Couch Analysts Note

    Over the past couple of weeks, Habr has been born several posts (and a couple of dozens of tantrums in the comments) about the purchase of Nokia by Microsoft and the role of Elop in this process (for example: 1 , 2 , 3 ). As a result of numerous discussions, as well as anonymous drains from super-reliable sources, the leading mobile analysts finally established themselves that Elop was sent to Nokia to destroy it and sell it cheaper to Microsoft.

    In the last of these topics, someone iliabvf asked my opinion on this issue - obviously, due to the fact that six months ago I published a post in which, as it seemed to many, I defended Elop.

    Dear Couch Analysts! Under the cut are two tables that will undoubtedly interest you.



    Here is the distribution of forces in the mobile phone sales market 10 years ago, in 2003.

    Nokia 34.70%
    Motorola 14.50%
    Samsung 10.50%
    Siemens 8.40%
    SonyEricsson 5.10%
    LG 5.00%
    Panasonic 3.20%
    NEC 2.60%
    Alcatel 1.40%
    Sagem 1.20%
    Others 13.30%

    (units of phones sold, source: gsmserver.com/articles/sales2003.php )

    But the distribution of forces in the sales market for the current year:

    Samsung 24.7
    Nokia 14
    Apple 7.3
    LG Electronics 3.9
    ZTE 3.5
    Huawei 2.6
    Lenovo 2.5
    TCL 2.3 Communication
    Sony Mobile Communications 2.2
    Yulong 1.8
    Others 35,1

    (phone number of units sold, source: www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2573415 )

    But More more fun, separately on smartphones:

    Samsung 31.7
    Apple 14.2
    LG Electronics 5.1
    Lenovo 4.7
    ZTE 4.3
    Others 40

    (from there)

    Do you notice anything? Let me tell you: 2 (two) manufacturers: Samsung and LG were able to survive the change of the “cool vendor phones” paradigm to “the same flat shovels with a touch screen”. (Two and a half, if you count half of Sony Erickson, and he is more likely dead than alive.) I honestly don’t know why - but, I suppose, because of their initial paradigm, “we constantly throw as many models as possible into all segments of all markets. "

    Now to how Elop "reduced the cost of Nokia." Wipe your eyes: in the market, chew on companies-with-history-eminent-brand-patent-package-and-all-cheap. Motorola, HTC, Blackberry, Siemens Mobile, Panasonic Mobile, BenQ Mobile, Ericsson, NEC Casio Mobile Communications, Alcatel-Lucent, thousands of them, hesitate to list. Who needs your Nokia for $ 7 billion, in the market of wild dumping, all major players are getting rid of mobile units or have already got rid of them.

    None of the old market players was ready for the fact that the mass consumer instead of beautifully painted plastic whistles wants a shovel on an android. Remember, once the main money was made on "designer" phones - Motorola RAZR cost 800 bucks at the time of release, and no one cared that it had 5.5 megabytes of memory inside.

    And now the manufacturer of the premium class is exactly one (Apple), all the rest compete mainly in features and price. Siemens and Motorola, all of a sudden, life did not prepare for this. And Nokia too.

    Yes, to the question of mobile operating systems that Nokia developed so abruptly and which Elop ditched to switch to VinFon. Take a look around: on the market of these cool operating systems, there are no less than the former giants of the mobile industry with hot fans: PalmOS / WebOS, Motorola EZX Linux, BBX, BlackBerry Tablet OS, Sallfish, Ubuntu Phone, FirefoxOS, Bada - choose any, half of them are for free in the form of source!

    This is all I need. Nokia in 2009 confidently and with a song went straight to hell. One could wait until she stupidly went bankrupt (and Nokia would have gone bankrupt enchantingly, with her 100 thousand employees), and bought for a dollar - and there was absolutely no need to send any Trojan horses there. Thanks to Elop, Microsoft did not buy a bankrupt, but a company with a more or less stable position in the market, with three years of experience working closely on its axis and with a more or less interesting niche in the market. And those members of the board of directors who hired Elop to sell the company, apparently already understood what options they had for further “development”. And how to evaluate this activity from a moral point of view - this, sorry, is not for me.

    Also popular now: