Advertisements
Advertisements

BBC: Life beyond Nokia in Finland – start up boom

| December 16, 2012 | 198 Replies

nokia logoThis week, the BBC published an article looking at “Life beyond Nokia” as in the up and coming start ups in Finland.

Nokia once dominated the worldwide mobile phone market but its influence has waned against strong competition in the smartphone sector. Finland’s largest company has been forced to downsize, with thousands of employees facing redundancy. Is there life beyond Nokia in Finland?

Advertisements

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20553656

When people think of Finland, they might immediately associate it with Nokia and vice versa. Nokia, being such a huge part of Finland means it has a large reach and massive influence. In one way or another, there’s a Nokia connection somewhere. According to the BBC, over 200 startups in Finland have been created by Ex-Nokians. Jolla, a hub of talent that continues Nokia’s efforts with Maemo/MeeGo, gets a mention.

Whilst some look on to the stumbling of Nokia as a great opportunity for startups, there’s plenty of room for new companies and a return-to-form Nokia plus the benefits of a strong giant on your backyard.

 

Advertisements

Category: Nokia

About the Author ()

Hey, thanks for reading my post. My name is Jay and I'm a medical student at the University of Manchester. When I can, I blog here at mynokiablog.com and tweet now and again @jaymontano. We also have a twitter and facebook accounts @mynokiablog and  Facebook.com/mynokiablog. Check out the tips, guides and rules for commenting >>click<< Contact us at tips(@)mynokiablog.com or email me directly on jay[at]mynokiablog.com
  • nn

    Still a dreamer, heh? Nokia is never going to return-to-form, they are exclusively carrying WP water for MS and with that it’s simply impossible to return to the Symbian strength. And when Elop fired all these people they even lost the talent to do it.

    • Anastasios-Antonios Toulkeridis

      the last time someone drooled over a Nokia product i was a kid. Then decades of silence. And now it’s happening again with the sexy Lumia 920. So excuse us for still dreaming yes

      • Janne

        I think “decades of silence” may be pushing it, but it is true that for a period of five years or so Nokia did loose their mainstream “drooability”. Failure to transition Symbian to touch successfully is mostly to blame. Back at the turn of the century Nokia was using Symbian’s strenghts, first real smartphones with camera, those great Communicators and so on.

        But the game became very different from around 2007 onwards. Nokia lost the plot for quite a while. I agree with you that Lumia 920 is turning that page and is widely and rightfully recognized as something to drool over. It really is a magnificent phone.

        As for this article, BBC is definitely right in pointing out the startup boom Nokia’s downsizing has created. I think that is a nice silver-lining to that cloud. Looking forward to seeing what guys like Jolla and beyond can deliver.

        • Spede oli aliarvostettu

          That’s very true.

          IBM invented the smartphone. Nokia invented the first popular smartphone. Apple invented the modern smartphone. Now it’s time for Nokia to sell those modern smartphones.

          The 920 is a nice phone. It’s definitely not for everyone, but it seems to be modern enough to succeed.

        • Viipottaja

          Remember this, complete with the naughty wink of the eye at the end? :D Kinda crystalizes what was at least a part of the wrong thinking, with its emphasis on stylus driven interface, at the time when the iPhone was just coming out and about to change the mobile world forever:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-NAhHEtS-g

          • Spede oli aliarvostettu

            That looks just horrible. Look how precisely you have to touch the screen with the stylus. Never going to work in the real world. What was the Nokia board smoking at the time?

            The leading platform, right! Some people just recently proposed that this UI was a true killer because it has so many features.

            • Viipottaja

              That was end of 2007. This is how far they got by early 2009 – a Symbian Foundation concept video. This resembles a lot more what we eventually got – the mapping augmented reality view never quite materialized though.

              http://thenokiareview.com/2009/11/05/symbian-touch-ui-concept/

            • DesR85

              Reminds me a bit of my brother’s Samsung Omnia touch screen phone a few years ago (this was before Android) which requires a rather firm press just for it to register a response.

              Then again, that phone was a stylus-centric device, so not surprising why its sensitivity isn’t that good.

              As for that ad, yeesh… that’s bad. Even the ad for the N90 I saw years ago was much better than this one.

              • Viipottaja

                You’d wish it was an ad – in fact it was just a concept video and it took Nokia another half a year or more to launch the 5800 in late April 2008 and then it did not have many/all the features of the concept.

                Don’t get me wrong – I too at the time thought it was enough but I have to admit in hindsight it clearly was not.

      • nn

        Yeah, here on mynokiablog it can certainly looks like Nokia is back in full strength, but you should keep in mind this is fan blog, in real world nobody is interested in WP phones and thus nobody is buying them.

        While some are trumpeting how they are feeling interests electrifying the populace as in times Nokia when ruled the market with 2/3 share, I bet that when the results are out we will suddenly hear from the same people that outsiders didn’t know about the new Nokia, the phones are superb but marketing is again failing Nokia, and so on, the same WP excuses as always.

        • Janne

          Returning to 2/3 share seems unlikely in the new world order. We are rooting for Nokia to return to a healthy state and keep on innovating – that is not impossible. That return to form first, we’ll worry about the 2/3 later. :)

          • nn

            Now only if somebody could define what this brand new “healthy state” and “keep on innovating” will mean, especially in comparison to the dark ages of unhealthy and stagnant Maemo/MeeGo/Symbian.

            But otherwise, it feels exactly like in 2006 all over again. Sure, the facts and results are day-and-night different and never will even touch previous levels, but the warmly feeling is there, deep inside our hearts. And subjective feeling is all what matters, the strategy is finally paying off.

            • Janne

              Healthy state for Nokia would obviously start from stopping the losses, return to profitability in all measurements and growth. It won’t happen in Q4 thouh unless they issue a warning saying so, because their Q3 report guidance is still Q4 losses due to restructuring and ramp-up time for new products. But Q4 results will point out whether or not this strategy is taking them towards that or not.

              Fiscally healthy progress would mean there is a company making us products we can be fans of, right? :) Next, keep on innovating, as in making products that are worthy of being fans of. As a Nokia fan and a Finn, I’d say that would be good start. I think the products are already being delivered, now the company must deliver itself from harms way.

              Nokia’s results, to me as a fan, are somewhat irrelevant. As a Finn and small stock holder, sure, they matter great deal more, but that’s mostly beyond the scope of what I personally care about MNB. This is a Nokia user forum and as Nokia users the thing that counts is good products, right?

              • nn

                Well, with that definition Nokia was in strong health up until the point when WP happened.

                The problem with WP fans is that they are happy with whatever MS and Nokia throws at them. Which they seems to have in common with Symbian fans. Or Android and iPhone fans. Perhaps Nokia should focus not on fans, but uninterested consumers that are far more critical.

                • Janne

                  Yes, in late 2010/early 2011 Nokia was at least momentarily in a healthier state financially.

                  However, it was missing the second part of the puzzle – at least as far as any Symbian offerings went – innovating with good products.

                  So, the momentum was going the wrong way. Nokia did not have good high-end products in late 2010, early 2011. Today it does.

                  • nn

                    That’s not true at all. The supposed crown jewel of new Nokia’s innovations, the camera in 920, has hard time beating two years old Symbian phone (yes, I’m talking about N8), the N9 design and UI was also pretty innovative.

                    In fact it rather seems that it is only with WP innovation at Nokia stopped and even regressed, and it shows in sales.

                    • Janne

                      The problem with Nokia products pre-Lumia 920 for quite some years that they may have had one highlight (N8 camera, 808 camera, E7 keyboard, N9 swipe) and that’s about it.

                      There was no overall balanced high-end product, unless maybe N900 which was pretty darn close (and I’m still angry at Nokia for not pursuing this instead of foolish MeeGo dreams that cost time and the whole project eventually). Sure, N9 was quite good too, as was Lumia 800/900 but there were still a lot of ifs and buts compared to the competition… But most of all the Symbian devices were not good overall devices, they had a highlight or few and a lot of features, but compromised by a bad user experience, lagginess etc.

                      Lumia 920 may have a detail or few where it is less than some previous product, but on the balance of things that’s like iPhone 4 to Nokia’s 2010 offerings. iPhone missed many small things, but in the big things, overall, it was really a lot better. Lumia 920 is overall really good and while N8/808 edge it out on camera, Lumia 920 still has better camera than any other Nokia device and overall has a competitive camera competition-wise.

                      Combine this with the UX and many innovative features (both in hardware, e.g. wireless charging & OIS, and software, e.g. the Scalado stuff) it really is a great package. And delivering an overall great package is something Nokia has rarely done in recent years, that was my point.

                    • nn

                      So indeed, innovation in these “highlights” stopped. But fear no, it’s just that these individual innovation don’t matter (please don’t pay attention to the fact these so called highlights is exactly what Nokia is desperately trying to hype in their Lumia line), now it’s about balanced holistic approach. As if debating how much is one camera better than the other wasn’t subjective enough.

                      But whatever, we can just firmly call the latest Lumia phone the best, period. People who have another idea about how balanced device looks, even if they compromise like 98 % of population, are simply mistaken. Fortunately it’s nothing that better ads and more retail staff training couldn’t fix.

                      Meanwhile, Nokia’s slump continues unabated…

                    • Janne

                      It was ALWAYS about a balanced holistic approach. We just took solace with Nokia on what we could, the highlights…

                      How long have we missed for a Nokia flagship that would combine it all? I think since N95 the last device to truly try and do that and now the Lumia 920. Sure, there is still room for a big camera niche and maybe a qwerty niche, but as an overall performer the Lumia 920 pretty much nails everything – finally, after many many years of waiting for it.

                      I’d say Nokia N900 was also pretty darn close. Sure, its camera was no 808, but it was a very good camera for its time (unlike the one in N9 or Lumia 900 for example which are very mediocre).

                    • Janne

                      …besides, the OIS in the 920 is a major highlight for anyone wanting to do video. The phone is full of interesting highlights, it just does it all in a package and experience that works in other ways as well.

                    • nn

                      Again, how do you know what is and isn’t holistically balanced phone that works as whole package from normal people point of view and that that is what they need?

                      You of course don’t, this loud thinking is completely subjective, starting with what one expects from the camera or device weight all the way up to the OS itself. But then the possibility that WP isn’t the best (or even better than Symbian) would mean somebody made fatally stupid mistake when he selected WP and the grand strategy is deeply flawed from the start.

              • tom

                Look at Nokia’s cost structure and operating margin http://seekingalpha.com/user/5886481/instablog.

                Not going to happen. Nokia’s operating margin in smart phone is -49% last quarter.

                • Janne

                  I agree, return to profitability won’t happen in Q4/2012.

                • dss

                  Like I said many times.. they need to downsize.. a lot. Maybe slightly bigger than HTC, but no where near what they are now. WP will never be as big as Symbian once was.. and they will never control the market in the manner they did during that period of time. They had a great chance to remain a force.. but the management had no vision, so now they have to suffer the consequences.

                  Maybe I shouldn’t say never, but I am pretty sure it won’t be in the next 10-15 years.

        • Spede oli aliarvostettu

          In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.

          I don’t doubt it for a second that it could be the other way around. It’s possible that people here are yelling that WP8 is hated by everyone and it’s still selling.

          • yasu

            @Spede oli aliarvostettu

            In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.

            And I’m sure you’ll have no problem posting pre Q2 2011 sales figures backing your assertion.

            • Janne

              Ah yes, the age old myth that Symbian was fine (and on a mend) in Q4/2010.

              I remember buying the Samsung Galaxy S II in the spring of 2011 and comparing it with my E7, the highest end Nokia device on the market at the time (I also had the N8). Even if Elop hadn’t done a thing, Swipe nor Symbian^4 would not have been ready at this time.

              There I was, E7 with Symbian Anna, next to Samsung Galaxy S II – not only boasting literally double the specs in almost every department… but featuring a immensely more usable and modern touchscreen experience.

              No, Symbian as a product was not fine. Nor was its market-share decline of several, several preceding quarters some fluke to be ignored. Say what you will of Elop or the strategy since, but Symbian in Q4/2010 was not fine. Nor was MeeGo Harmattan, by the way – although by the time they got it fixed, maybe it could have worked.

              But Symbian, no, it was not fine in Q4/2010. It’s downfall was slightly being slowed by a fast growing market, still some leeway in the cheapest segment (Android was not yet there in full force) and a new product generation (Symbian^3) selling on the faithful brand – to those not burned by N97 – but make no mistake it was going down. By spring 2011 the cheap Android was all over the place and Symbian^3 was not cutting it on the market. Series60v5 was still most of the sales, simply because of price.

              Did Elop make it go down faster? Probably, somewhat at least. Was the Windows Phone strategy a good choice? We’ll know come Q4 results. Should Nokia have gone MeeGo full-force instead? Maybe – probably years prior, when they should have stopped cooking around with Symbian Series 60 that was inherently unsuitable for the touch task at hand. But no way was Symbian fine. Nokia botched transforming it to the touch era and that was their biggest mistake, not leaving it early enough.

              • Janne

                Also, reminder: Nokia had lost almost all of its Symbian ecosystem partners in 2010 *before* Elop started. A major blow to any Qt aspirations… MeeGo was not attracting them back.

              • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                Actually Nokia’s biggest mistake was made on January 9. 2007. They should have ditched Symbian that day as their primary platform. After that day it was pretty clear that Symbian was doomed and there was no future for it.

                Every day after that one made it harder for Nokia to survive against iPhone and later Android. At the time too many managers were claiming that the iPhone was missing certain features and it was never – yes really NEVER – going to be anything else but a niche product. That’s how arrogant they were at the time.

                They could have been making updates for Symbian’s UI but nothing else. The UI was just horrible.

                • Janne

                  Yes, they should elevated the Maemo team to the top floor on that day – the latest.

                  Even better: two years prior to that day. Nokia had all the ingredients to do iPhone before iPhone.

                  That’s the greatest shame.

              • nn

                Ah, yes, the history rewriting with age old excuse “not my fault, it was already broken when I touched it!”

                Of course Symbian^3 wasn’t cutting it in Spring 2011, Elop already killed it in Winter. Surely it will be interesting your take on Q4 results, when we now know that selling 15M phones in far smaller market is “not cutting it”. Also plotting the marketshare of Nokia from the introduction of first Lumia in 2011/Q4 onwards will be fun, because that was the quarter where the market share decline was stopped with people finally able to migrate from the awful Symbian and MeeGo to WP.

                • Janne

                  Symbian^3 was a terrible product compared to the competition. No fault of Elop. That was its first and foremost sin. Not even you can deny that. (Swipe nor Symbian^4 would have been ready at the time.)

                  As for its sales, I maintain Symbian^3 was not doing fine in sales – and would not have done fine even had Elop not done the Feb11. It just was not competitive in the high-end as its initial pent-up demand withered and its true nature became apparent. Where Symbian sold was the cheap segment, Symbian^3 was not there.

                  I do agree Elop overall accelerated the Symbian’s downfall somewhat, but most likely nowhere near as much as you’d like to think.

                  I think the far more pressing question about Elop is, should he have stayed the course with MeeGo instead of WP. You would have far more compelling arguments there in my view, then trying to defend Symbian Anna products versus things like Samsung Galaxy S II. Seriously.

                  • Janne

                    Steve Jobs was right about one thing: It all starts with a great product. Nokia was *not* delivering great products in late 2010, early 2011.

                    Some might argue they stopped delivering great products around the time after N95 launch, but at least there was the N900 blip… What if, what if Maemo 6 could have come by early 2010…

                    Nokia’s flawed Symbian efforts was the main reason Nokia was not delivering overall great products in 2008-2011 and that’s why their competitiveness faltered. Symbian also took focus and resources from Nokia’s Linux efforts for years, hampering them too.

                    I think they are delivering great products now, both in Lumia and Asha lines as well as in the accessories department. And as a Nokia user, I am at least happy about that aspect!

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I bought iPhone 3GS back in 2009 and that was really something great. After using Nokia phones for years, it was just incredible how everything was really working and it was really actually possible to download all those Apps from the App Store.

                      The camera? Yes, that was all there was for Nokia. Not enough for me for using a camera as a phone.

                      Now I have iPhone 4S and a 808 and I’m using the 4S as a smartphone. Just guess what I’m using the 808 for?

                  • nn

                    I don’t know what you are talking about. What Elop actually intended to do is just kill MeeGo for the high end, replace it with WP, and leave Symbian to more or less in it’s former role of supporting OS for low range smartphones, where it will slowly die. Of course what didn’t occur to him was that the old strategy could work only as a whole, that essentially killing the future of the ecosystem means immediate end to it and that flipping switch on WP is not going to work.

                    Yes, you think Lumias are great phones. You and couple of other people. However, even in previous quarter more people were choosing Symbian UI than WP UI. Therefore you are total, irrelevant minority. It boils down to the same blind spot of WP fans – the inability to comprehend not only that WP is worse than Android or iOS, but far worse than even Symbian ever was. The hyped 920 probably wont achieve even N97 sales, let alone the sales of N8. And we are talking about absolute sales unadjusted for overall market growth.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      We don’t know the N8 sales. We may have some guesses about it but Nokia never released any real numbers.

                    • nn

                      I hope you will keep that on mind when just by coincidence Nokia wont officially release that number for 920 either and somebody will want to talk about 920 sales.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I will remember that. Just like I remember Nokia never released N9 sales numbers while some people are claiming it sold 1,75 million units in Q4 2011.

                    • nn

                      Or those people who claim N9 sold just couple hundredths of thousands or something, certainly less than Lumias, ditto for 808. I hope you will whack all of them on their head with equal strength.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      According to Gartner there was no way N9 sold more than 0,8 million.

                      Yes, it’s true that even their numbers are just guesses.

                    • outdated os

                      ‘I will remember that.
                      Just like I remember
                      Nokia never released
                      N9 sales numbers
                      while some people are
                      claiming it sold 1,75 million units in Q4
                      2011.’

                      err, Track and Protect claimed to have more than 1M unique activations from N9 s.

                    • MF

                      WP is worse than Symbian ever was? This is laughable and instantly subtracts from your credibility. Symbian was just horrible. The user experience was just downright awful and laggy. Just take the browser and keyboard for example. WP7 might not allow that many customizations but at least it was very smooth and consistent, as what every modern smartphone should be. Symbian was just so ancient.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      More than 1 million in Q4 2011? Really?

                    • nn

                      @MF

                      Yep, WP is worse than Symbian. That’s what the market is telling you over and over and over and over again. Year and half of rotting in unmarked grave and people still like it more than WP. You can ponder why is that, but the fact itself is crystal clear. (Or if you are WP fan you can just ignore the reality, that’s solution too.)

                    • nn

                      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Well, it didn’t take long for you to forget about the “only official Nokia number counts” rule.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      nn: How so? I gave out some numbers from Gartner to show that those guesses (1,75M/0,8M) are not even compatible.

                      That’s one reason guesses are just guesses.

                    • Janne

                      nn: Symbian is outselling WP in numbers because it has been selling in lower price points than WP. Nothing to do with better, everything to do with price. In fact, this was also one thing why Symbian stayed afloat as long as it did, selling quite well in the lower end until Android caught up. Symbian lost high-end a long, long time ago.

                      I still can’t believe how eye-opening playing with my E7/N8 Symbian Anna devices and Samsung Galaxy S II was in spring 2011. E7 came to market mere weeks before the Samsung Galaxy S II… Wow. Staggering difference and not to Symbian’s benefit. (Of course I also had an iPhone 4 at the time so I knew what to expect, I bought that with the N8 to compare them previous fall.)

                      Look, Nokia’s Symbian touch devices UX is crap. That’s why they faltered on the high-end. It took myself too a while to admit it, but looking at how they evolved (not) during late 2010 and early 2011 – and where they are even with Belle – I just have to conclude… yes, the UX is crap.

                      One upside for Nokia’s Symbian devices is plentitude of features, connections, E7 with keyboard and keyboard controllability and for the N8/808 models the camera. That’s about the saving graces there, UX-wise. Rest is crap.

                    • nn

                      @Janne

                      Except that this is not true. In last quarter ASP (average selling price) of Lumia was 160€ while Symbian sat around 150€. So much for cheap Symbian and high-end WP phones.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      NN: Nokia has apparently ended the production of most low end Symbian phones and the hig end is not selling that well.

                      The 808 has the camera but it’s not enough for too many people.

                    • nn

                      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Don’t see what’s your point. It’s myth that Symbian sells for cheap while Lumia is high earner and whatever are the reasons, they don’t change that simple fact.

                      Also, why are people trying to bash Symbian for being able to run and sell on lowprice phones? It’s not Symbian fault that WP can’t do the same and after Elop killed all the alternatives he has nothing to fill the big hole with.

                      The 808 has the camera but it’s not enough for too many people.

                      We should write this wisdom somewhere, I have strange feeling it will come handy when we will talk about 920 next year.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      The problem is that Nokia was no longer able to sell cheap Symbian phones. That’s why they are selling only small amounts of mid range phones.

                      It’s Symbian’s fault that it was no longer able to compete with price.

                    • nn

                      Funny how the debate progressed from argument that Symbian only can sell for cheap to argument that Symbian fault is it can not sell for cheap. Also, you are the fan of official numbers, so I would like to see where Nokia said Symbian ASP moves are due to lower sales of cheap phones.

                      At least the point that WP is still worse than Symbian in sales while not much different regarding prices holds.

                    • Janne

                      nn: It is true that Q3 was bad for Lumia ASP, but we all know why that happened. I wasn’t liking the WP8 wait any more than you are.

