The Windows 10 April 2018 update has arrived! Get the new Dell XPS 15, starting at $999.99
05-31-2012 06:12 PM
75 123
tools
  1. squire777's Avatar
    I'm sure the recent sales of the 900 will help Nokia out in the long run. I have also heard that here in Canada, Rogers has sold a lot more 710s than they had expected so that should help in a small way. Nokia just needs to get the 900 out onto more carriers in North America so they can keep riding this wave.

    On a side note, it's funny to see the detractors of WP try to rain on the sales of the 900 by saying that most AT&T stores probably had 5 phones in stock, when the reality is that we've heard from employees who have stated that they are selling out in much larger numbers.
    04-25-2012 10:55 AM
  2. MattLFC's Avatar
    Nokia could have made better Symbian devices, and without the hardware limitations they certainly could have made 1st class Android devices.
    No they couldn't; Symbian, as most of us realised, was past its sell-by date in 2007.

    Like it or not, the iPhone changed everything. Nokia never reacted quick enough, and expected Symbian to keep selling on the basis of brand alone. In the past, Nokia have always done well through their philosophy of waiting for "new" technologies and hardware to mature, instead of being early adopters; what Nokia hadn't bargained for however, was that although the iPhone and its technology was brand new, because it was essentially built upon the success of the iPod and the iPod platform as a whole, the iPhone was already mature, stable and standardised.

    Nokia had a mountain to climb to keep Symbian in the running, and though the brand alone maintained marketshare, the popularity of the iPod, and Apples marketing, not only managed to eat into Nokia's huge marketshare, but also left Nokia users feeling ripped-off, and out in the cold, once they saw their friends iPhones doing even more than they could with their Symbian devices, but most importantly, doing everything better.

    [YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcHYZsbrK8A[/YT]

    This video, more than 3 years after the launch of the original iPhone, for me, illustrates how bad Symbian is/was, and even though Nokia did try to improve it, the effort was complete half-arsed at best, and did not do anything to help devices compete with the iPhone - their primary competition. Just look how slow, awkward and incomplete Symbian looks in comparison to the iPhone. The internet browser is atrocious, and by this time, people were using the mobile internet on an hourly basis. It's only saving grace, was it's flash-support, but Nokia treated the browser as though it was still the early 2000's, and it was a niche thing to have or something. Yes, you can get Opera Mini and that would blow Safari out of the water... but I remember a friend with a 5800 - didn't have a clue about Opera Mini until I installed it for him - and to say he was made-up is an understatement. Previous to having Mini installed, he barely touched the Nokia browser - and most people don't/didn't know what Opera was. Ultimately, he upgraded to an iPhone after his miserable time with the 5800 and never looked back.

