zlacker

[parent] [thread] 14 comments
1. kyrra+(OP)[view] [source] 2014-04-25 13:12:42
But Nokia was a company that was already starting to falter when Elop came on board. What else could the company have done to survive? Their options seem limited from what we know about the marketplace. They could have release an android phone, but then they just would have been fighting for a piece of the pie that Samsung, Moto, and other phone makers are eating. They could have stayed with their phone OS and probably would have had just about the same fate as picking up Windows Mobile.

Maybe they would have had more sales with an Android phone, but I'm not sure it would have made a bit enough difference to prevent this buyout. Elop set Nokia up to be bought out by being a major windows phone maker. It may have been a better long-term bet than Android.

replies(4): >>jsight+w3 >>curryw+7t >>wisty+Jz >>kig+XO
2. jsight+w3[view] [source] 2014-04-25 13:48:39
>>kyrra+(OP)
Fighting for share of the pie in the Android market would have created far more sales than fighting for crumbs of a virtually non-existent pie in the Windows market.

Having said that, I agree with your final point. If you view the whole thing as a setup to extract maximum value via an acquisition, it might make sense. They may have been worth more as a MS acquisition target selling Windows phones than they would have been had they gone down the Android path.

It's entirely possible that neither path would have led to sustainability as a standalone entity.

replies(4): >>Varcht+L6 >>nyrina+h8 >>cmelby+Hj >>funkyy+QY
◧◩
3. Varcht+L6[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-25 14:20:37
>>jsight+w3
I think it is safe to say they had at least a slice of Windows Phone leaving the others to fight over the crumbs. With Windows Phone at around 4% of the market Nokia had most of that. The question then is could they have grabbed 5% of the Android market.
◧◩
4. nyrina+h8[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-25 14:32:23
>>jsight+w3
Especially due to the name Nokia. If you gave me a choice between Nokia and HTC, I know what I would choose - based purely on reputation
◧◩
5. cmelby+Hj[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-25 16:20:19
>>jsight+w3
A small correction: They weren't fighting for the crumbs of Windows Phone, they were eating the whole pie (save a small slice for HTC and a tiny sliver for Samsung).
replies(1): >>jsight+Lai
6. curryw+7t[view] [source] 2014-04-25 17:50:25
>>kyrra+(OP)
This is a very US-centric view. Other than the US market, Nokia was crushing rivals everywhere. They had amazing repeat buyers, generational buyers, and an almost invincible brand. People didn't give two hoots about Symbian/Meego .. they were buying a Nokia phone !

In my alternate fantasy timeline, I'm currently using an amazingly efficient Meego device which gives me as powerful an environment like Android, in a neat and simple user-interface [1]

[1]: http://swipe.nokia.com/

replies(1): >>camus2+uy
◧◩
7. camus2+uy[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-25 18:41:11
>>curryw+7t

   >  Nokia was crushing rivals everywhere.
that's just not true,especially in Europe.Mobile is driven by apps and advertisment. And who publish mosts apps and is willing to pay for ads? western countries.I doesnt matter for my business if WP is number one in Brazil(Nothing against Brazil,love it,and i have brazilian origins myself) if it has only 4% shares in the market I want to target ... Doesnt even matter for Microsoft,except for PR reaons. WP is a failure as today,Microsoft knows it.

Would they have done better with Android,hard to say,I think they would.Nokia is a famous ,in Europe for instance, Nokia means robust and quality phones.But we'll never know.

8. wisty+Jz[view] [source] 2014-04-25 18:53:52
>>kyrra+(OP)
> They could have release an android phone, but then they just would have been fighting for a piece of the pie that Samsung, Moto, and other phone makers are eating

Nokia has never needed a software edge to crush its rivals. They just needed to keep making phones that wouldn't break if you dropped them.

When you already have a massive competitive advantage (Nokia's reputation for making reliable hardware), you don't dive into a niche.

9. kig+XO[view] [source] 2014-04-25 22:08:00
>>kyrra+(OP)
Nokia was really good at competing in big markets. Back when everyone was using their various pre-Android stacks with similar levels of software prowess, Nokia was the biggest phone maker. Because they were competing in the biggest market and doing it well.

Then the market changed to "[Android] phones that are like the iPhone" and Nokia refused to compete in that market, going for the "[Windows] phones that are not like the iPhone"-market instead. And totally dominated it with a 90%+ market share.

But that market was tiny. And Nokia was size-wise geared to compete with Samsung and Apple. Cue massive collapse of business when expenses overtook sales.

◧◩
10. funkyy+QY[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-26 00:49:23
>>jsight+w3
Release 3310 in smartphone world. With their strong brand they could create another indestructible phone in smartphone era that would sell for $199.

The specs could be weak, as long as it would be easy, durable and fast for regular users.

Nokia 3310 was phone for regular users. Phone that could drop, had few games, allowed you to download some ringtones. Strong battery, good screen, water/shock proof. Put 8GB memory plus one SD slot, some ok-ish processor and 2GB ram (so it wont age after 1 year) + make put really good battery. No ridiculous screen resolutions, fingerprint readers etc - just durable smartphone for regular user.

With specs like that they might break even - but for sure they would steal european and growing APAC regions easy. Once they would get back they would release business versions that would help them to correct their profitability. Its not difficult for such a strong brand like Nokia. I was amazed how Scandinavian way of thinking (simplicity) vanished from the company.

If Nokia could deliver mentioned phone - I would use it for sure.

replies(1): >>mahous+dd1
◧◩◪
11. mahous+dd1[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-26 09:27:08
>>funkyy+QY
A lot of companies are trying this, even CAT (known for their excavators, etc) and I would say it's not working very well for them. http://catphones.com/phones/b15-smartphone.aspx
replies(2): >>funkyy+cJ1 >>jsight+Wai
◧◩◪◨
12. funkyy+cJ1[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-26 21:30:50
>>mahous+dd1
CAT is not Nokia. Nostalgia after Nokia in Europe is HUGE. I know that majority of my friends is vouching for old ways Nokia was doing business and they still believe that if Nokia could create 3310 smartphone way - they would go all in.
replies(1): >>eli+lm2
◧◩◪◨⬒
13. eli+lm2[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-04-27 14:44:53
>>funkyy+cJ1
I don't think it's possible to roll back the clock like that. Nokia's Windows phones weren't that bad. Very well built, as far as I know. Yet no one bought them, so clearly there's a limit to what the brand alone could carry.
◧◩◪
14. jsight+Lai[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-05-08 16:10:36
>>cmelby+Hj
But the "whole pie" in this case was just a few crumbs leftover from Android and iPhone. :)
◧◩◪◨
15. jsight+Wai[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-05-08 16:11:51
>>mahous+dd1
Arguably, one of the companies trying this is Motorola. They are certainly gaining market share (if not immediate profits).
[go to top]