                      However, that wasn’t really my point. The point was, Symbian was really loosing it and it was quite questionable if an incompatible Symbian^4 (more so than WP8 even) would have cut the mustard.

                      MeeGo… MeeGo could have worked. Or even Maemo. If only Nokia had had the foresight to play on the N900 strength in 2009 or even years prior to that.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      You didn’t quite understand. Symbian was able to sell mostly on the low end. Today when Symbian is no longer able to compete in the low end, they sell phones with an higher ASP. The low end sales are missing. That’s why the unit sales are so low.

                      Remember that Nokia was not able to compete with the iPhone even when the Symbian^3 was released. Apple sold more iPhones with with the latest iOS than Nokia sold with it’s latest Symbian OS.

                      At the time they were mostly selling low end and old OS versions.

                    • nn

                      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I understand what you are trying to say, but I don’t see you providing any evidence for it. And it’s not like your theory is the only possible scenario that would explain the jump in ASP.

                      If Symbian was unable to compete with iPhone, then look at how WP is going in that regard. Hint: it’s far far worse.

                    • nn

                      @Janne

                      You said in quite uncertain terms that Symbian sells more than WP only because it’s on cheaper phones. As was demonstrated, this is clearly false.

                      We can guess why that happened in Q3, but how that advances your point? Bring good HW to year and half dead OS, which was totally uncompetitive crap even in the time of it’s death, and it will outsell the-best-of OS, which is momentarily awaiting new version in three months? What this tells us about WP?

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      So, what is the other scenario?

                      How is it possible to have a higher ASP if they are not selling less low end phones? And they are selling only small amounts of Symbian phones anyway.

                    • nn

                      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Selling more high end phones?

            • Spede oli aliarvostettu

              Here you are. This is how Nokia’s market share evolved before and after the memo.

              http://dominiescommunicate.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/nokia_market_share_prediction.png

              As you can see, the collapse of the market share wasn’t really accelerating. Nokia was just losing market share and that was not Elop’s fault. You should blame people deciding about Nokia’s OS development back in 2007-2009. In 2010 it was already too late to stop the collapse in 2011.

              • yasu

                @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                Here you are. This is how Nokia’s market share evolved before and after the memo.

                http://dominiescommunicate.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/nokia_market_share_prediction.png

                As you can see, the collapse of the market share wasn’t really accelerating. Nokia was just losing market share and that was not Elop’s fault. You should blame people deciding about Nokia’s OS development back in 2007-2009. In 2010 it was already too late to stop the collapse in 2011.

                I don’t recall talking about market share. Nokia sells, to the best of my knowledge, devices, not points of market share. You like Janne, seem to have me confused with someone else.

                You said, and I quote “In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.”

                So post the sales figures that back your assertion.

                • Janne

                  Market share losses in this case are a vehicle in pointing out the obvious woes with the product’s competitiveness. I maintain that inherently Symbian’s issue was lack of competitiveness that was fast coming to bite it upp the proverbial behind, Elop or no Elop.

                  Now, the bigger, better question is was going WP the right response to this threat? That is a far more compelling discussion, although one I doubt neither of us wants to have. :) MeeGo could have worked and the move away from Symbian was mismanaged (it could have been done better I’m sure), that I agree with.

                  • nn

                    Now, the bigger, better question is was going WP the right response to this threat?

                    But we know answer to that question, Nokia delivered first WP phones year ago. And the answer is that the market share plunged even more, right from the day one.

                    But you are right, that’s what you don’t want to discuss.

                    • Janne

                      I will discuss it to our hearts’ content after the Q4 results. :) I don’t have enough information to call it yet.

                    • nn

                      Oh yes, I forgot, the Q4 will make all historical record irrelevant. The uptick from the Q3 plunge will finally propel Nokia back into the front of race. Or at minimum we will be able to throw around our guesses about what the anticipations for Q1/Q2 could be.

                    • Janne

                      No, Q4 will make the historical record complete.

                      Come on. Give me some credit. I’m not dragging the debate around indefinitely. I have set a date and will stick to it.

                    • nn

                      Well, it’s bit mystery why you decided to throw yourself behind Q4 with such vehemence, and I didn’t expect much from it. But the way you are already backtracking on it and hinting that the really important thing will be guessing about Q1/Q2 quarters, apparently in reaction to the fact that even the tiny 10M number isn’t going to happen in this quarter…

                      I have to say I’m impressed.

                • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                  The market share shows how many people are interested in about the product. Less market share, less people interested in about it. It’s that simple.

                  Maybe you are proposing that Elop should have been pusking out more unit sales while losing market share. Could you please tell me how is that possible?

                  And why do you think market share is irrelevant when talking about how many people are really interested in about the products Nokia is making?

                  I have no idea what kind of figures you would like to see if the market share is not enough for you?

                • yasu

                  @Janne and Spede oli aliarvostettu

                  I’m not interested in your hand waving. And you Janne should know better, since with locked horns so much in the past.

                  If you have sales figures showing that “In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.”, post them.

                  I’ll wait.

                  • Janne

                    So you are more interested in semantics than really discussing the issue… :)

                    Just so I understand, your view is that “In real world the same amout or more people were interested about Symbian”? Is that right?

                    • yasu

                      So you are more interested in semantics than really discussing the issue… :)

                      What semantics? I clearly quoted the assertion that should be backed up by declining sales figure pre Elop intervention.

                      Just so I understand, your view is that “In real world the same amout or more people were interested about Symbian”? Is that right?

                      My view is that Spede oli aliarvostettu should back up his assertion.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I backed it up. Nokia was losing unit sales in Q2 2011. They lost the unit sales because the market growth stalled and they were losing market share.

                      What do you think? How should they have been able to sell more units with a smaller market share? You never answered to that one.

                      Maybe you just can’t.

                    • yasu

                      I backed it up. Nokia was losing unit sales in Q2 2011.

                      After February 11, 2011, when Elop EOLed Symbian.

                      They lost the unit sales because the market growth stalled and they were losing market share.

                      Sure, distributors and carriers were going to trip over themselves giving precious shelf space in a hotly competitive market to an obsoleted product.

                      What do you think?

                      That you talk about market share but I’m not sure that you understand how it works.

                      How should they have been able to sell more units with a smaller market share? You never answered to that one.Maybe you just can’t.

                      They’ve been able to it up to and including Q1 2011 (the quarter when Elop obsoleted the Symbian line).

                      You can increase your sales and still lose market share. Like the iPad is doing right now.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      It’s true that you can get more unit sales while losing market share.

                      Are you trying to say that Nokia lost unit sales because market stopped growing? Or are you suggesting that the market growth stalled because of Feb 11. or because of Elop?

                      You are saying that Nokia lost market share and they were able to grow unit sales just because of market growth. Now we have to just agree on what caused the stalling of the market growth since we both agree on that being the reason for declining unit sales.

                    • tom

                      Point is with absolutely no new model and no marketing, Symbian still outsold WP with all new models and lot of marketing. Market is clearly telling that People like Symbian more than WP. That’s people voting with wallet, not bunch of armchair experts telling WP is better.

                      I am not saying Symbian is technically better than WP(or usability). In some aspect I think Web OS was very good(UI wise).

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I’ve not said that WP7 has been doing great. It’s possible that even WP8 is not doing great.

                      Symbian is getting some sales because some companies are using those phones and they may have software for them. But that’s not enough for maintaining the market.

                      Let’s hope Symbian didn’t ruin Nokia’s reputation. After all, Symbian did ruin Symbian’s reputation.

                      So, WP7 was not doing great and Symbian was not doing great. Happy?

                  • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                    Nokia sold 16,7 million smartphones in Q2 2011. They sold 25,2 million smartphones in Q2 2010.

                    That’s less people interested in about Symbian in 2011.

                    • Janne

                      The problem with Q2 is, you could say Elop caused it – although the market share comparisons do throw a spanner into that idea.

                      Q1 is a much better one, because realities of the trade mean Feb 11th announcement really couldn’t ruin Q1/2011…

                      Here is one take on this question:

                      http://dominiescommunicate.wordpress.com/2012/07/28/meaning-of-market-share-clarified/

                      The growth of industry hides it well for Q3 and Q4 2010 but growth stopped on Q1 2011, revealing the horrible truth.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I could say that Elop ruined Nokia’s Q1 2007 but that doesn’t make it true. That’s why I’m not saying anything like that.

                      The decline of the market share caused less unit sales in Q2 2011 and that was not Elop’s fault. Some people seem to be obsessed about unit sales. They seem to think that Nokia should have had more unit sales while they were losing market share. Unfortunately that’s not possible if the market is not growing.

                    • yasu

                      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Nokia sold 16,7 million smartphones in Q2 2011. They sold 25,2 million smartphones in Q2 2010.

                      That’s less people interested in about Symbian in 2011.

                      Q2 2011 is after Feb 2011. Thanks for playing.

                    • yasu

                      @Janne

                      The problem with Q2 is, you could say Elop caused it

                      Correct, Q2 2011 is after Feb

                      – although the market share comparisons do throw a spanner into that idea.

                      Why? Nokia sells points of market share?

                      I’m still waiting for hard cold sales figures showing that”“In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.”

                      So far, you don’t seem to have much success.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Yasu,

                      Yes it is.

                      Thanks for accepting the fact that the decline of the unit sales was not caused by Elop but Nokia’s declining market share.

                      You see, the decline of the market share happened also after Feb 2011 and because it happened also before the Fef 2011, it’s double the reason Elop can be.

                      Thanks for playing.

                    • yasu

                      Yasu,

                      Yes it is.

                      Thanks for accepting the fact that the decline of the unit sales was not caused by Elop but Nokia’s declining market share.

                      Where did I do that? You made the claim that

                      In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.

                      I’m still waiting for sales figures backing up that assertion.

                      You see, the decline of the market share happened also after Feb 2011 and because it happened also before the Fef 2011, it’s double the reason Elop can be.

                      I don’t recall contesting market share. I contest your sales assertion.

                      Thanks for playing.

                      Heh.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Nokia is selling market share. It turns into unit sales and that turns into revenues.

                      It’s all about market share because that turns into unit sales and that into revenues.

                      I wonder why you don’t like to talk about market shares while Nokia itself has been promoting the market share as an important metric. That has happened before and after Elop.

                    • yasu

                      Nokia is selling market share.

                      They do? That’s news to me. I would have sworn they were selling devices. Well, at least that’s what they pretend in their quarterly results.

                      It turns into unit sales and that turns into revenues.

                      You got it all wrong. They sell devices for a price. The sum of those sales are the revenue. Then, if one wants to know the marketshare, one has to get all the sales of all the actors on the market, that will be used as a divisor.

                      It’s all about market share because that turns into unit sales and that into revenues.

                      No, it’s about sales that turn into revenue, and even better profits. Market share involves knowing and factoring the competitors sales.

                      I wonder why you don’t like to talk about market shares while Nokia itself has been promoting the market share as an important metric.