    Anyone thinking that better, more powerful devices would have helped Symbian, is only kidding themselves. The N8 was a fantastic device by all accounts, it was the software that let it down, and more importantly, people would look at how fast, modern and fluent their friends iPhones were, and think what is this crap. The internet browser in Symbian in 2010, had barely changed since I had a Nokia 6600 - back in 2003. 7 years of innovation by Nokia, had led to nothing.
    04-25-2012 09:46 PM
  3. jimmy1one's Avatar
    One of you guys said something that rings true, can the Carriers set back and allow Nokia to fell? In effect leave their future to be dictated by Apple, these people who know how to hold a gruel. MS is all in, either Nokia succeeds with WP8 or Windows 8 OS is dead in the water ditto ATT having made Nokia their Flagship for WP or crawl back to Apple asking forgiveness. The other manufactures of IP based products even the TV manufactures are all gearing up for all out war with Apple fearing the lost of their own market share if Apple moves into their market. The real story is people just buy the Apple products having been told they are THE best. It does not matter if another Manufacturer came out with a new product with a 3.5 inch screen they'd be DOA. Historically there is no reason for the Pied Piper effect of the IPhone. MS and Nokia are right why clone the IPhone those who want an IPhone will stay with the IPhone. I'm holding onto my Focus I'll pickup a new WP8 and Windows 8Tablet when available putting the difference in my grans 529 and having a nice laugh.
    04-26-2012 09:01 AM
  4. peestandingup's Avatar
    ^The carriers are about what makes them money, period. Whether its from Samsung, or Apple, or whoever. They have zero interest in propping up any floundering hardware maker. If that were the case, Palm would have lived.
    04-26-2012 10:13 AM
  5. jimmy1one's Avatar
    ^The carriers are about what makes them money, period. Whether its from Samsung, or Apple, or whoever. They have zero interest in propping up any floundering hardware maker. If that were the case, Palm would have lived.
    Just goes to show you I'm clueless. I'm an Att customer and I admit they nickle and dime you but I'm yet to be charged for pictures or my camera use. In the interest of fairness I've used Androids and IPhone but I can not venture an opinion on the Palm. I will say this, no carrier can survive depending on a dictating supplier let alone have their entire business model be subject to the wimp of a supplier. It makes no difference how popular that suppliers product may be this is a fluid market change is a given . It's in every Carrier's interest to have as many products available to the consumer as possible. The failure of Nokia at this time means WP 8 and W 8 are a failure. The relationships are such you can not separate the OS from the Phone. BTW all in is all in, I'm not a betting man but it's clear no one involved in this fight is going to roll over, there's just no upside to letting this happen.
    04-26-2012 10:56 AM
  6. peestandingup's Avatar
    ^Carriers are different because it doesn't matter to them who supplies what. They're pretty much just providers of basic services, like internet service providers are. I know that some of them TRY not to be, with exclusives, branding (Verzion's DROID) & all that stuff. But thats really what they are in the end when you look past all the marketing crap they do here in the US (in the EU they're more like straight up providers). Dumb pipes funneling data. So they really don't have anything to do with hardware, nor could they even if they really wanted to. Hence why they won't care what Nokia (or MS does for that matter). If its not a Nokia device, it'll be something else either way.

    Its a series of tubes, man. :)
    04-26-2012 02:02 PM
  7. socialcarpet's Avatar
    The carriers don't necessarily want to prop Nokia up, but the appeal of Nokia is that they make interesting, nice looking phones and they offer an alternative in WP which gives the stores something else to sell.

    What the carriers DO want, is a way to have some leverage against Apple other than Android. A viable third choice gives them one more way to attract new customers, or get new customers to buy a new phone sooner. A viable third choice also gives them some leverage when Apple demands the carriers subsidize more of the cost of the iPhone.

    Up until Nokia got in the game, none of the carriers cared much about WP7 because none of the OEM's were really invested in it. All they did was retread Android phones with WP7, they did nothing to make them stand out, nothing to support them beyond the minimum necessary. Nothing to advertise Windows Phone.

    Nokia has changed everything though by committing to WP as their primary platform. Now the Nokia brand will reinforce the WP brand and vice versa. Much the way Android was drifting aimlessly until Verizon and Motorola got behind it with the "Droid" brand and promoted it like crazy. That worked so well that many people STILL call all Android phones "Droids".

    It's NOT the OS that sells the phone to most people. It's the phones. The OS is part of the phone, but you need to have a phone that isn't stuck in a corner and something that looks appealing enough for someone to walk over and pick it up. Another black slab won't do at all.

    This is why I am optimistic about Nokia's future. Because if there is anything Nokia knows, it's how to build interesting and unique phone hardware, and THAT is what sells phones.

    Sensuous looking modern and colorful Lumia's that look different than anything else will do more to boost Windows Phone than 10,000 Windows Phone OS commercials ever could.

    Nokia needs people to ask for the Lumia by name. People need to know what a Lumia looks like and that a Lumia isn't a "Droid" or an iPhone, it's something different. Doesn't matter if they understand what Windows Phone is or not, they just need to know that there is something OTHER than "Droid", iPhone and Blackberry when they go phone shopping.

    When people say they have a Lumia and the average person knows what that means, that will mean they have succeeded.

    Success for Nokia will help all the other OEM's who sell Windows Phones too, but Microsoft really needed a flagship brand that people would identify with the OS. Now they have it.

    A bright blue or pink Lumia may get someone to walk over to that section of the store and play with it, versus the 400 Androids that all look the same and the two iPhones which they are already familiar with. Even if they don't buy a Lumia, we need them to PICK UP A WINDOWS PHONE and play with it for 5 minutes so they can see what Windows Phone is. That same person might then ask a sales person about it, and who knows they may buy a Samsung Focus S or an HTC Titan II.
    04-26-2012 03:20 PM
  8. selfcreation's Avatar
    are NOKIA sales not UP sints they dropped ( pretty much droped ) Symbian and switch to WP! no??

    so how is it a collapse? its more of a re-build , they already collapsed 2 years ago..

    unless they are talking about WP's 100% growth .. yes 100% cause it dint exist before :P lol.
    04-26-2012 03:30 PM
  9. jimmy1one's Avatar
    The carriers don't necessarily want to prop Nokia up, but the appeal of Nokia is that they make interesting, nice looking phones and they offer an alternative in WP which gives the stores something else to sell.

    What the carriers DO want, is a way to have some leverage against Apple other than Android. A viable third choice gives them one more way to attract new customers, or get new customers to buy a new phone sooner. A viable third choice also gives them some leverage when Apple demands the carriers subsidize more of the cost of the iPhone.

    Up until Nokia got in the game, none of the carriers cared much about WP7 because none of the OEM's were really invested in it. All they did was retread Android phones with WP7, they did nothing to make them stand out, nothing to support them beyond the minimum necessary. Nothing to advertise Windows Phone.

    Nokia has changed everything though by committing to WP as their primary platform. Now the Nokia brand will reinforce the WP brand and vice versa. Much the way Android was drifting aimlessly until Verizon and Motorola got behind it with the "Droid" brand and promoted it like crazy. That worked so well that many people STILL call all Android phones "Droids".

    It's NOT the OS that sells the phone to most people. It's the phones. The OS is part of the phone, but you need to have a phone that isn't stuck in a corner and something that looks appealing enough for someone to walk over and pick it up. Another black slab won't do at all.

    This is why I am optimistic about Nokia's future. Because if there is anything Nokia knows, it's how to build interesting and unique phone hardware, and THAT is what sells phones.

    Sensuous looking modern and colorful Lumia's that look different than anything else will do more to boost Windows Phone than 10,000 Windows Phone OS commercials ever could.

    Nokia needs people to ask for the Lumia by name. People need to know what a Lumia looks like and that a Lumia isn't a "Droid" or an iPhone, it's something different. Doesn't matter if they understand what Windows Phone is or not, they just need to know that there is something OTHER than "Droid", iPhone and Blackberry when they go phone shopping.

    When people say they have a Lumia and the average person knows what that means, that will mean they have succeeded.

    Success for Nokia will help all the other OEM's who sell Windows Phones too, but Microsoft really needed a flagship brand that people would identify with the OS. Now they have it.

    A bright blue or pink Lumia may get someone to walk over to that section of the store and play with it, versus the 400 Androids that all look the same and the two iPhones which they are already familiar with. Even if they don't buy a Lumia, we need them to PICK UP A WINDOWS PHONE and play with it for 5 minutes so they can see what Windows Phone is. That same person might then ask a sales person about it, and who knows they may buy a Samsung Focus S or an HTC Titan II.
    socialcarpet I think we're on the same page but what do I know, only what's undeniable. MS did not forge their agreement with Nokia because the weather was rainy in Redmond. W 8 OS is effect a beefed up version of the WP 8 OS they're interchangeable AFA the consumer is concerned. We will not know what the WP 8 product will do until they are on products that meet the species but there will be no half stepping this time around. Again they are not trying to lure people away from the IPhone but grab a significant percentage of the smart phone market that's just emerging. Remember only 40 to 50 percent of the market has been penetrated depending on who you want to believe.
    04-26-2012 06:48 PM
  10. sentimentGX4's Avatar
    But Nokia is losing the low-end market. Their low-end phone sales are absolutely tanking.
    The problem is that the low end market doesn't matter. It's an area that Nokia excelled in; but, profits were far too marginal to make any impact on their balance sheets. Companies completely dominating low end markets such as RIM and Nokia are suffering the most.

    Given the state of Nokia's affairs, it wouldn't be unwise to exit from the low end market altogether to shift focus and to relaunch as a "premium" brand.
    04-26-2012 10:28 PM
  11. Bkr11's Avatar
    I asked over in off topic who, if anyone, actually owned Nokia stock, and it's been crickets.
    I originally picked it up at $5.00. Bought more around $4.10 and again today at about $3.68 iirc.

