The "iPhone Effect." Instead of cutting jobs at the bottom, they should start at the top. After all, the guys at the bottom did nothing but follow the recommendations of the ones at the top.
Really - the iPhone cut into the wXXX / zXXX series business? C'mon fanboi - it was more a lack of a product line suited to business needs like the Nokia E series lineup or HTC/Samsung/Asus smartphones that cost them the market. The pXX lineup had potential but lacked execution - KXXX lineup has an identity crisis. X1 maybe a tad late to enter the market - but it may be a start for SE to enter the business smartphone segment.
"Instead of cutting jobs at the bottom, they should start at the top. After all, the guys at the bottom did nothing but follow the recommendations of the ones at the top."
No joke. It seems the guys at the top can't figure out the basic law of business failure: me (corporate exec.) = fail. At least Hector Ruiz made it appear that he understood this, although, I am sure he was pushed out. Dell, for example, cuts 8000 manufacturing/sales jobs (there were other reasons for this as well) when Dell's marketshare was slipping to HP to cut costs. Yeah, I'm sure the poor bastards putting PC's together had everything to do with the company's poor performance, not the a-hole who makes more by himself than everybody he canned. Rinse and repeat for GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc.
@Krush: I'm not fan of the iPhone at all. To the contrary, I'm sick of hearing/reading so much about it. But, if you're to tell me that the money people decided to spend on the iPhone instead of other manufacturers' phones has had no effect at all, then I'm at a loss for words. That's as foolish to assume as the statements made by Sony saying that the Wii is no competition for them. The money people are spending on the Wii is money they're not spending on the PS3. Same thing with Sony-Ericson; the money they're spending on the iPhone is money they're ... The irony of it all. The Wii is eating Sony's lunch, and the iPhone is ... you got it.
It's not about being a fanboy, as you're quickly categorized with. It's all about being an informed consumer and seeing things for what they are, and not what CE companies, and their marketing departments, want you to think they are. Love it or hate it, the iPhone has had an effect in the cellphone business just like the Wii has done the same in the video games arena.
"not the a-hole who makes more by himself than everybody he canned."
Wonderfully democratic of you, but the a-holes at the top rarely make more than everyone they fire. Check my math, but 2,000 people working 40 hours at just minimum wage for a year is $24,336,000. That's discounting any overtime, senior workers, etc. I doubt all 2,000 were just minimum wage ($5.85 USD).
Yeah it's the leadership that often fails a company first, but if you've got peons eating up that much cash with no one buying...well, it's not just the leaders that need to go. Unions may point to ridiculous exec salaries for sympathy, but those GM workers aren't pulling in pennies a year. They're part of the fiscal problem too.
That doesn't make workers bad people, or even responsible. But slicing off the top layer and thinking that'll solve everything is the kind of stellar thinking that made the USSR such an economic success.
The iPhone owns Sony Ericcson. Might as well kiss the Experia goodbye since it'll be useless against the iPhone in generating revenue. One more company to experience the iPhone steamroller effect.
It's like when Hancock goes to prison and the seasoned inmates want to ream him because he's fresh meat. Instead Hancock turns the tables and puts guys heads up each other's asses. That's what the iPhone 3G is doing to the smartphone market.
Iphone has have a effect, but do you really think that iphone had any effect of this report? I mean iphone sold what 1 million mostly in USA where SE and Nokia don't exist. Iphone even as it's superb product and currently is selling great have absolutely no effect to what SE is going through now. Take those USA glasses away.
SE's problems are the same as Moto's. SE thought it was enough after those groundbreaking products and money coming out of the windows 3 years ago to stop it there and trust that the cypershot and Walkman brand will be enough and what they have achieved now will carry them around, but as we saw with Moto it just dosen't work and so did Nokia steal the spotlight as having best camera around and Nokia, Samsung smoking SE out of the emerging markets.
"Yeah it's the leadership that often fails a company first, but if you've got peons eating up that much cash with no one buying...well, it's not just the leaders that need to go. Unions may point to ridiculous exec salaries for sympathy, but those GM workers aren't pulling in pennies a year. They're part of the fiscal problem too. "
True, and I do recognize that there is other fiscal resposibility companies, and, therefore execs. must manage; however, in GM's case, the execs. signed on for the ridiculous compensation packages that union workers receive (like full salary for several years to go back to school (however that is defined since some of the reports I have seen/read suggest that they may not even attend school), after which they do not have to return to GM). Also, GM's (and Ford's) execs. decided to continue producing large trucks and SUVs as other manufacturers moved to smaller, more fuel-effecient vehicles, leaving GM's (and Ford's) sales reeling. Just sayin'...
"Also, GM's (and Ford's) execs. decided to continue producing large trucks and SUVs as other manufacturers moved to smaller, more fuel-effecient vehicles, leaving GM's (and Ford's) sales reeling. Just sayin'..."
Yeah, but it's also easy to see the writing on the wall in retrospect. But SUVs and large trucks were the mainstay of those corporations. I'm sure careful market research suggested that heavy investment was the key to profitability for a long stretch.
Ford made their hybrids and GM has the Volt, but the American culture in which they exist cherishes livin' it large. Management was stupid and definitely overpaid (aren't they always?), but rare is the leader chosen that makes a deliberate choice to screw up. But you might be better versed in the actual character of company leaders. I just temper my condemnation with the realization that I've never had billions riding on my choices.
The iPhone effect? For a company that draws most of its sales from outside the United States? The iPhone wasn't sold in Asia until last week, and its success in UK/Germany/France was limited. Clearly some there's other problem here.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
The "iPhone Effect."