                      It’s not about liking, it’s that I don’t contest the drop of market share.

                      That has happened before and after Elop.

                      Drop of market share, yes, drop of sales, no.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Perhaps you would like to explain how Nokia was supposed to make the market grow while losing market share?

                      You don’t seem to think market share has any value? How come Nokia is promoting it so much in the quarterly results?

                    • yasu

                      Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Perhaps you would like to explain how Nokia was supposed to make the market grow while losing market share?

                      No. Why would I?

                      You don’t seem to think market share has any value? How come Nokia is promoting it so much in the quarterly results?

                      They do? I see them post their sales figures.

                      Seriously, you don’t seem to know what market share is, stop abusing it.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      It seems that you haven’t really studied Nokia’s quarterly results if you don’t know they have been promoting market shares.

            • yasu

              @Janne

              Ah yes, the age old myth that Symbian was fine (and on a mend) in Q4/2010.(…)

              You must have me confused with someone else.

  • jammy

    But they had this deal with Microsoft for 5yrs., so after 5yrs. which way they will go is anyone’s guess, maybe they must be working on other OS internally, and after 5yrs. they will unveil it, when it’s fully mature. Or maybe Jolla is part of Nokia, working on meego as side project, so that microsoft don’t take them to court for developing competing platform while in deal with them, for 5yrs………..

    • jtanigawa

      How likely is it that Jolla is Nokia? If Jolla is Nokia that would be amazing!

  • Viipottaja

    Hope some of these startups succeed in establishing themselves and growing, and hopefully diversyfying and strengthening the Finnish economy.

    • Janne

      Another great segment are the games houses, for which Finland of course has a rich history dating back to the 1980s, but which are also benefiting from the app economies which have contributed to Nokia’s failures. Here’s hoping future might see some positive collaborations there as well. I like Angry Birds Roost as a start. :)

      In any case, these gaming establishments deserve great respect too.

  • keist

    Nokia is dead guys. Time to move on. There are two much better alternatives than Nokia. Samsung and Apple. You choose.

    • Janne

      Bye!

      • keist

        I know some of you are nostalgic but you should leave the past behind if you want to experience how advanced the technology is today. Nokia is now a thing of the past. Samsung is now the new Nokia. Actually, much better.

        • KeiZka

          I abhor the day Samsung reigns supreme. Now there’s such a conglomerate it’s not healthy for consumers.

          • keist

            There’s a reason why Samsung is now the number 1 smartphone manufacturer and rightfully so. They are the ones who are quick to respond to the market needs. They give what people want and don’t force something to people what they don’t want. Samsung is much better than Nokia because they are able to emerge on top even with so many alternatives. Nokia was number 1 for 14 years because they never really had any competition.

            • MF

              The only reason Samsung will want to “respond to market needs” and “give what people want” is, obviously, due to market competition. As you said, they are now the “new Nokia”, perhaps much better. I do believe they will eventually prevail over Apple. And that’s worrying. Because as a corporation once all competition has effectively been eliminated, your focus will shift from innovation to profit/efficiency optimization. Time to milk your monopoly. That will be the day you would regret wishing that other competitors just die off and let Samsung walk over them.

              Just look at Nokia today and compare them to Samsung. Nokia today is making a real effort to introduce genuinely new technologies (e.g. Pureview technology is the perfect example). And what technological breakthroughs did the Samsung Galaxy S III bring? We can quibble about their choice of OS, but nobody can deny that Nokia is at least trying very hard and doing their best to bring out good products.

              The sad thing is there exists a very strong herd mentality, and Samsung/Apple will remain at the top in the near future no matter what they do or what the competition does. It’s just sheer herd momentum, and nothing to do with “responding to market needs” or “give what people want”.

              I was in South Korea and there were shops selling Samsung-branded clothes. I shudder to think of the day…

              • Tom

                On phone and tablets, i consider high resolution screen a must have and that’s something Samsung gives you. Most of the components and most high pixel density screen are manufactured by Samsung. Samsung innovates more than Nokia, well now at least. That’s the reason they are on top of the market.

        • Janne

          keist: I have plenty of Samsung devices, last I counted at least three different ones with Galaxy labels on them and one bigger with a Smart label on it, plus token others.

          I’ll stick to Lumia 920 as my daily driver, thank you very much. It is the most advanced smartphone on the market today in my opinion. I couldn’t say that of previous Nokia devices in the past few years, except for details like camera, but now I can.

          As for my iDevices (I have a few), I sold them some time ago. Who needs such antiquated icon grids when they have Lumia! :)

          • tom

            I like Nokia but will never touch anything that has WP label. saying that, I looked at HTS 8x and Lumia 920 in store. Apart from camera (pureview or otherwise) I found HTC device better in every respect. It’s thinner, lighter and easier to hold. The screen is much more symmetric as opposed to 920 which has big bezel in bottom(including the buttons), feels much bigger. Look and feel is ofcourse personal choice but to me HTX 8x looked better.

            • Janne

              I have also seen the HTC 8X in a store and it looked like a cheap knockoff.

              However, that isn’t its main burden. It is the fact that it is missing all those nuances makes the 920 great: super sensitive touch, wireless charging (I love my three Nokia Fatboy charging pillows!), optical image stabilization, Nokia Scalado apps/lenses, Nokia navigation/City Lens and other services like Nokia Music and Nokia TV (great in Finland!), Nokia Collection growing all the time with something nice etc.

              Lumia 920 is the best. Not just the best Windows Phone, the best smartphone around. Finally, I can seriously say that of a Nokia product in recent years. I have absolutely no doubt it is the best smartphone on the market at this time. Sure, 808 has a better camera, iOS/Android devices a fuller ecosystem, WP8 is still missing some small functions here and there, but overall as a smartphone device Lumia 920 is the best I can think of. Certainly better than anything with a Samsung Galaxy label on it. I know.

              Will it succeed? Maybe not. But it is the best.

              • Tom

                I think the cheap knockoff thing is questionable. I don’t mean they haven’t copied/inspired, I know they have and with blessing from MS. HTC 8X does not feel cheap.

                As I said, I agree pureview is innovative in some respect. Wireless, charger.. hmm even my 3 year old Palm pre had it. I didn’t use it a single time or feel the need of it(on a side note I really liked Web OS). rest of things are incremental in any case, nothing beyond what others don’t offer. Nokia has off line maps, but Google is gold standard now in maps/navigation.

                I don’t think Lumia 920 is the most advanced phone, not by a long stretch.

    • j

      jolla or blackberry.

    • rustyknight17

      Plus RIM , Jolla Mobile , HUAWEI , zte , ETC …

  • rhey

    If Nokia will not realize that only Android can save them then they deserve to be bought by another company rather than completely shutting down. Apple or Samsung should buy Nokia. That PureView camera and excellent build quality need to get to more hands and not just to a very few. The mobile industry is only a two horse race between iOS and Android. No one is here for that Windows Phone crap.

    • KeiZka

      Uhhuh. Just like it has saved the traditional phone makers, such as SonyEricsson and Motorola. Right.

  • sephirot

    Nobody is interested in Nokia anymore. Look at the daily interest rankings of Nokia Lumia 920 in GSMArena. It’s nowhere to be found in the top 20. Even in the US where it is most advertised in, a lot of people have no idea what a Lumia is.

    • Janne

      What did I miss?

      GSM Arena Current Rankings

      By user ratings Device Rate Votes
      1. Nokia Lumia 920 7.687 1,254
      2. Samsung Galaxy Note II N7100 7.456 892
      3. Sony Xperia V 7.390 230
      4. Nokia N9 7.317 314
      5. Nokia N8 7.314 419
      6. Motorola DROID RAZR MAXX HD 7.310 56
      7. Nokia 808 PureView 7.308 362
      8. Nokia Lumia 900 7.306 98

      • keist

        That is user ratings, not the daily interest rankings.

        User ratings = votes.
        Daily interest = hits.

      • Pica Pica

        You are missing the daily interest rankings. You know the ones that sephirot was talking about, that tell how interested people are about different phone. But you knew that and just wanted to be a smartass. Or worse, just plain dishonest, but I’m willing to give you a benefit of doubt and lean to the smartass option.

        Here are the interest rankings:

        By daily interest Device Daily hits
        1. Samsung I9300 Galaxy S III 63,818
        2. Samsung Galaxy Note II N7100 50,583
        3. Samsung Galaxy Ace S5830 42,549
        4. Apple iPhone 5 41,207
        5. Samsung I9100 Galaxy S II 39,545
        6. Samsung Galaxy S Duos S7562 37,448
        7. LG Nexus 4 E960 36,895
        8. Samsung Galaxy Y S5360 36,096

        Not a single Lumia there. Not even a single WP device. Android rules totally that list.

  • Spede oli aliarvostettu

    I have been thinking that Nokia is some kind of a religion. For small group of people that is.

    Those iPhone or Android users are usually showing off their phones and telling what kind of cool stuff they can do with those phones. It’s easy to compare your phone with them and reason by telling what they can and can’t do with their phones. Sometimes they say that they don’t need some feature or they would love to see something on their phone. It’s not that hard to talk with them even if you are a bit too satisfied on your phone.

    With the old school Nokia folks, it’s always the same. They tell you how they have to use this and that crappy feature just because Elop decided it’s bad for Nokia. They claim that Nokia was doing great before Elop. They don’t want to talk about market shares because that’s not very good subject if you want to believe in the story about Elop ruining Nokia. Oh wait! They do want to talk about market shares if 920 risks selling too well in comparison to the N8. They like to remind that market has grown after Q4 2010 and 920 should sell more than 4 million. But hey, don’t talk about market shares if it risks ruining the Elop story.

    Nokia is truly a religion for those people.

    • Janne

      Well, I do have to object about iPhone users. It too, like all of Apple, can be quite the religion.

    • tom

      “They claim that Nokia was doing great before Elop”

      Looking at financial statements, Nokia was profitable(quite a bit actually) before Elop. Now you can spin in any way you want, but those are numbers and they tell the truth.

    • Pica Pica

      You’ve been enjoying way too many magic mushrooms during the weekend. Or are you just plain drunk? :D Whatever it is, it’s seriously hurting your reasoning abilities. Better stop it before it causes any physical damage.

      • Spede oli aliarvostettu

        Cool!

        That talk about Nokia as religion really made you react that way?

        But yes, it truly is a religion.

  • yasu

    (…)They claim that Nokia was doing great before Elop. They don’t want to talk about market shares because that’s not very good subject if you want to believe in the story about Elop ruining Nokia.(…)

    Before The Announcement, Nokia was a profitable business, quarter in, quarter out. Since Q2 2011, Noki

    • yasu

      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

      (…)They claim that Nokia was doing great before Elop. They don’t want to talk about market shares because that’s not very good subject if you want to believe in the story about Elop ruining Nokiac(…)

      Before The Announcement, Nokia was a profitable business, quarter in, quarter out. Since Q2 2011, Nokia is posting losses, six consecutive quarters so far.