    I remember being in Sweden on my year of study abroad (around 1995/6) reading an article about Apple and it was at $2.00/share or something like that. While I'm not banking on an Apple-like story, I do think a few successful phones, a successful tablet and some traction in emerging markets and it can come back nicely.

    I'd be lying if I said I'm trying to take a major position, but I think a few thousand shares at these prices could turn out nicely. Its not the safest investment out there, but I do think it has a decent chance of turning out ok.
    04-26-2012 10:58 PM
  12. tekhna's Avatar
    I originally picked it up at $5.00. Bought more around $4.10 and again today at about $3.68 iirc.

    I remember being in Sweden on my year of study abroad (around 1995/6) reading an article about Apple and it was at $2.00/share or something like that. While I'm not banking on an Apple-like story, I do think a few successful phones, a successful tablet and some traction in emerging markets and it can come back nicely.

    I'd be lying if I said I'm trying to take a major position, but I think a few thousand shares at these prices could turn out nicely. Its not the safest investment out there, but I do think it has a decent chance of turning out ok.
    I think it probably has room to go up, but at this point it's got to be on someone's radar as a buyout for their patent portfolio and engineers/designers.
    04-27-2012 09:46 AM
  13. based_graham's Avatar
    Its at 3$ its a good time to buy especially when Windows 8 is around the corner. Nokia is going to go through some very hard times decline of Symbian slow rise of Windows Phones but they have to keep plucking through.
    04-27-2012 01:41 PM
  14. KingCrimson's Avatar
    Nokia will rise again like a phoenix from the ashes....
    04-27-2012 03:27 PM
  15. tekhna's Avatar
    Well, Barrons downgraded Nokia from neutral to sell, on weak Lumia sales. Or, rather, strong sales that faded away quickly.

    Nokia Suffers From Hang-Ups - Barrons.com

    "Our new price target of $2 [down from $4] is based on our estimate of the value of the company's intellectual property, which we peg at slightly more than $7 billion.

    We assume no value for the handset business and no value for the roughly four billion euros [about $5 billion] in net cash, which Nokia (ticker: NOK) could potentially burn through in the next two years."
    05-31-2012 09:03 AM
  16. sentimentGX4's Avatar
    We assume no value for the handset business and no value for the roughly four billion euros [about $5 billion] in net cash, which Nokia (ticker: NOK) could potentially burn through in the next two years.
    That's a rather careless assumption. 4 billion dollars is a lot of money and 2 years is plenty of time to turn around sales or to sell the company.
    05-31-2012 09:17 AM
  17. willied's Avatar
    I think it's about time I bought some shares. :D
    05-31-2012 09:22 AM
  18. tekhna's Avatar
    I think it's about time I bought some shares. :D
    I've got a lightly used bridge to, well, I think it goes somewhere, for sale if you've got extra $$. Structurally sound, I think. Well, it might be. Not really sure.
    alaskanjackson likes this.
    05-31-2012 09:25 AM
  19. sentimentGX4's Avatar
    I've got a lightly used bridge to, well, I think it goes somewhere, for sale if you've got extra $$. Structurally sound, I think. Well, it might be. Not really sure.
    Believing a stock will rise or fall because an analyst told you so is a misguided. A company can be in steep, irreversible decline yet still offer value from being oversold.

    You should never be too critical of others stock buying decisions because stocks is a game that awards investors with uncommon perspectives.
    05-31-2012 09:57 AM
  20. tekhna's Avatar
    Believing a stock will rise or fall because an analyst told you so is a misguided. A company can be in steep, irreversible decline yet still offer value from being oversold.

    You should never be too critical of others stock buying decisions because stocks is a game that awards investors with uncommon perspectives.
    Sure, in the end their wallets will be the ones critical or not. I think Nokia is, or should be, only for the highly risk-tolerant. Nokia either ends up in bankruptcy and their stock totally collapses (more so that it has already) or it triples (or quadruples) in value. There's no half-way point for Nokia, it's pretty much all or nothing, and you have to be comfortable with that possibility.

