Well, let us see.

Your graph appears to be historical stock price trend between Sept 2003 to Sept 2013. If your point is about the up and down of the stock price; then sure Nokia current price is much lower than when it was peaking at $40 in mid 2007. So let me extend that thinking and may be I could conclude this: in 2007, Nokia was selling all this dump phones and the stock price was $40; in 2013, Nokia is selling all these wonderful WP phones and yet the stock price is under $10 -- what the f#$k, Wait a minute, I can get a bigger meal with $40 than $10...Oh my GOD, let us go back to sell more dump phones instead.

But... I guess that is NOT want you want to show or want people to conclude, isn't it?

So, just throwing a graph out without context and detail would cause a lot of confusion -- especially for simple guy like me.

You point was that nobody wanted Symbian, and the Nokia mobile was worthless before Mr. Elop's leadership. Your graph does NOT show that. If it were the case, shouldn't the graph show sharp decline of stock price toward of $0.0 by mid-2010 and then an upward trend once Mr. Elop has taken over.

We all know that by late 2011, under Elop's direction, Nokia was selling nothing but WP phones; and the overall stock price still trending downward; so using the same logic as you would have used(i.e. low stock price reflects the fact that less people wanting the product), then would it also means that Nobody wants WP either for all these years? But I have a warm and fuzzy feeling that you don't want me or other to conclude that either, isn't it?

As I noted before, it is a free country/or internet(as everyone says); you are entitled to what you want to write and say. But if you want to prove your points, I welcome you to put up the numbers. Again, please do not pound the table, I begin to feel sorry for the table now.

Cheers,