First and foremost, I'm not familiar with the Author and he might be an investor and analyst for a living, he definitely writes in a blog about marketshare, I know that much. However, he seems to repeatedly state that Wall Street is beating Nokia and it's CEO up, NOK trades at 22 P/E which is not akin to being beaten up by Wall Street standards, so unfortunately, his ultimate point is lost, at least on me (I used to be "involved" in the market and went to school for finance). He also brings up how other companies are losing money here, losing money there, it's mostly irrelevant and something to bring up if you are prideful about the company you work for/invest in/report on, nothing else...Wall Street could care less how long they've made smartphones and/or how bad others are doing, or have done, in dumbphones.
"Why is Wall Street demanding his head on a plate? "
>profits
"[the USA] didn't really believe in SMS until the Obama Presidential campaign of 2008."
>I missed this on first read, but it's just laughable.
Section "ENTER APPLE"
>better on 2nd read, and they are hitting the head on what Nokia is doing wrong and Apple is doing right, but they seem to stick to the "Why is the public seeing it this way" line of thought too much, IMHO this isn't about which is better and that's what the article is missing here and in other places (though it seems to understand this fact, as they bring it up in ways, but not in the way that matters, again IMO).
Section "Profits"
>the guy doesn't know that HTC just made a profit and they are the fastest growing smartphone OEM in the top 5, growth is what matters to Wall Street and it is growth in unrealizable profits that is most important. HTC is growing market share and margins at the same time, Wall Street is in love with that shit.
Section "Symbian"
>I think he's right that the analysts are wrong here. However, he brings up these facts about how Nokia did what was good for the world, and trust me, I wish corporations thought more like Nokia and less like Apple, but Wall Street...they could care less...they say, you can take your humanitarian ventures and shove them up your...
>I'll quote here from the same section "Buying Palm would have been idiotic in this environment. But then consider true Nokia rivals SonyEricsson, LG and Motorola - they do not control their destiny. They don't even make a smartphone OS. They are utterly dependent on Google or Microsoft (or Symbian or MeeGo) for their smartphone future. Which is the right strategy? And what of Samsung? Nokia saw smartphones as a strategic direction in 1996. Samsung launched its own smartphone OS, Bada, now in 2010. Is Nokia not miles and years and yes, lightyears ahead of its real rivals, Samsung, LG, Motorola and SonyEricsson, when it comes to smartphones? But no, now there is an Apple in the market, suddenly Symbian is 'obsolete' and Nokia is 'lost' in its smartphone strategy? No, OPK, life is not fair. Wall Street is giving you no credit for the best strategy in smartphone OS's and is rewarding Apple for very sub-optimal, proprietary, industry-dividing, hurtful, excluding smartphone OS strategies that even refuse basic internet standards like Adobe's Flash being supported."
>Again, how long you have been here is irrelevant to Wall Street, yes, it's a cruel, cruel game. Also, perhaps the reason why Nokia has lost value is that Wall Street *did* care about this, when Nokia was pioneering and seemingly the be-all, end-all...now that there is competition, even if their margins were growing and their market share was stagnant Wall Street would punish them because of the predicted expectations of the future, it's as simple as that. (again, reference their P/E ratio, it's quite good, they aren't being "punished" they're being kept in check by Wall Street who was at one time, almost always bullish on Nokia, then they started to be a bit open-minded, now they are pessimistic, but still fair IMO). Also, if Samsung, LG and the others referenced have a cruel twist of fate that land them OS less, then Nokia's stock will shoot up, but there's no reason to really right that in there unless you're a bit of a fanboy trying to spread FUD. I agree on the Palm point, they are one of the last companies that should buy them.
"Because Nokia has a strategy already in place for MeeGo, there is utterly no point in even considering going Android. "
> I can't disagree more, as I've said, they should keep MeeGo, no question. It should be their priority. But as long as Nokia can make cheaper phones than the rest of their industry they should want 40% of the Android game (random number, just because it jives with their current smartphone marketshare) depending on how cutthroat it is, but they can compete here and I could care less as a potential investor if Symbian is 759457% more powerful, I care about units and profitability. Nokia wouldn't have to put in much effort, and regardless of how lovely their strategy is with MeeGo, this is missing an opportunity for profit, even if they only market these phones in the U.S. (hey, whadda great idea!...well not according to the author of the article)
"Very quick evidence. Those cool things you liked about the iPhone? GPS? 3G? WiFi? App Store? 5 megapixel cameraphone? Touch Screen? Games? HD video recording? Video calls? - those were all invented and done first on mobile phones in Japan, years and years before the iPhone (obviously all done in Japan before Nokia did it too).
Or consider the carriers/mobile operators of America. That 'all you can eat' data plan you like on the iPhone? Invented in Japan. The 70:30 revenue sharing that Apple's iPhone App Store offers - was invented in Japan but they offer a far better deal: 90:10. Mobile wallet/mobile payments? Invented in Japan. 2D barcode based coupons you see now on Times Square? Invented in Japan. The mobile internet? Invented in Japan. Idle screen services. Invented in Japan."
>Again, irrelevant to Wall Street.
"The top Samsung Galaxy from South Korea that went on sale last week - offers a built-in pico projector! "
>again, facts wrong, this is the "Beam".
" They cannot know how outdated some of their views are, because those analysts don't get to make pilgrimages to Japan or South Korea etc to study the most advanced mobile markets."
>I live in Korea, and I love following telcom news, but to speak about advanced = what Wall Street cares about is to speak wrong.
"Now, which was the Western smartphone maker who first put a camera on its smartphone? Not RIM, not Apple, not Palm, not Motorola - it was Nokia - based on studying Japan. What was the first Western smartphone maker who first put a 2D barcode reader on its smartphones? Nokia again. TV-out? Nokia. App store? Nokia. Touch screen? Nokia. Etc. Nokia has been tracking the most advanced markets and brought innovations to the smartphone space for the whole decade, but the US based tech press do not know this, and do not understand this."
>Again, where this was useful and original to the market, Nokia got it's stock price pushed up, this is meaningless today.
"f that meant creating USA-only iPhone clones, then so be it. If that meant (remember the commitment was from 2006) creating Razr clones to match Motorola's US success, then do it. And Nokia had huge profits back then - bankroll that US invasion. If it meant Nokia's US sales had to be subsidised from other markets, no biggie, its only 8% of the world market."
>again, think Android, just *think*, because it will work. iPhone clones *might* but it really depends. 8% yes, but it's not 8% of the world revenue. Depending on what he means by subsidize, I think he means cut margins, but I can either agree or largely disagree with what he says.
"until these 4 US carriers were satisfied. Nokia needed the US market to experience Nokia's best, not Nokia's worst phones. And Nokia needed US carriers to promote its phones, so US consumers would adopt them."
>nail on the head
"Profits is a fair point but an unfair judgement. Yes, Nokia's profits are down, drastically, from 2006. But the market is fiercely competitive, and against Nokia's traditional rivals, those who sell mass market phones to the world - Motorola, SonyEricsson, Samsung and LG, during OPK's rule, Nokia has far outperformed these true rivals. "
>again, it's true rivals have also been scorched by these same analysts, I get confused if he actually sees Nokia in a bubble when he says that Wall Street is too hard on them.
"Incidentially. Four years ago, Nokia's global mobile phone market share was 35%. Since then the number of rival handset makers has doubled. The market shares of the other top 5 makers have shrunk from 48% to 40%. Did Nokia do well? Before OPK took charge, Nokia's smartphone market share globally was 48%. Since then the number of smartphone manufacturers has more than tripled. Nokia's market share is still 41%, bigger than numbers 2 and 3 combined."
>Here is where Wall Street has it really right, and the author has it really wrong. He's using "smartphones" to conflate the argument throughout the article. Smartphones is only relevant to Wall Street in the context that they are as profitable as the top tier model, the "Backflips, Allies, Palm Pre Pixis" of the world need not apply with this term. But I do think he knows that as he actually makes the reference earlier on more than one occasion.
Overall it's an article written by a former Nokia exec, I could expect a different tone, but I won't in the future if reading from him again.
@juanvaldez "Very quick evidence. Those cool things you liked about the iPhone? GPS? 3G? WiFi? App Store? 5 megapixel cameraphone? Touch Screen? Games? HD video recording? Video calls? - those were all invented and done first on mobile phones in Japan, years and years before the iPhone (obviously all done in Japan before Nokia did it too)."
To my knowledge the first GPS phone was made by a obscure finnish phone manufacturer Benefon, not by a japanese company. Japan was first with 3G, but for the rest of those I think games might be made first by Nokia. Ericksson was one of the first with a touchscreen, if not the first.
The N9 has arrived. What we can say from our first experience is that we're in the presence of a fantastically designed device with a gorgeous AMOLED screen and some highly responsive performance.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
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.
@juanvaldez
First and foremost, I'm not familiar with the Author and he might be an investor and analyst for a living, he definitely writes in a blog about marketshare, I know that much. However, he seems to repeatedly state that Wall Street is beating Nokia and it's CEO up, NOK trades at 22 P/E which is not akin to being beaten up by Wall Street standards, so unfortunately, his ultimate point is lost, at least on me (I used to be "involved" in the market and went to school for finance). He also brings up how other companies are losing money here, losing money there, it's mostly irrelevant and something to bring up if you are prideful about the company you work for/invest in/report on, nothing else...Wall Street could care less how long they've made smartphones and/or how bad others are doing, or have done, in dumbphones.
"Why is Wall Street demanding his head on a plate? "
>profits
"[the USA] didn't really believe in SMS until the Obama Presidential campaign of 2008."
>I missed this on first read, but it's just laughable.
Section "ENTER APPLE"
>better on 2nd read, and they are hitting the head on what Nokia is doing wrong and Apple is doing right, but they seem to stick to the "Why is the public seeing it this way" line of thought too much, IMHO this isn't about which is better and that's what the article is missing here and in other places (though it seems to understand this fact, as they bring it up in ways, but not in the way that matters, again IMO).
Section "Profits"
>the guy doesn't know that HTC just made a profit and they are the fastest growing smartphone OEM in the top 5, growth is what matters to Wall Street and it is growth in unrealizable profits that is most important. HTC is growing market share and margins at the same time, Wall Street is in love with that shit.
Section "Symbian"
>I think he's right that the analysts are wrong here. However, he brings up these facts about how Nokia did what was good for the world, and trust me, I wish corporations thought more like Nokia and less like Apple, but Wall Street...they could care less...they say, you can take your humanitarian ventures and shove them up your...
>I'll quote here from the same section "Buying Palm would have been idiotic in this environment. But then consider true Nokia rivals SonyEricsson, LG and Motorola - they do not control their destiny. They don't even make a smartphone OS. They are utterly dependent on Google or Microsoft (or Symbian or MeeGo) for their smartphone future. Which is the right strategy? And what of Samsung? Nokia saw smartphones as a strategic direction in 1996. Samsung launched its own smartphone OS, Bada, now in 2010. Is Nokia not miles and years and yes, lightyears ahead of its real rivals, Samsung, LG, Motorola and SonyEricsson, when it comes to smartphones? But no, now there is an Apple in the market, suddenly Symbian is 'obsolete' and Nokia is 'lost' in its smartphone strategy? No, OPK, life is not fair. Wall Street is giving you no credit for the best strategy in smartphone OS's and is rewarding Apple for very sub-optimal, proprietary, industry-dividing, hurtful, excluding smartphone OS strategies that even refuse basic internet standards like Adobe's Flash being supported."
>Again, how long you have been here is irrelevant to Wall Street, yes, it's a cruel, cruel game. Also, perhaps the reason why Nokia has lost value is that Wall Street *did* care about this, when Nokia was pioneering and seemingly the be-all, end-all...now that there is competition, even if their margins were growing and their market share was stagnant Wall Street would punish them because of the predicted expectations of the future, it's as simple as that. (again, reference their P/E ratio, it's quite good, they aren't being "punished" they're being kept in check by Wall Street who was at one time, almost always bullish on Nokia, then they started to be a bit open-minded, now they are pessimistic, but still fair IMO). Also, if Samsung, LG and the others referenced have a cruel twist of fate that land them OS less, then Nokia's stock will shoot up, but there's no reason to really right that in there unless you're a bit of a fanboy trying to spread FUD. I agree on the Palm point, they are one of the last companies that should buy them.
"Because Nokia has a strategy already in place for MeeGo, there is utterly no point in even considering going Android. "
> I can't disagree more, as I've said, they should keep MeeGo, no question. It should be their priority. But as long as Nokia can make cheaper phones than the rest of their industry they should want 40% of the Android game (random number, just because it jives with their current smartphone marketshare) depending on how cutthroat it is, but they can compete here and I could care less as a potential investor if Symbian is 759457% more powerful, I care about units and profitability. Nokia wouldn't have to put in much effort, and regardless of how lovely their strategy is with MeeGo, this is missing an opportunity for profit, even if they only market these phones in the U.S. (hey, whadda great idea!...well not according to the author of the article)
"Very quick evidence. Those cool things you liked about the iPhone? GPS? 3G? WiFi? App Store? 5 megapixel cameraphone? Touch Screen? Games? HD video recording? Video calls? - those were all invented and done first on mobile phones in Japan, years and years before the iPhone (obviously all done in Japan before Nokia did it too).
Or consider the carriers/mobile operators of America. That 'all you can eat' data plan you like on the iPhone? Invented in Japan. The 70:30 revenue sharing that Apple's iPhone App Store offers - was invented in Japan but they offer a far better deal: 90:10. Mobile wallet/mobile payments? Invented in Japan. 2D barcode based coupons you see now on Times Square? Invented in Japan. The mobile internet? Invented in Japan. Idle screen services. Invented in Japan."
>Again, irrelevant to Wall Street.
"The top Samsung Galaxy from South Korea that went on sale last week - offers a built-in pico projector! "
>again, facts wrong, this is the "Beam".
" They cannot know how outdated some of their views are, because those analysts don't get to make pilgrimages to Japan or South Korea etc to study the most advanced mobile markets."
>I live in Korea, and I love following telcom news, but to speak about advanced = what Wall Street cares about is to speak wrong.
"Now, which was the Western smartphone maker who first put a camera on its smartphone? Not RIM, not Apple, not Palm, not Motorola - it was Nokia - based on studying Japan. What was the first Western smartphone maker who first put a 2D barcode reader on its smartphones? Nokia again. TV-out? Nokia. App store? Nokia. Touch screen? Nokia. Etc. Nokia has been tracking the most advanced markets and brought innovations to the smartphone space for the whole decade, but the US based tech press do not know this, and do not understand this."
>Again, where this was useful and original to the market, Nokia got it's stock price pushed up, this is meaningless today.
"f that meant creating USA-only iPhone clones, then so be it. If that meant (remember the commitment was from 2006) creating Razr clones to match Motorola's US success, then do it. And Nokia had huge profits back then - bankroll that US invasion. If it meant Nokia's US sales had to be subsidised from other markets, no biggie, its only 8% of the world market."
>again, think Android, just *think*, because it will work. iPhone clones *might* but it really depends. 8% yes, but it's not 8% of the world revenue. Depending on what he means by subsidize, I think he means cut margins, but I can either agree or largely disagree with what he says.
"until these 4 US carriers were satisfied. Nokia needed the US market to experience Nokia's best, not Nokia's worst phones. And Nokia needed US carriers to promote its phones, so US consumers would adopt them."
>nail on the head
"Profits is a fair point but an unfair judgement. Yes, Nokia's profits are down, drastically, from 2006. But the market is fiercely competitive, and against Nokia's traditional rivals, those who sell mass market phones to the world - Motorola, SonyEricsson, Samsung and LG, during OPK's rule, Nokia has far outperformed these true rivals. "
>again, it's true rivals have also been scorched by these same analysts, I get confused if he actually sees Nokia in a bubble when he says that Wall Street is too hard on them.
"Incidentially. Four years ago, Nokia's global mobile phone market share was 35%. Since then the number of rival handset makers has doubled. The market shares of the other top 5 makers have shrunk from 48% to 40%. Did Nokia do well? Before OPK took charge, Nokia's smartphone market share globally was 48%. Since then the number of smartphone manufacturers has more than tripled. Nokia's market share is still 41%, bigger than numbers 2 and 3 combined."
>Here is where Wall Street has it really right, and the author has it really wrong. He's using "smartphones" to conflate the argument throughout the article. Smartphones is only relevant to Wall Street in the context that they are as profitable as the top tier model, the "Backflips, Allies, Palm Pre Pixis" of the world need not apply with this term. But I do think he knows that as he actually makes the reference earlier on more than one occasion.
Overall it's an article written by a former Nokia exec, I could expect a different tone, but I won't in the future if reading from him again.
@juanvaldez
"Very quick evidence. Those cool things you liked about the iPhone? GPS? 3G? WiFi? App Store? 5 megapixel cameraphone? Touch Screen? Games? HD video recording? Video calls? - those were all invented and done first on mobile phones in Japan, years and years before the iPhone (obviously all done in Japan before Nokia did it too)."
To my knowledge the first GPS phone was made by a obscure finnish phone manufacturer Benefon, not by a japanese company. Japan was first with 3G, but for the rest of those I think games might be made first by Nokia. Ericksson was one of the first with a touchscreen, if not the first.