    The thing about this article isn't that an analyst told me to buy or sell, but that their analysis shows that the fundamentals underlying the company are collapsing. You can do with that what you want, but they are arguing that essentially the only worthwhile part of Nokia is their patent portfolio.
    05-31-2012 10:08 AM
  21. N8ter's Avatar
    Believing a stock will rise or fall because an analyst told you so is a misguided. A company can be in steep, irreversible decline yet still offer value from being oversold.

    You should never be too critical of others stock buying decisions because stocks is a game that awards investors with uncommon perspectives.
    Analysts don't make projections on stock prices based solely on their opinions. There is methodology behind it.

    I actually think Windows 8 and it's Tablet/Phone counterpart will hurt Nokia a bit in the ecosystem as it will loosen the restrictions on other OEMs a bit, allowing them to compete better on this platform (with is ultimately better for consumers, obviously).

    Everyone in internet forums is an expert in stocks, anyways, so I don't tend to pay much attention to this. As long as a company is putting out products that I find useful, I will buy those products. The only time I won't is when it's pretty evident the company will fail soon and support may be an issue (as was the case with WebOS devices).
    Last edited by N8ter; 05-31-2012 at 12:18 PM.
    05-31-2012 12:05 PM
  22. pwaikon's Avatar
    Imho, Microsoft won't let Nokia fail, and neither will the Finnish government. If Nokia collapse, Windows Phone collapses with it; and anyone who know's anything about Finland, will realise that Nokia is as much a "national institution" as the NHS is in the UK, and Coca Cola is in the US - but more importantly, there is too much reliance on Nokia from the viewpoint of Finnish jobs, and economical power.
    As I'm a Finn I can comment this: I agree with you 100%. I read an article couple of days ago that stated the following: Partnership with Nokia is Microsoft's last effort to gain noticeable marketshare with Windows Phone. WP will do better on the popular scale w/ Nokia than without so if Nokia goes down WP goes down (for good) too :(. That is the reason why Microsoft won't let Nokia die, if money is what Nokia needs, MS will give it to them, 2 billion dollars was the amount mentioned in the article. IMHO I believe that Nokia has other friends and supporters in the mobile world beside Microsoft that will be willing to help them on the 11 hour (if it comes to that, God hope not!). Nokia, a legendary over 100 years old telecommunication company that has been one the founders of the field going bankrupt and disappearing completely is not something anyone in the mobile world want to see happening. The tough of Apple and Google being the only (major) players on the field is horrifying! Motorola got sold, RIMM is going down, Nokia is hanging on.... color me sad :(

    Nokia means everything to Finland and the Finns. Nokia is the one thing we can be proud of. Nokia brings **** load of money to Finland and gives jobs to the Finns. It's true that majority of the owners of Nokia are non-Finns but in the end Finland owns Nokia and the government (or the Finns) are not gonna give Nokia away easily nor not at all. Finland losing Nokia simply is not an option for our country. Biased people can stop talking about company that and this buying Nokia 'cos we're not selling. Geesh *rolls eyes*

    Disclaimer: This my personal opinion but really I am not an expert so please don't shoot me :excl:
    HeyCori likes this.
    05-31-2012 01:55 PM
  23. tekhna's Avatar
    The argument seems to be that Nokia is to big to fail. Then the question is, too big to fail for whom?

    Microsoft? Maybe. But they can't keep Nokia on life-support forever. Nokia is also not irreplaceable for them. HTC and Samsung have both expressed interest in being more than just Android OEMs.

    The carriers? Maybe, but so far they haven't really evinced huge support for Nokia or WP7. That seems to be changing some though. Peoples' arguments here seem to revolve around the fact that carriers won't tolerate a duopoly, but so far they have.

    Finland? Maybe, I dunno. Sounds like they're a point of national pride, but when push comes to shove, will they be propped up with no viable business model?

    In the end, if Barron's is right about Nokia's phone unit being essentially worthless, that means that Nokia is the equivalent of a zombie bank, kept alive because people seem to think it needs to be, not because it should be.
    In the end, we can't possibly know anything 'til July when the next round of earnings are released. But it doesn't seem very encouraging.
    05-31-2012 02:40 PM
  24. simonnyc's Avatar
    "Be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful" - Warren Buffett
    05-31-2012 02:47 PM
  25. oldpueblo's Avatar
    Remember when Apple was almost a dead company? Good times.
    05-31-2012 06:12 PM
75 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD