Microsoft is misunderstanding the success of the Lumia 520 and that may cost them

[Ebuka Allison]

Microsoft may be misunderstanding the success of the Lumia 520 and that may cost them

Everyone know about the Lumia 520 and its unprecedented success. Its the single best selling Windows Phone device, proving that Windows Phone is successful at the low end. So Microsoft's wooing of manufacturers to manufacture low-end devices makes sense right?

Not quite and here?s why.

If you can spot another Lumia 5xx device there besides the 52x...
You see, Microsoft has released the Lumia 530 to succeed the 520 at even cheaper prices...and it's being overshadowed by the 63X Lumias. In fact, none of the new super cheap Windows Phones save the 630 are making a dent in the WP world if Ad-duplex stats are to believed. This may be justified for higher end devices as people who buy high end devices are more likely to use paid apps and less likely to sell in high volumes.

But why is this not the case for lower end phones?

Here's why.

The Lumia 520 was not merely a cheap phone, it was an alright phone. It was pretty good for its price range. Consumers will buy pretty good for its price range, they will not buy abysmal. Hence why the Lumia 510 wasn't successful and why the 530 has yet to make a blip compared to the 630.

Microsoft?s aiming for price points by letting OEMs release crap will only hurt it in the long run. While someone who bought a 520 would consider upgrading and someone who has a 620 would be more than happy to get a better model, can anyone sincerely argue that the generic phone with a Snapdragon 200 processor and 4 GB of storage is going to help the platform?

But that?s not all, even if they do intend to flood the market with low-end white label devices, devaluing the Lumia line is certainly not the way to go about it.

Speaking of which, my first Windows Phone was a Lumia 620. Effectively a 920 lite. That phone had nearly everything the higher ups had aside from processor and RAM. It even had glance.

Cut to today where the number of modern Lumias with glance is just one and you get what Microsoft is doing.

Compromise.

Cutting here and there to reach price points. An SD slot here, a snapdragon 800 here, some camera buttons here. You get the point.

No one likes a miser.
No Lumia fan likes the fact that each of the new models has a downgrade compared to the previous model.

The best thing for Microsoft's low end device strategy is, and I may be repeating myself here...to deliver a good experience and at a reasonable price. Not one that declares its price at every second. Heck tossing the Snapdragon 200 in the 620 would have made it a pretty powerful 530.

 

[rodan01]

The Lumia 520 was successful because Android used to be awful in low-end hardware. Things are different now, Android is quite good in low-end hardware, so how can the Lumias compete without the apps?

The only way to survive is undercutting Android with even with lower prices. The 530 offer a better user experience with 512mb of ram than any equivalent Android phone.

As Android improves in the low-end, the space for Lumias shrinks, or as hardware improves in the low-end, the performance problems of Android disappear.

Sent from my GeForce7050M-M using Tapatalk

 

[LockOnTech]

I hope I am correct in saying that a good while ago when they had the Lumia 510 available to buy on t-mobile prepaid, it was nearly 300 dollars to buy. Where as the Lumia 521 I have was a third of the price; price had made a significant factor on my interest to purchase the Lumia 521 now than the Lumia 510 in the past. Went on amazon for the Lumia 510 it is 229 dollars unlocked.

 

[aximtreo]

Microsoft may be misunderstanding the success of the Lumia 520 and that may cost them

Everyone know about the Lumia 520 and its unprecedented success. Its the single best selling Windows Phone device, proving that Windows Phone is successful at the low end. So Microsoft's wooing of manufacturers to manufacture low-end devices makes sense right?

Not quite and here’s why.
View attachment 84193
If you can spot another Lumia 5xx device there besides the 52x...
You see, Microsoft has released the Lumia 530 to succeed the 520 at even cheaper prices...and it's being overshadowed by the 63X Lumias. In fact, none of the new super cheap Windows Phones save the 630 are making a dent in the WP world if Ad-duplex stats are to believed. This may be justified for higher end devices as people who buy high end devices are more likely to use paid apps and less likely to sell in high volumes.

