Some thoughts on the conflict between Nokia and Eldar Murtazin
I wanted to share some of my observations related to the conflict between Nokia and the journalist Murtazin ( eldarmurtazin ). I want to immediately clarify my attitude to both persons involved in the conflict - the Nokia company, on the one hand, has serious problems with the release of new products and platforms, on the other hand, it has serious potential and it is very early to arrange a funeral. As for Murtazin, I consider his publication to be the undisputed market leader in most respects and consider it a fair and worthy result of many years of hard work. But reading the comments of many people, I realized that many obvious moments lovers of gadgets ignore. And some facts deserve to be paid attention to.
Over the years, Eldar Viktorovich managed to create a well-functioning process of influencing the retail market. In short, his reviews are structured in such a way that they are read by so many retail representatives — ordinary sellers, purchasing managers, and so on. It is for them that almost always in the final part of the review there is an assessment of the device in terms of market sales. In general, the reviews are built largely from the point of view of the seller - the design is evaluated in terms of what price level the model pulls, the positioning of the device in the line and relative to competitors, the target audience, the schedule for price reductions, release dates of competitors' devices, and others, extremely important for sellersthings. If you regularly read Mobile-Review.com, then you must have noticed this significant difference from reviews of other publications.
This is a very significant factor that determines the interesting mechanism of positive feedback. If you write that “the phone will not be sold”, he has “the percentage of returns is extremely high” and so on, then many retailers will avoid this model, remove it at disadvantageous places, and will not spend money on advertising. A small volume of purchases in the first lots will minimize the presence of the affected model in retail outlets, sales consultants will discourage customers from buying a new product. As a consequence of this, sales will be minimal, which will surprisingly coincide with the forecast of Eldar Viktorovich. This is a well-known fact for market participants; therefore, many have to reckon with its interests.
Of course, the forecasts are usually based on some real facts, it doesn’t come to outright slander. But the interpretation of the details, the emotional presentation - it all depends on the mood of the author. This is not surprising, a person can really be saddened by something, for example, there may be some troubles at work: the largest advertiser stopped placing ads, and a very financial contract for support in Social Media went into some kind of editing . How to write reviews in this mood?
It is important to understand that this mechanism of influence on sales is quite effective, but has certain limits of applicability. Such a spell will affect a product strong from the market point of view to a much lesser extent than a product with one or another problem, even if it is not critical for the end user. In part, we can say that there is an exponential dependence - if a weak apparatus (in the market sense) can simply kill such a review, then a strong player may well get away with some problems at the start of sales. Obviously, the feedback system works in two directions - it’s very difficult to openly open a potential bestseller, this will lead to a drop in confidence on the part of the audience.
By the way, from my point of view, recently there has been a slight drop in confidence in MR. This indicator is very difficult to measure, so I can only share my feelings. This process, rather, is associated not so much with the objectivity of the reviews, but with a large number of Samsung advertisements, including in the form of articles “as advertisements”. This creates a feeling for the simple reader of a one-sided editorial policy, and is aggravated by the statements of Eldar Viktorovich outside his publication - in other media, in his blog, twitter and so on. Honestly, it's hard to say whose problem it is: Samsung or Mobile Review.
Another aspect is, in my opinion, a peculiar perception of some market situations. For example, Motorola and Nokia reacted almost equally to the problem with the antenna in the iPhone 4 (Death Grip). Both companies have posted messages saying they can hold their phones with any hand and whatever. The reaction of Eldar Viktorovich was immediate and entitled "... Nokia or guys without eggs that lie". For some reason, Motorola is not mentioned at all. And for some reason other companies do not receive such metaphors. And in vain. From my point of view, for example, a series of these posts could be continued. For example, a post with the title “... Beeline or girls without eggs that lie” would be fair, and what’s important - both statements would be true, as the company's marketing efforts have recently been directly aimed at misinforming the consumer about the real cost of services. But this is perhaps the topic of a separate conversation. Another example of a peculiar market vision is the assessment of companies' policies regarding the support of a large number of software platforms. In the case of Samsung, this is called " do not put all the eggs in one basket ", while in the case of Nokia the situation looks a little different: "Zoo, a mixture of everything and everything ”or even“ Beginning of the end of Nokia ”. There are quite a few such examples, and I don’t think that we need to collect all of them here.
A separate story with the ratings that are expressed in relation to the top management and the company's security service - it’s difficult to call them provocative.