Instead of cutting jobs at the bottom, they should start at the top. After all, the guys at the bottom did nothing but follow the recommendations of the ones at the top.
Really - the iPhone cut into the wXXX / zXXX series business? C'mon fanboi - it was more a lack of a product line suited to business needs like the Nokia E series lineup or HTC/Samsung/Asus smartphones that cost them the market. The pXX lineup had potential but lacked execution - KXXX lineup has an identity crisis. X1 maybe a tad late to enter the market - but it may be a start for SE to enter the business smartphone segment.
"Instead of cutting jobs at the bottom, they should start at the top. After all, the guys at the bottom did nothing but follow the recommendations of the ones at the top."
No joke. It seems the guys at the top can't figure out the basic law of business failure: me (corporate exec.) = fail. At least Hector Ruiz made it appear that he understood this, although, I am sure he was pushed out. Dell, for example, cuts 8000 manufacturing/sales jobs (there were other reasons for this as well) when Dell's marketshare was slipping to HP to cut costs. Yeah, I'm sure the poor bastards putting PC's together had everything to do with the company's poor performance, not the a-hole who makes more by himself than everybody he canned. Rinse and repeat for GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc.
/rant
@Krush:
I'm not fan of the iPhone at all. To the contrary, I'm sick of hearing/reading so much about it. But, if you're to tell me that the money people decided to spend on the iPhone instead of other manufacturers' phones has had no effect at all, then I'm at a loss for words. That's as foolish to assume as the statements made by Sony saying that the Wii is no competition for them. The money people are spending on the Wii is money they're not spending on the PS3. Same thing with Sony-Ericson; the money they're spending on the iPhone is money they're ... The irony of it all. The Wii is eating Sony's lunch, and the iPhone is ... you got it.
It's not about being a fanboy, as you're quickly categorized with. It's all about being an informed consumer and seeing things for what they are, and not what CE companies, and their marketing departments, want you to think they are. Love it or hate it, the iPhone has had an effect in the cellphone business just like the Wii has done the same in the video games arena.
"not the a-hole who makes more by himself than everybody he canned."
Wonderfully democratic of you, but the a-holes at the top rarely make more than everyone they fire. Check my math, but 2,000 people working 40 hours at just minimum wage for a year is $24,336,000. That's discounting any overtime, senior workers, etc. I doubt all 2,000 were just minimum wage ($5.85 USD).
Yeah it's the leadership that often fails a company first, but if you've got peons eating up that much cash with no one buying...well, it's not just the leaders that need to go. Unions may point to ridiculous exec salaries for sympathy, but those GM workers aren't pulling in pennies a year. They're part of the fiscal problem too.
That doesn't make workers bad people, or even responsible. But slicing off the top layer and thinking that'll solve everything is the kind of stellar thinking that made the USSR such an economic success.
The iPhone owns Sony Ericcson. Might as well kiss the Experia goodbye since it'll be useless against the iPhone in generating revenue. One more company to experience the iPhone steamroller effect.
It's like when Hancock goes to prison and the seasoned inmates want to ream him because he's fresh meat. Instead Hancock turns the tables and puts guys heads up each other's asses. That's what the iPhone 3G is doing to the smartphone market.
Iphone has have a effect, but do you really think that iphone had any effect of this report? I mean iphone sold what 1 million mostly in USA where SE and Nokia don't exist. Iphone even as it's superb product and currently is selling great have absolutely no effect to what SE is going through now. Take those USA glasses away.
SE's problems are the same as Moto's. SE thought it was enough after those groundbreaking products and money coming out of the windows 3 years ago to stop it there and trust that the cypershot and Walkman brand will be enough and what they have achieved now will carry them around, but as we saw with Moto it just dosen't work and so did Nokia steal the spotlight as having best camera around and Nokia, Samsung smoking SE out of the emerging markets.
"Yeah it's the leadership that often fails a company first, but if you've got peons eating up that much cash with no one buying...well, it's not just the leaders that need to go. Unions may point to ridiculous exec salaries for sympathy, but those GM workers aren't pulling in pennies a year. They're part of the fiscal problem too. "
True, and I do recognize that there is other fiscal resposibility companies, and, therefore execs. must manage; however, in GM's case, the execs. signed on for the ridiculous compensation packages that union workers receive (like full salary for several years to go back to school (however that is defined since some of the reports I have seen/read suggest that they may not even attend school), after which they do not have to return to GM). Also, GM's (and Ford's) execs. decided to continue producing large trucks and SUVs as other manufacturers moved to smaller, more fuel-effecient vehicles, leaving GM's (and Ford's) sales reeling. Just sayin'...
"Also, GM's (and Ford's) execs. decided to continue producing large trucks and SUVs as other manufacturers moved to smaller, more fuel-effecient vehicles, leaving GM's (and Ford's) sales reeling. Just sayin'..."
Yeah, but it's also easy to see the writing on the wall in retrospect. But SUVs and large trucks were the mainstay of those corporations. I'm sure careful market research suggested that heavy investment was the key to profitability for a long stretch.
Ford made their hybrids and GM has the Volt, but the American culture in which they exist cherishes livin' it large. Management was stupid and definitely overpaid (aren't they always?), but rare is the leader chosen that makes a deliberate choice to screw up. But you might be better versed in the actual character of company leaders. I just temper my condemnation with the realization that I've never had billions riding on my choices.
The iPhone effect? For a company that draws most of its sales from outside the United States? The iPhone wasn't sold in Asia until last week, and its success in UK/Germany/France was limited. Clearly some there's other problem here.