But why is this not the case for lower end phones?

Here's why.

The Lumia 520 was not merely a cheap phone, it was an alright phone. It was pretty good for its price range. Consumers will buy pretty good for its price range, they will not buy abysmal. Hence why the Lumia 510 wasn't successful and why the 530 has yet to make a blip compared to the 630.

Microsoft’s aiming for price points by letting OEMs release crap will only hurt it in the long run. While someone who bought a 520 would consider upgrading and someone who has a 620 would be more than happy to get a better model, can anyone sincerely argue that the generic phone with a Snapdragon 200 processor and 4 GB of storage is going to help the platform?

But that’s not all, even if they do intend to flood the market with low-end white label devices, devaluing the Lumia line is certainly not the way to go about it.

Speaking of which, my first Windows Phone was a Lumia 620. Effectively a 920 lite. That phone had nearly everything the higher ups had aside from processor and RAM. It even had glance.

Cut to today where the number of modern Lumias with glance is just one and you get what Microsoft is doing.

Compromise.

Cutting here and there to reach price points. An SD slot here, a snapdragon 800 here, some camera buttons here. You get the point.

No one likes a miser.
No Lumia fan likes the fact that each of the new models has a downgrade compared to the previous model.

The best thing for Microsoft's low end device strategy is, and I may be repeating myself here...to deliver a good experience and at a reasonable price. Not one that declares its price at every second. Heck tossing the Snapdragon 200 in the 620 would have made it a pretty powerful 530.
View attachment 84192

I have read a few of your postings and truly like how you think. Why MS doesn't hire you is a mystery to me.

 

[aximtreo]

The Lumia 520 was successful because Android used to be awful in low-end hardware. Things are different now, Android is quite good in low-end hardware, so how can the Lumias compete without the apps?

The only way to survive is undercutting Android with even with lower prices. The 530 offer a better user experience with 512mb of ram than any equivalent Android phone.

As Android improves in the low-end, the space for Lumias shrinks, or as hardware improves in the low-end, the performance problems of Android disappear.

Sent from my GeForce7050M-M using Tapatalk

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I learned a long time ago that anyone can give a product away. A good sales person or sales company is one that knows its intended markets and product. I point out again, you have to have chosen the right market segment and then provide the sales support for those that have to sell the product. I don't thin MS does a good job of knowing what market it wants to be in nor provides the necessary training of the product that results in successful sales and profit. In this case, too few trained MS people whose job it is to go out to the Sales chain and provide support and info. When is the last time you went into a US WP carrier and found adequate display of WP products and people onsite that know what they are talking about?

Successful sales of a product is based on an acceptable margin, the cost of the unit vs the price it takes to sell the product. Sometimes having the cheaper product does more harm than good.

 

[Mellifluous]

You make some good points about what is potentially flawed strategy, but you should bear in mind that the 630 was released in May whilst the 530 was released in August, so the 630 had a head start.

 

[aikidaves]

The Lumias that have been introduced up to now have come from projects started by Nokia, which at the time was a company on the edge of bankruptcy. Drastically altering those projects would only have delayed the introduction of any new phones this year. I think right now it's a bit presumptuous to think we know what Microsoft's hardware direction will be. We don't know what strategy changes they've made since they took over, and it's still a few months yet before we see the results of any hardware projects they started.

As for other OEMs, it's no surprise that they're getting their feet wet at the low end. Microsoft made it cheap and easy for them to take an Android design and put WP on it, and by making WP free, the OEM is saving the cost of the patent royalties that have to be paid on Android. With the cut-throat margins at the low end, that's a big deal. Will WP gain market share this way? We'll have to wait and see. Will those OEMs produce better quality Windows Phones in future? Maybe if they sell a lot of cheap ones. Again, we'll have to wait and see.

 

[luxnws]

MS is competing against Android. There are a lot of barely usable Android devices out there. I expect that some of the white label devices running WP and Win8.1 will be in the same category going forward. That's the risk that MS takes in trying to increase their market share.

The 530 doesn't make sense to me. 512 MEG ram is fine, the quad core cpu is okay, but with 4 GB storage I don't know. On my 521, the system files take up 3.88 GB. Guess buying a microSD card is a known necessary accessory in the markets where the 530 is being sold. Also, try buying a 530 on Amazon in the U.S. It's more expensive than a 635 although the 530s are usually sold by various vendors unlocked.

I agree with rodan01 that the 520/521 sold well last year primarily because lower end Android phones had and continue to have a less than positive rep. But Google has its own Nokia in its Motorola company and the Moto line is almost like Google's Lumia equivalent. So it will be interesting to see if the 630/635 can do as well or better this year as the 520/521 did last year. If it does, it would be a big win for MS. If it doesn't and if the upscale models don't make a dent, it would have to be looked at as a fail. Of course people can still buy the 520 at very low prices.

 

[Ebuka Allison]

I have read a few of your postings and truly like how you think. Why MS doesn't hire you is a mystery to me.

Why anyone doesn't hire a gap year student is a mystery to me as well ha ha.
I would totally rock on the WP team

 

[Ebuka Allison]

Yes true, but the 630 started showing up a month after it had released though

You make some good points about what is potentially flawed strategy, but you should bear in mind that the 630 was released in May whilst the 530 was released in August, so the 630 had a head start.

 

[aikidaves]

But Google has its own Nokia in its Motorola company and the Moto line is almost like Google's Lumia equivalent.

Um, Google is selling Motorola to Lenovo. They're getting out of the phone business again.

 

[a5cent]

This is one of those rare threads where everyone has very good points to contribute! Nice read.

MS is competing against Android. There are a lot of barely usable Android devices out there. I expect that some of the white label devices running WP and Win8.1 will be in the same category going forward.

From what I understand, all of these companies are releasing what is fundamentally the same phone. They are all identical, or at least very similar to, a reference design made by MS, with slight variations to peripheral hardware (cam, display type, case, storage capacity). That is part of what makes it attractive... just slap off-the-shelf parts together... no real engineering involved... cheap and simple.

If true, I'd suspect the user experience for all of them to be pretty much identical (good or bad).

 

[Ebuka Allison]

This is one of those rare threads where everyone has very good points to contribute! Nice read.






From what I understand, all of these companies are releasing what is fundamentally the same phone. They are all identical, or at least very similar to, a reference design made by MS, with slight variations to peripheral hardware (cam, display type, case, storage capacity). That is part of what makes it attractive... just slap off-the-shelf parts together... no real engineering involved... cheap and simple.



If true, I'd suspect the user experience for all of them to be pretty much identical (good or bad).

Precisely, Microsoft's better off creating a really good phone for a low price and then trying to push that in addition to the OEMs everywhere those OEMs are weak or if they are half hearted attempts, do what Satya said and "make the market for Windows Phone ". They need a desirable product.
P.s Can I change my user name to my real name (I really didn't choose this name -/-)

 

[luxnws]

Um, Google is selling Motorola to Lenovo. They're getting out of the phone business again.

The Moto G was designed and launched before Motorola was under Lenovo's management. It still is (or was depending how you look at it) Google's Android competitor for the low end Lumias. The Moto G has a 1.2 GHz quad core cpu, 1 GB ram and 8 GB of storage for under $100 locked. It also has a led flash. Google has their Nexus line but those are higher end smartphones.

 

[aikidaves]

The Moto G was designed and launched before Motorola was under Lenovo's management. It still is (or was depending how you look at it) Google's Android competitor for the low end Lumias. The Moto G has a 1.2 GHz quad core cpu, 1 GB ram and 8 GB of storage for under $100 locked. It also has a led flash. Google has their Nexus line but those are higher end smartphones.

And does this in any way invalidate what I said about Google selling Motorola? I am confused by your response. Sure, the Moto G is a nice phone for the price, no argument there. What do its virtues have to do with Google getting out of the phone business? I was countering your statement that Google has its own Nokia in Motorola - no, it doesn't, not anymore.