      Nokia is truly a religion for those people.

      For me, nothing religious about it, just plain old looking at Nokia’s financial results. You can read all about it here : http://www.nokia.com/global/about-nokia/investors/financials/financials/

      • Spede oli aliarvostettu

        By looking only some numbers you seem to miss the actual trend.

        That’s the loss of the market share.

        It sure seems like a religion to me when you claim that Nokia was supposed to make more unit sales while losing market shares. While the market growth stalled.

        You need something divine to be able to make that equation to work.

        • yasu

          By looking only some numbers you seem to miss the actual trend.

          That’s the loss of the market share.

          I’m discussing trends. I ask you to post the sales figure that back up your original point.

          It sure seems like a religion to me when you claim that Nokia was supposed to make more unit sales while losing market shares. While the market growth stalled.

          I claim no such thing. I asked you here http://mynokiablog.com/2012/12/16/bbc-life-beyond-nokia-in-finland-start-up-boom/comment-page-1/#comment-723369 to provide sales figure that back up this.

          In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.

          You need something divine to be able to make that equation to work.

          Good thing I’m not arguing that, now, is it?

          • Spede oli aliarvostettu

            Could you please post me a sales figure proving that the loss of sales is caused by Feb 11. or Elop?

            I posted the market share trend.

            • yasu

              Could you please post me a sales figure proving that the loss of sales is caused by Feb 11. or Elop?

              Look at http://mynokiablog.com/2012/12/16/bbc-life-beyond-nokia-in-finland-start-up-boom/comment-page-1/#comment-723414. A 30% drop of sales. When such a YoY loss happens, something has happened.

              From http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/924613/000095012311024458/u10545e20vf.htm it’s a SEC document dated from March 11, 2011 submitted by Nokia which addresses the risks associated with

              We may not be able to maintain the viability of our current Symbian smartphone platform during the transition to Windows Phone as our primary smartphone platform or we may not realize a return on our investment in MeeGo and next generation devices, platforms and user experiences.

              The continued viability of our Symbian smartphones, even as we plan to deliver additional user interface and hardware enhancements, during the transition to Windows Phone as our primary smartphone platform is subject to certain risks and uncertainties, which could, either individually or together, significantly impair our market share, net sales and profitability. Those risks and uncertainties include the following:

              • Our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers may no longer see our Symbian smartphones as attractive investments during the transition to Windows Phone. This would result in a loss of market share, which could be substantial, during the transition and which we may not be able to regain when quantities of Nokia Windows Phone smartphones are commercially available.

              • We may not succeed in transitioning over time our installed base of Symbian owners to our Windows Phone smartphones.

              • Application, services and content development by developers and other partners for Symbian may decline or cease, which would diminish the viability of our Symbian smartphones and their attractiveness to our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers, as well as limit the opportunity to transition compatible aspects of our Symbian development to the Windows Phone ecosystem.

              • Our mobile operator and distributor customers may choose not to promote and market robustly some or all of our Symbian smartphones, may require monetary incentives, including significant price reductions, to do so or may discontinue some or all of our Symbian smartphone product lines.

              • Our suppliers may reduce the availability of certain components for our Symbian smartphones or we may not be able to obtain certain or sufficient components for our Symbian smartphones at attractive prices resulting in increased costs that we may not be able to pass on to our customers.

              • We may not be able to provide the necessary support for our Symbian smartphones organization and business during the transition to Windows Phone, including efficiently managing the phase-out over time of our investment in Symbian while maintaining acceptable profitability for those products.

              • We may lose key personnel and skilled employees involved in the development of our Symbian platform. We may also not be able to maintain employee motivation and focus to continue to innovate and develop on the Symbian smartphone platform or otherwise be able to maintain the quality of our Symbian smartphones.

              • Under our new strategy, MeeGo becomes an open-source, mobile platform project. Our investment in MeeGo will emphasize longer-term market exploration of next-generation devices, platforms and user experiences. We plan to ship a MeeGo-based mobile product later this year. If the market segment that we target with that mobile product does not materialize as expected, or if we fail to develop next-generation platforms, user experiences and mobile products, we may incur operating losses and accordingly not realize a return on our investment in this area.

              Horace dediu also asked in February 14, 2011, well before the Q2 2011 results. From http://www.asymco.com/2011/02/21/platform-sunk-costs/

              One could question why would anyone buy a product whose platform that’s been declared end of life. Perhaps there is a built-in assumption that end users are inherently stupid. However even in that scenario the question is which distributors will make the same bet with Nokia? Or, even more perplexing, which operators are willing to stock EOL products for two years when that shelf space is getting strong bids from Nokia’s rivals.

              Apparently, Nokia and Horace Dediu seemed to know, well before Q2 2011 results that EOLing a platform will result in dropping sales. No magic involved. Just knowledge of how that market works.

              I posted the market share trend.

              I know. Market share != sales.

              Look, maybe if Elop had not made the bombastic Feb 11 2011 announcement, Nokia sales would have pluged to zero. We’ll never know.

              We know that he came empty handed and EOL the main bread winner, and the very next quarter, Nokia went into loss making. They still haven’t have recovered from that. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t. Roll on January 24th.

              • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                You can’t have sales if you don’t have market share. It’s as simple as that.

                You are basically saying that the reason for the drop in sales is not known?

                I say that the trend was Nokia losing market share. That has happened. Before Feb 11. and after Feb. 11.

                I can’t help you if you think the market share is irrelevant.

                • yasu

                  You can’t have sales if you don’t have market share. It’s as simple as that.

                  Actually it’s the other way around. At Nokia’s (or any company for that matter) headquarters they don’t know their market share, but they know their sales. That’s how they make their money. That’s what they disclose on financial report day. After all the sales of all the actors in a specific market are known, then and only then can any company’s market share can be calculated.

                  You are basically saying that the reason for the drop in sales is not known?

                  I do?

                  I say that the trend was Nokia losing market share. That has happened. Before Feb 11. and after Feb. 11.

                  I don’t remember disputing that.

                  I can’t help you if you think the market share is irrelevant.

                  In the context of growing or decreasing sales? Absolutely.
                  One can have decreasing sales while growing market share or decreasing market share while increasing sales.

                  • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                    So, what is the reason for the drop in sales?

                    You apparently claim it is not happening because of the trend with losing market share.

                    • yasu

                      So, what is the reason for the drop in sales?

                      Elop’s EOLing of the platform is a good culprit.

                      You apparently claim it is not happening because of the trend with losing market share.

                      Nokia sold

                      2009 : 66 million smartphones
                      2010 : 100 million (+50% or +33 million, more than any other manufacturer in volume), still lost market share.

                      Once again, one can lose market share while losing sales or increase market share while decreasing sales.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Please prove that the drop in sales happened because of Elop and not because of the ongoing trend.

                      You are just handing out event that may have very little to do with the actual matter. Please give us hard facts.

                      Once again, one can’t increase sales if the market size is not growing enough and you are losing market share. That’s not possible.

                    • yasu

                      @

                      Please prove that the drop in sales happened because of Elop and not because of the ongoing trend.

                      Ongoing trend, since we are talking about sales were increasing sales.

                      You are just handing out event that may have very little to do with the actual matter.

                      That’s probably why Elop is whining about the transition tha

                      Please give us hard facts.

                      Once again, one can’t increase sales if the market size is not growing enough and you are losing market share. That’s not possible.

                      And? You look at a consequence and you believe it to be a cause.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Well.

                      Please prove that Elop changed the trend. It may have been because of something else.

                      Please give us facts instead of your beliefs.

              • tom

                @Yasu

                People here can spin in any way they want, and they usually do that to try to defend WP and Elop, Number and quarterly statement tells the truth.

                Nokia is 10th largest smart phone maker now. May be another few quarter, no one will notice them. They were giant once, not any more. Yes, they will sell few more millions of smart phones, may be little more than last quarter, but everoneelse will outpace them or are doing so already.

                • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                  Nice.

                  I’m not defending WP and Elop.

                  Your problem may be that I’m not accusing Elop.

                  In my opinion Symbian was destined to collapse just because it was not as good product as it should have been.

                  • GordonH

                    “I’m not defending WP and Elop.”
                    LOL ha ha LOL
                    having too many mushrooms again. ha ha ha
                    ha ha.
                    you are getting too funny LOL aha ah ha

    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

      Yes, and Nokia’s profits had been dropping long time before Elop and Feb 11. announcement. Q2 was only the moment when the profits dropped enough to make Nokia unprofitable. Just look how how they have been losing profits for years.

      Devices & Services
      Operating profit

      2007/2008
      Q1 1252/1883 (+631)
      Q2 1779/1824 (+45)
      Q3 1959/1602 (-357)
      Q4 2594/766 (-1828)

      2008/2009
      Q1 1883/547 (-1336)
      Q2 1565/763 (-802)
      Q3 1602/785 (-817)
      Q4 766/1219 (+453)

      2009/2010
      Q1 547/831 (+284)
      Q2 763/643 (-120)
      Q3 785/807 (+22)
      Q4 1219/1018 (-201)

      2010/2011
      Q1 831/690 (-141)
      Q2 643/-247 (-917)
      Q3 807/132 (-675)
      Q4 1082/203 (-879)

      You never explained how Nokia was supposed to sell more units while losing market share. Oh wait! Yes you did, but you never explained how Nokia was supposed to make the market grow when the growth stalled.

      • yasu

        Yes, and Nokia’s profits had been dropping long time before Elop and Feb 11. announcement. Q2 was only the moment when the profits dropped enough to make Nokia unprofitable. Just look how how they have been losing profits for years.

        Profits > losses any day of the week and specially on financial reports day.

        From http://www.nokia.com/global/about-nokia/investors/financials/financials/ a consolidated view

        2006 : 5.4 billion
        2007 : 7.9 billion
        2008 : 4.9 billion
        2009 : 1.1 billion
        2010 : 2.0 billion (drop halted)
        Elop years
        2011 : -1.1 billion
        2012 : ???? billion (we’ll know the 24th of January).

        You never explained how Nokia was supposed to sell more units while losing market share. Oh wait! Yes you did, but you never explained how Nokia was supposed to make the market grow when the growth stalled.

        Why should I? I made no such assertion.

        • Spede oli aliarvostettu

          So, please post any data proving the losses were not destined to happen with or without Elop.

          • yasu

            So, please post any data proving the losses were not destined to happen with or without Elop.

            Why? Didn’t make any such assertion. I asked you to back up yours.

            • Spede oli aliarvostettu

              I did. I can’t help it if you don’t want to accept that.

              Sorry.

  • nn

    @Spede oli aliarvostettu

    Well, it didn’t take long for you to forget about the “only official Nokia number counts” rule.

  • yasu

    I did. I can’t help it if you don’t want to accept that.

    Sorry.

    Where? Where are your sales figures showing that

    In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.

    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

      Less people bought Nokia’s smartphones in Q2 2011. It was lo longer so interesting for the people. That’s real data.

      If you want to claim that was because of Elop, maybe you should try to prove that one.

      • yasu

        Less people bought Nokia’s smartphones in Q2 2011. It was lo longer so interesting for the people. That’s real data.

        If you want to claim that was because of Elop, maybe you should try to prove that one.

        Nice try. Your claim is here

        In real world less and less people were interested about Symbian. Still some people have this strange idea that it’s somehow Elop’s fault Symbian losing that much sales.

        . You still have to back it up. No need to move the goalposts.

        • Spede oli aliarvostettu

          That’s a fact. Claim proved. Less people wanted it.

          Anything else?

          • yasu

            That’s a fact. Claim proved.

            Er, no.

            Less people wanted it.

            After Mr Elop EOL the platform. Up to that moment, the sales were increasing.

            Would have continue to increase without it, we’ll never know. All we know is that the very next quarter, sales plunged, Elop came an try to repair the damage with a claim that Symbian “would still be supported till 2016 if not more”, to no avail. http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/26/elop-symbian-will-continue-getting-updates-until-2016-at-least/

            Anything else?

            • Spede oli aliarvostettu

              The hard fact is that less people were interested in about Symbian. Nokia’s numbers from Q2 2011 prove that.

              Maybe you should try to proof that it was not just coincidence that the sales collapsed after the memo? You are saying that it collapsed after the memo but so what? What are you trying to say with that?

              • yasu

                The hard fact is that less people were interested in about Symbian. Nokia’s numbers from Q2 2011 prove that.

                And that happen after Mr Elop’s intervention. As long as he didn’t do anything, sales were increasing, profits were made.

                Maybe you should try to proof that it was not just coincidence that the sales collapsed after the memo? You are saying that it collapsed after the memo but so what? What are you trying to say with that?

                I didn’t speak about the memo. I spoke about the Feb 11 announcement. When Elop EOLed the platform, the sales were bound to suffer. Nokia knew it and told so in the SEC document.http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/924613/000095012311024458/u10545e20vf.htm

                Horace Dediu asked in http://www.asymco.com/2011/02/21/platform-sunk-costs/

                One could question why would anyone buy a product whose platform that’s been declared end of life. Perhaps there is a built-in assumption that end users are inherently stupid. However even in that scenario the question is which distributors will make the same bet with Nokia? Or, even more perplexing, which operators are willing to stock EOL products for two years when that shelf space is getting strong bids from Nokia’s rivals.

                So, why would operators and distributors would stock and give shelf space for EOL products?

                Why would Elop suddenly come, three mere days before the first of many profits warning, try to reaffirm support for Symbian? Just for the heck of it? Because he was bored and had nothing better to do that day?

                • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                  I’m not claiming the drop in sales is a coincidence. However maybe you should try to prove it happened because of what Elop did. As far as we know, it could be just a coincidence and the drop was destined to happen with or without Feb 11. announcement.

                  You gave us no proof that the drop in sales and profits happened because of Elop’s actions.

                  • yasu

                    I’m not claiming the drop in sales is a coincidence.

                    Then, what caused the collapse of sales? And why then?

                    However maybe you should try to prove it happened because of what Elop did. As far as we know, it could be just a coincidence and the drop was destined to happen with or without Feb 11. announcement.

                    Of course, 30%! drop of sales happen like that all the time, it’s a perfectly normal.

                    A few questions :

                    Did Elop EOL Symbian?

                    If Symbian is EOL, it’s supposed to be phase out. Are the sales supposed to increase while it’s getting phased out?

                    Why would operators and distributors stock EOL products while the competition for shelf space is so fierce?

                    And why, did Elop a mere three days before the profit May 29th warning try to assure that Symbian would be supported till 2016 if not more? What could have possibly prompted such an act?

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      The drop in unit sales happened because less people wanted to buy Nokia phones. A certain percentage of the people were buying phones made by Nokia. Now why that percentage was smaller than before.

                      Maybe you should try asking yourself what caused Nokia to lose market share?

                      You are not proving anything by claiming Elop doing something. You can’t really point out why his actions were that harmful while the actual trend was meaningless according to you.

                    • yasu

                      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Maybe you should try asking yourself what caused Nokia to lose market share?

                      I know. An exploding smartphone market. Even by growing more in volumes than competitors, Nokia lost market share.

                      You are not proving anything by claiming Elop doing something. You can’t really point out why his actions were that harmful while the actual trend was meaningless according to you.

                      But the trends were increasing sales. Up to an including Q1 2011.

                      You still haven’t answered the question. I put them here.

                      Did Elop EOL Symbian?

                      If Symbian is EOL, it’s supposed to be phase out. Are the sales supposed to increase while it’s getting phased out?

                      Why would operators and distributors stock EOL products while the competition for shelf space is so fierce?

                      And why, did Elop a mere three days before the profit May 29th warning try to assure that Symbian would be supported till 2016 if not more? What could have possibly prompted such an act?

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I told you that less people wanted to buy Nokia phones. I gave you the numbers to prove it.

                      You still have not provided me any real facts that Elop caused Nokia to lose unit sales. As far as I know, it may be a coincidence. Or it may have only a slight effect on the sales. Please provide some facts to back up your claims.

                      I don’t care what Elop did if you are not providing any facts about the consequences of his actions. They may have just as little significance as anything else has.

                    • yasu

                      @Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I told you that less people wanted to buy Nokia phones. I gave you the numbers to prove it.

                      You also said that Elop was unjustly blamed.

                      You still have not provided me any real facts that Elop caused Nokia to lose unit sales.

                      Sure did. You can’t even bring yourself to answer the very questions that clearly show that.

                      As far as I know, it may be a coincidence. Or it may have only a slight effect on the sales. Please provide some facts to back up your claims.

                      The announcement was about phasing out Symbian. I believe that when a product is phased out, it’s not expected to grow sales. Since that’s the point of phasing it out.

                      I don’t care what Elop did if you are not providing any facts about the consequences of his actions. They may have just as little significance as anything else has.

                      Incorrect. You obsolete your product line that you want to phase out, the sales are bound to drop, especially in such a competitive market.

                      If you don’t know how the market works, that’s your issue.

                      I wonder why you don’t answer the simple questions.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      You really still haven’t provided us real facts about Elop making Symbian sales to fall. That’s just guessing from you.

                      Please answer the question. What are the facts about Elop making Symbian to fall? Please, give us hard facts. Not just something that you feel may have caused the loss of sales.

                    • yasu

                      Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      You really still haven’t provided us real facts about Elop making Symbian sales to fall. That’s just guessing from you.

                      No. He clearly stated that he intended Symbian to be replaced by WP. For this to occurs, Symbian sales had to diminish.

                      Please answer the question. What are the facts about Elop making Symbian to fall?

                      You first. I have a bunch of question still unanswered here : http://mynokiablog.com/2012/12/16/bbc-life-beyond-nokia-in-finland-start-up-boom/comment-page-1/#comment-723570

                      Please, give us hard facts. Not just something that you feel may have caused the loss of sales.

                      I don’t feel anything. To transition from Symbian to WP, Symbian sales have to disappear, that means that they should decrease. And so they did. Unless you know another way for it to happen?

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      I see you can’t give us any facts about Elop causing Symbian sales to collapse.

                      All you can do is making more questions.

                      In Q2 2011 people no longer wanted that many Symbian phones. That’s why Nokia was no longer able to sell those as much as earlier.

              • tom

                “The hard fact is that less people were interested in about Symbian”

                May be you didn’t notice, hardly anyone is interested in WP. Unless you are blind, look at Lumia sales numbers. If you want more, look at quarterly statements for profit/loss number too.

                • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                  Very true.

                  Let’s hope Symbian didn’t ruin Nokia’s reputation for good.

                  • Tom

                    So you blame Symbian for that? How convenient. May be you didn’t notice no one cared about WP and all vendors almost dumped it in trash can till Nokia came to the party. They were selling in thousands, not millions before Nokia did WP. It’s not Symbian, it’s WP and MS that people don’t want.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Let’s really hope Symbian didn’t ruin Nokia’s reputation for any product they might offer.

  • dss

    Janne, before you start calling Symbian old or whatever, I think you should read a little bit about the kernel and what the OS is cable of.. In many ways, its actually better than Windows NT when it comes to mobile devices, simply because it was developed with them in mind.

    Nokia is now using a desktop kernel, developed in the early 90s, instead of a mobile device kernel developed in the late 90s. From what I can see Symbian > WP overall.. for now, I am sure that Microsoft will get it right in 24-34 months time, but Nokia didn’t have to wait for that.. they could have worked on Symbian.. remain independent…and maybe sell a couple of shitty android devices in the meantime until Symbian^4 was ready to roll.

    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

      If Symbian is so great, why is it so incredibly unstable?

      Symbian must be really good because it took Nokia only 5,5 years to make the latest Belle that’s not as smooth as years old iOS with less powerful hardware.

    • Janne

      dss: I am discussing Symbian as the Nokia Series 60 (and its successors) incarnate and all that was wrong with that. I think we have already established and agreed here on MNB, in many such threads in the past, that Symbian itself (although hard/exotic to code in many ways) may have been in a better shape for the future.

  • Francis

    Ha… Bought my Samsung Galaxy Note II white today to replace my N9 64GB Black.

    After returning from shop and start tinkering it, seem transfers contacts is very much easier now with latest Samsung Klies. It is so much fun, those Symbian features also all available in android too, eg Bluetooth transfer, widgets, micro sd, etc. plus Huge and Massive quantity of good software available !!

    However, to transfers my N9 calendar to Note II still in progress via exchange..

    I’m leaving Nokia for time being to explore other world, but I still keep my 808 as secondary phone mainly for photography. After my first Nokia 8250, 3310, ….til 808 (about 15 years), this Note II is my first Non Nokia phone. So far very happy with it !

    WP with those Metro Title is not my taste.

  • Janne

    yasu and the underappreciated Spede, one comment:

    – Neither is disputing that Symbian had been loosing market share at a significant rate already a long time before February 11th and Elop.

    – yasu is making the argument that marketshare is irrelevant to device sales numbers, that marketshare is simply a result of those numbers compared to competitor’s numbers, but that’s all it means. In many ways, he is right of course.

    – Spede oli aliarvostettu argues that marketshare signals the popularity of a product. More so, loosing market share means that as soon as market contracts instead of grows, your device sales numbers will go down too. yasu argues that isn’t necessarily the case as you can win market share even when selling less devices as long as you sell more than your competitors – and vice versa.

    You both have a point.

    It all comes down what you believe was the trend. Spede oli aliarvostettu is right that quarter after quarter, less of every 100 people walking into a mobile phone store chose Nokia’s Symbian devices. This happened for a long time during OPK and it has continued to happen during Elop. Only because more people walked into the store (market was growing), did Nokia’s device sales numbers grow in late 2010. In Q1/2011 the market stopped growing and Nokia dipped.

    yasu of course is right that your sales trend may be more independent of larger market trends. Apple may be a good example, while they are loosing market share, I doubt anyone could dump them in the same category with our Symbian fears…

    However, I don’t really think even yasu believes Symbian in Q4/2010 was Apple’s iPad – loosing market share only because more (cheaper) competitors entered the fray, not because the product itself became less wanted. In fact, Symbian was staying afloat by going cheaper and cheaper, to combat more wanted high-end products’ numbers.

    So it comes down to what you believe: Was Symbian’s market share trend telling of a less desireable product (and thus a danger to sales numbers with the same trend as market share losses) or was it indeed just like Apple’s iPad, loosing market share because more equally good or more accessibly priced competitors were coming on-board and the market was growing with new customer groups coming on board, but not really loosing consumer interest itself.

    Was Symbian loosing market share because new consumer groups were coming to the market? Or was Symbian loosing market share because it was loosing its existing consumer groups while also gathering less and less of the new consumer groups coming to the market? Former would have been fine, the latter – a killer.

    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

      Symbian losing the market share was only the trend. It was not the reason for people wanting it less and less from the early 2010.

      The actual reason was probably that iPhone killed the high end and Android wiped out the low end. Eventually Android became so cheap that Symbian was no longer competitive even with a lower price.

      If you look carefully, you see that the ASP of Nokia’s smartphones was no longer coming down in the Q1 2011 and Q2 2011. The ASP for smartphones went down 16% YoY back in Q4 2010.

      It’s apparent that Nokia was no longer able to compete with price. That’s what was the final straw for unit sales. Not the only reason. I remember thinking how much better those early 2011 Android phones seemed to be when I compared them to the low end Symbian phones. Symbian was winning only in the camera and that’s not enough for everyone. Actually it’s only enough for a small minority.

      • yasu

        Symbian losing the market share was only the trend. It was not the reason for people wanting it less and less from the early 2010.

        That’s probably why from 2009 to 2010 the yearly sales jumped from 66 million to 100 million.

        The actual reason was probably that iPhone killed the high end and Android wiped out the low end. Eventually Android became so cheap that Symbian was no longer competitive even with a lower price.

        There were cheap androids before Q2 2011 and iPhone was alreay there. Nokia managed to grow their sales in that environment. Once the product was declared obsolete and headed to extinction, the sales would have been real hard pressed to grow. Well, maybe not in Elopland.

        If you look carefully, you see that the ASP of Nokia’s smartphones was no longer coming down in the Q1 2011 and Q2 2011. The ASP for smartphones went down 16% YoY back in Q4 2010.

        That’s nice.

        It’s apparent that Nokia was no longer able to compete with price. That’s what was the final straw for unit sales.

        Yeah. And the fact that Nokia had obsoleted with big fanfare should have helped sales.

        Not the only reason. I remember thinking how much better those early 2011 Android phones seemed to be when I compared them to the low end Symbian phones. Symbian was winning only in the camera and that’s not enough for everyone. Actually it’s only enough for a small minority.

        Sales are not just dictated by what Spede oli aliarvostettu thinks of a product.

        Do you even know who are Nokia clients?

        • Spede oli aliarvostettu

          So, you still don’t have any facts about Symbian sales collapsing? Perhaps you should try to look for some before making claims you can’t prove.

          • Pica Pica

            @Spede oli aliarvostettu

            A little advice if I may. Stop digging. When you’re already in a hole digging more will not get you out of it. I know it’s hard to admit being wrong, but you don’t even have to do that. Just stop digging. That’s all. What you’re doing now is just embarrassing and plain stupid. You’re just making yourself look like some annoying teenager idiot. Are you one? If not, then just stop.

            • Spede oli aliarvostettu

              Don’t worry.

              I just wanted to see his patterns.

              • GordonH

                patterns whooa patterns. Circles LOL you are too funny. Stop those Mushrooms.

                • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                  Well.

                  It’s great if the demise of Nokia amuses you.

                  If you understand that, yes?

    • yasu

      @janne

      (…)So it comes down to what you believe(…)

      Do you believe that operators and distributors would be more interested in supporting and providing shelf space for an EOL product?

      If yes? Why would they?

      Do you believe that a product that is phased out is supposed to enjoy growth?

      • Spede oli aliarvostettu

        What are the hard facts explaining that was the reason for the fall?

        I can say that it happened because people didn’t want to buy it. That’s backed by hard facts because Nokia had less unit sales.

        You claiming it was just because of Elop is guessing. Please prove that.

        • Janne

          Symbian’s main fault is that an increasing share of people didn’t want to buy it. Just like it is with BB7. Times changed and the “legacy” providers were no longer competitive.

          However, it is likely Elop hurt Symbian’s sales somewhat in addition to that.

        • yasu

          @Spede oli aliarvostettu

          What are the hard facts explaining that was the reason for the fall?

          Elop wanted to transition from Symbian to Windows Phone. For that, Symbian sales must disappear for WP to pick up the slack, which it has so far spectacularly failed to do.

          I can say that it happened because people didn’t want to buy it.

          Rather distributors and operators, which are the actual Nokia customers, were less interested by an EOL product.

          That’s backed by hard facts because Nokia had less unit sales.

          You claiming it was just because of Elop is guessing. Please prove that.

          I don’t need to guess. Nokia said so themselves ( http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/924613/000095012311024458/u10545e20vf.htm) and so did Horace Dediu (http://www.asymco.com/2011/02/21/platform-sunk-costs/) And they did so, before the Q2 2011 results were known. They didn’t after the fact try to explain away a result.

          I believe that’s it because they know how the market works.

          • Spede oli aliarvostettu

            You are still guessing and not giving us any hard facts. Please prove your claims.

            Nokia has also said that they may not be able to produce competitive (including Symbian) products. I guess Nokia knows better than you how the market works.

            “Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to: 1) the competitiveness and quality of our portfolio of products and services and their combinations”

            So, Nokia told us that Symbian was a risk.

            • yasu

              @Spede oli aliarvostettu

              You are still guessing and not giving us any hard facts. Please prove your claims.

              http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_microsoft_more_details/

              Here. Symbian sales were expected to decrease.

              Nokia has also said that they may not be able to produce competitive (including Symbian) products.

              They also said since you are into selective quoting.

              The continued viability of our Symbian smartphones, even as we plan to deliver additional user interface and hardware enhancements, during the transition to Windows Phone as our primary smartphone platform is subject to certain risks and uncertainties, which could, either individually or together, significantly impair our market share, net sales and profitability. Those risks and uncertainties include the following:

              • Our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers may no longer see our Symbian smartphones as attractive investments during the transition to Windows Phone. This would result in a loss of market share, which could be substantial, during the transition and which we may not be able to regain when quantities of Nokia Windows Phone smartphones are commercially available.

              • We may not succeed in transitioning over time our installed base of Symbian owners to our Windows Phone smartphones.

              • Application, services and content development by developers and other partners for Symbian may decline or cease, which would diminish the viability of our Symbian smartphones and their attractiveness to our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers, as well as limit the opportunity to transition compatible aspects of our Symbian development to the Windows Phone ecosystem.

              • Our mobile operator and distributor customers may choose not to promote and market robustly some or all of our Symbian smartphones, may require monetary incentives, including significant price reductions, to do so or may discontinue some or all of our Symbian smartphone product lines.

              • Our suppliers may reduce the availability of certain components for our Symbian smartphones or we may not be able to obtain certain or sufficient components for our Symbian smartphones at attractive prices resulting in increased costs that we may not be able to pass on to our customers.

              • We may not be able to provide the necessary support for our Symbian smartphones organization and business during the transition to Windows Phone, including efficiently managing the phase-out over time of our investment in Symbian while maintaining acceptable profitability for those products.

              • We may lose key personnel and skilled employees involved in the development of our Symbian platform. We may also not be able to maintain employee motivation and focus to continue to innovate and develop on the Symbian smartphone platform or otherwise be able to maintain the quality of our Symbian smartphones.

              So the competiveness of Symbian was supposed to be affected by the upheaval of the transition.

              I guess Nokia knows better than you how the market works.

              Well, at least knew. The Nokia of today…

              “Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to: 1) the competitiveness and quality of our portfolio of products and services and their combinations”

              So, Nokia told us that Symbian was a risk.

              The risk was that its competiveness couldn’t be maintained during the transition.

              • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                Nokia has also said that it was possible that Symbian was no longer competitive.

                You have not provided us any facts about Elop causing Symbian sales to collapse. Please give real facts and not opinions.

                • yasu

                  Nokia has also said that it was possible that Symbian was no longer competitive.

                  They also said this :

                  Our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers may no longer see our Symbian smartphones as attractive investments during the transition to Windows Phone. This would result in a loss of market share, which could be substantial, during the transition and which we may not be able to regain when quantities of Nokia Windows Phone smartphones are commercially available.

                  • We may not succeed in transitioning over time our installed base of Symbian owners to our Windows Phone smartphones.

                  • Application, services and content development by developers and other partners for Symbian may decline or cease, which would diminish the viability of our Symbian smartphones and their attractiveness to our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers, as well as limit the opportunity to transition compatible aspects of our Symbian development to the Windows Phone ecosystem.

                  • Our mobile operator and distributor customers may choose not to promote and market robustly some or all of our Symbian smartphones, may require monetary incentives, including significant price reductions, to do so or may discontinue some or all of our Symbian smartphone product lines.

                  • Our suppliers may reduce the availability of certain components for our Symbian smartphones or we may not be able to obtain certain or sufficient components for our Symbian smartphones at attractive prices resulting in increased costs that we may not be able to pass on to our customers.

                  • We may not be able to provide the necessary support for our Symbian smartphones organization and business during the transition to Windows Phone, including efficiently managing the phase-out over time of our investment in Symbian while maintaining acceptable profitability for those products.

                  • We may lose key personnel and skilled employees involved in the development of our Symbian platform. We may also not be able to maintain employee motivation and focus to continue to innovate and develop on the Symbian smartphone platform or otherwise be able to maintain the quality of our Symbian smartphones.

                  You may selectively quote as many times as you want, I just have to cut and paste the whole thing. :D

                  You have not provided us any facts about Elop causing Symbian sales to collapse.

                  I have, repeatedly, with links.

                  Please give real facts and not opinions.

                  I have repeatedly. I would like your opinion on one matter. How are Symbian sales going to get totally replaced by Windows Phones, if Symbian sales don’t decrease? Allow me to refresh your memory with an illustration from the Feb 11 2011. http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_analyst_slide.jpg

                  • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                    You are not providing me any hard facts. Some “may”‘s are not facts.

                    So, you should try to find some real proof about Elop causing Symbian sales to collapse.

                    • yasu

                      You are not providing me any hard facts. Some “may”‘s are not facts.

                      What may are you talking about?

                      So, you should try to find some real proof about Elop causing Symbian sales to collapse.

                      I have, repeatedly.

                      Fact: Elop decided to phase out Symbian.

                      Fact: Symbian sales are expected to decrease. He even showed a nice graphic : http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_analyst_slide.jpg

                      I posit that there is no way for Symbian sales not to decrease if WP are supposed to replace them. Look again at the nice graphic : http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_analyst_slide.jpg

                      If you know a way for Windows Phone to replace Symbian and at the same time Symbian sales not decrease, please enlighten me.

                      I’ll check back later, but somehow, I think you’ll come short.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      That graph is missing some information. Please tell me the dates for that projected transition. Without them it’s hardly any proof.

                      Please give us hard proof that it was Elop who caused Symbian’s collapse in 2011 and 2012.

                      Your graphs may have completely different timeline.

                      So, where is that real proof you were talking about?

      • Janne

        yasu:

        I believe Feb11 hurt Symbian and that the transition away from Symbian was mismanaged under Elop. I have been consistent about right after Feb11, calling it a gamble here, and called it a failure after Q1/2012 results.

        Now, do I believe the Symbian market share trend of pre-Feb11 would have decimated its sales numbers anyway? Yes, I do. Because it, just like RIM (that did no Feb11, instead tried to uptalk BB7), was no longer competitive and thus was loosing real sales – not just percentages.

        Sure, the market growth meant it was still gaining new sales more than it was loosing sales, but it was already loosing sales for many quarters. I firmly believe that, hence the loss in market share. I do believe it would have continued to loose those sales just like RIM to the point where eventually not even market growth would have helped Nokia.

        Now, would the drop have happened as fast? Probably not. I think Feb11 hastened Symbian’s demise by, perhaps a quarter or two. Symbian^4 would have failed, I think. MeeGo – that, that really could have worked. Just like WP still can work. None of the options would have been pretty for Nokia though… except the one where they’d gone Maemo full blast in 2005.

        That would have been beautiful.

        • Janne

          Sure, the market growth meant it was still gaining new sales more than it was loosing sales, but it was already loosing sales for many quarters.

          Clarification: Here I mean Nokia, not RIM.

        • Spede oli aliarvostettu

          It’s very hard to tell what Yasu is trying to say.

          He probably thinks that it’s not possible that Nokia was keeping up the unit sales with new customers they had because of the market growth. In that kind of situation the stalling of the market growth would kill the unit sales. Just as happened.

          He is probably thinking that Nokia had good products. That’s because bad products will eventually lead to loss of sales and he has been blaming Elop with no hard proof.

          Now I think Nokia had bad products leading to loss of market share and eventually into loss of unit sales when the market growth stalled.

          • Janne

            Spede oli aliarvostettu:

            I agree, clearly yasu thinks that Nokia was not loosing customers and he is not considering the possibility that Nokia was gaining new customers as the smartphone market expanded (people moving up from feature phones for example where Nokia had a good reputation), but was also rapidly loosing old smartphone customers due to dissatisfaction with the products (that resulted in loss of sales once new customers stopped calling or once the loss of old customers became more than gain of new ones).

            I’m somewhere in-between of your two extremes in this discussion, I guess. :)

            • yasu

              @Janne.
              clearly you don’t know what Yasu thinks, so don’t pretend to. Thank you very much.

              • Janne

                So do tell us, what do you think. :)

          • yasu

            It’s very hard to tell what Yasu is trying to say.

            Before Elop decide to EOL Symbian, Nokia sales were growing and profit were made.

            (some drivel aboute what I’m supposed to think…)That’s because bad products will eventually lead to loss of sales and he has been blaming Elop with no hard proof.

            What? Didn’t he announced to the world that he intended to phase out Symbian?http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_microsoft_more_details/

            Look at the graphic : http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_analyst_slide.jpg

            Clearly Symbian sales were expected to decrease.

            Now I think Nokia had bad products leading to loss of market share and eventually into loss of unit sales when the market growth stalled.

            • Spede oli aliarvostettu

              Yes, you make up claims without any hard proof.

              You are trying to convince us to believe something you think caused the collapse while you have no proof of that.

              Nokia announced beforehand that Symbian was a risk.

              “Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to: 1) the competitiveness and quality of our portfolio of products and services and their combinations”

              • yasu

                Yes, you make up claims without any hard proof.

                I posted link that showed that Elop, by announcing his intention to replace Symbian with Windows Phone, expected Symbian sales. Posted links, complete with nice graphices.

                You are trying to convince us to believe something you think caused the collapse while you have no proof of that.

                Nokia said so before hand, Horace Dediu said so before hand. Elop expected it : http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_analyst_slide.jpg

                Nokia announced beforehand that Symbian was a risk.

                “Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to: 1) the competitiveness and quality of our portfolio of products and services and their combinations”

                Nokia said this

                Our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers may no longer see our Symbian smartphones as attractive investments during the transition to Windows Phone. This would result in a loss of market share, which could be substantial, during the transition and which we may not be able to regain when quantities of Nokia Windows Phone smartphones are commercially available.

                • We may not succeed in transitioning over time our installed base of Symbian owners to our Windows Phone smartphones.

                • Application, services and content development by developers and other partners for Symbian may decline or cease, which would diminish the viability of our Symbian smartphones and their attractiveness to our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers, as well as limit the opportunity to transition compatible aspects of our Symbian development to the Windows Phone ecosystem.

                • Our mobile operator and distributor customers may choose not to promote and market robustly some or all of our Symbian smartphones, may require monetary incentives, including significant price reductions, to do so or may discontinue some or all of our Symbian smartphone product lines.

                • Our suppliers may reduce the availability of certain components for our Symbian smartphones or we may not be able to obtain certain or sufficient components for our Symbian smartphones at attractive prices resulting in increased costs that we may not be able to pass on to our customers.

                • We may not be able to provide the necessary support for our Symbian smartphones organization and business during the transition to Windows Phone, including efficiently managing the phase-out over time of our investment in Symbian while maintaining acceptable profitability for those products.

                • We may lose key personnel and skilled employees involved in the development of our Symbian platform. We may also not be able to maintain employee motivation and focus to continue to innovate and develop on the Symbian smartphone platform or otherwise be able to maintain the quality of our Symbian smartphones.

                • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                  That proves nothing than this one.

                  Nokia has also said that it was possible that Symbian was no longer competitive.

                  “Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to: 1) the competitiveness and quality of our portfolio of products and services and their combinations”

                  Please provide us real facts instead of those “may”‘s.

                  • yasu

                    That proves nothing than this one.

                    Nokia has also said that it was possible that Symbian was no longer competitive.
                    “Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to: 1) the competitiveness and quality of our portfolio of products and services and their combinations”

                    You missed a little bit. Allow me.

                    Our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers may no longer see our Symbian smartphones as attractive investments during the transition to Windows Phone. This would result in a loss of market share, which could be substantial, during the transition and which we may not be able to regain when quantities of Nokia Windows Phone smartphones are commercially available.

                    • We may not succeed in transitioning over time our installed base of Symbian owners to our Windows Phone smartphones.

                    • Application, services and content development by developers and other partners for Symbian may decline or cease, which would diminish the viability of our Symbian smartphones and their attractiveness to our mobile operator and distributor customers and consumers, as well as limit the opportunity to transition compatible aspects of our Symbian development to the Windows Phone ecosystem.

                    • Our mobile operator and distributor customers may choose not to promote and market robustly some or all of our Symbian smartphones, may require monetary incentives, including significant price reductions, to do so or may discontinue some or all of our Symbian smartphone product lines.

                    • Our suppliers may reduce the availability of certain components for our Symbian smartphones or we may not be able to obtain certain or sufficient components for our Symbian smartphones at attractive prices resulting in increased costs that we may not be able to pass on to our customers.

                    • We may not be able to provide the necessary support for our Symbian smartphones organization and business during the transition to Windows Phone, including efficiently managing the phase-out over time of our investment in Symbian while maintaining acceptable profitability for those products.

                    • We may lose key personnel and skilled employees involved in the development of our Symbian platform. We may also not be able to maintain employee motivation and focus to continue to innovate and develop on the Symbian smartphone platform or otherwise be able to maintain the quality of our Symbian smartphones.

                    Please provide us real facts instead of those “may”‘s

                    Whay may’s are you talking about?

                    Elop annonced the shift from Symbian to Windows Phone with an accompanying graphic showing the expected drop of Symbian sales. And they did.

                    In the Euclidian universe that I inhabit, for Windows Phone sales to *replace* Symbian sales, Symbian sales have to decrease. No if and buts about it.

                    Elop knew it, Nokia it and Horace Dediu knew it and they each said so. What Elop didn’t anticipate, it was the effect that would have and how WP would fail to pick up the slack. But that’s a story for another day.

                    If you know a way for Windows Phone to replace, as intended by Elop, Symbian without Symbian sales decreasing, I’ll be interested to hear about it.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      Did Elop tell you even when that was going to happen? I don’t see even that there. That’s hardly any proof.

                      Please try to find anything to back your claims. It seems that you are making this stuff up.

                      You haven’t really proved anything yet.

                    • yasu

                      Did Elop tell you even when that was going to happen?

                      No. But it was bound to happen. However, Nokia knew and so did Horace Dediu that the operators and the carriers would be less accomodating.

                      I don’t see even that there. That’s hardly any proof.

                      What? That they didn’t know that the sales would drop?

                      Please try to find anything to back your claims. It seems that you are making this stuff up.

                      What stuff am I making up? I post link to back my claims, what you are completely unable to do.

                      You haven’t really proved anything yet.

                      Ok. Then, explain to me how WP is supposed to completely replace Symbian, if Symbian sales aren’t supposed to decrease and eventually reach zero. That’s a simple question of logic.

                    • Spede oli aliarvostettu

                      You never explained the timeline Symbian was supposed to be replaced.

                      Please give us hard proof that it was Elop who caused Symbian’s collapse in 2011 and 2012.

                      So, where is that real proof you were talking about?

                      Besides, that graph was just a plan. It’s completely possible that Symbian just failed because it’s a bad product.

                      I’m asking for you to prove the collapse was caused by Elop and not Symbian being a bad product. You are the one making the claims.

        • Tom

          @Janne,

          There are couple of differences.

          1. Now RIm is doing better than Nokia. Nokia is 10th in smart phone, much below RIM. That considering BB7 is crap, even against Symbian. Or do you consider BB7 competitive?

          2. Nokia had a brilliant product N9/Meego on hand and market, 2 years back. Not RIM, they will have BB10 in Jan 30th.

  • http://wendelltrujillo.wordpress.com/2013/07/03/top-ten-freddie-wong-videos/ Aimbot Mw3

    Very good post. I will be experiencing many of these
    issues as well..

  • http://moneyning.com/review/optionshouse-review/ Blake Vorkink

    Pretty! This has been an incredibly wonderfl article.
    Thanks for providing this info.

Advertisements