In this light, Nokia’s actions are not very logical, though understandable. Constant trolling and provoking a showdown on a personal level left the company no choice but to start active action against the analyst and businessman Murtazin. But in the future, if these actions are not supported by a number of Nokia’s steps on a different plane, the outcome of this story will be a lose-lose situation.
Over the years, Eldar Viktorovich managed to create a well-functioning process of influencing the retail market. In short, his reviews are structured in such a way that they are read by so many retail representatives — ordinary sellers, purchasing managers, and so on. It is for them that almost always in the final part of the review there is an assessment of the device in terms of market sales. In general, the reviews are built largely from the point of view of the seller - the design is evaluated in terms of what price level the model pulls, the positioning of the device in the line and relative to competitors, the target audience, the schedule for price reductions, release dates of competitors' devices, and others, extremely important for sellersthings. If you regularly read Mobile-Review.com, then you must have noticed this significant difference from reviews of other publications.
This is a very significant factor that determines the interesting mechanism of positive feedback. If you write that “the phone will not be sold”, he has “the percentage of returns is extremely high” and so on, then many retailers will avoid this model, remove it at disadvantageous places, and will not spend money on advertising. A small volume of purchases in the first lots will minimize the presence of the affected model in retail outlets, sales consultants will discourage customers from buying a new product. As a consequence of this, sales will be minimal, which will surprisingly coincide with the forecast of Eldar Viktorovich. This is a well-known fact for market participants; therefore, many have to reckon with its interests.
Of course, the forecasts are usually based on some real facts, it doesn’t come to outright slander. But the interpretation of the details, the emotional presentation - it all depends on the mood of the author. This is not surprising, a person can really be saddened by something, for example, there may be some troubles at work: the largest advertiser stopped placing ads, and a very financial contract for support in Social Media went into some kind of editing . How to write reviews in this mood?
It is important to understand that this mechanism of influence on sales is quite effective, but has certain limits of applicability. Such a spell will affect a product strong from the market point of view to a much lesser extent than a product with one or another problem, even if it is not critical for the end user. In part, we can say that there is an exponential dependence - if a weak apparatus (in the market sense) can simply kill such a review, then a strong player may well get away with some problems at the start of sales. Obviously, the feedback system works in two directions - it’s very difficult to openly open a potential bestseller, this will lead to a drop in confidence on the part of the audience.
By the way, from my point of view, recently there has been a slight drop in confidence in MR. This indicator is very difficult to measure, so I can only share my feelings. This process, rather, is associated not so much with the objectivity of the reviews, but with a large number of Samsung advertisements, including in the form of articles “as advertisements”. This creates a feeling for the simple reader of a one-sided editorial policy, and is aggravated by the statements of Eldar Viktorovich outside his publication - in other media, in his blog, twitter and so on. Honestly, it's hard to say whose problem it is: Samsung or Mobile Review.
Another aspect is, in my opinion, a peculiar perception of some market situations. For example, Motorola and Nokia reacted almost equally to the problem with the antenna in the iPhone 4 (Death Grip). Both companies have posted messages saying they can hold their phones with any hand and whatever. The reaction of Eldar Viktorovich was immediate and entitled "... Nokia or guys without eggs that lie". For some reason, Motorola is not mentioned at all. And for some reason other companies do not receive such metaphors. And in vain. From my point of view, for example, a series of these posts could be continued. For example, a post with the title “... Beeline or girls without eggs that lie” would be fair, and what’s important - both statements would be true, as the company's marketing efforts have recently been directly aimed at misinforming the consumer about the real cost of services. But this is perhaps the topic of a separate conversation. Another example of a peculiar market vision is the assessment of companies' policies regarding the support of a large number of software platforms. In the case of Samsung, this is called " do not put all the eggs in one basket ", while in the case of Nokia the situation looks a little different: "Zoo, a mixture of everything and everything ”or even“ Beginning of the end of Nokia ”. There are quite a few such examples, and I don’t think that we need to collect all of them here.
A separate story with the ratings that are expressed in relation to the top management and the company's security service - it’s difficult to call them provocative.
In this light, Nokia’s actions are not very logical, though understandable. Constant trolling and provoking a showdown on a personal level left the company no choice but to start active action against the analyst and businessman Murtazin. But in the future, if these actions are not supported by a number of Nokia’s steps on a different plane, the outcome of this story will be a lose-lose situation.