Thread: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
View Single Post
gerbick
2013-11-22 , 23:09
Guest | Posts: n/a | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on
#2266
Originally Posted by Lumiaman View Post
Hey Gerb, I agree with what you said. No disagreements.
Writing this day down... no, seriously. I am.

What I disagree is to blame ELOP as the sole cause of Nokia failure. The point of the graph is to show that Nokia lost shareholders confidence as it's price kept sliding downwards despite fanboys touting large numbers. Everyone knew that Symbian was dead man walking.
No, Symbian was still selling, it just wasn't growing as fast as the market had grown. There's a subtle difference and when Elop came out with that "burning platform" notice, it scuttled any sales of Symbian any further thus setting a downward trend and disabled any more growth and Nokia didn't have a full-blown strategy at that moment that was publicly known.

Simply stated, he committed an unprecedented Osborne Effect by killing one brand that was still selling (yet not growing in market share which in itself the market was growing) and then coming out with an unpopular mobile OS that meant Nokia had an uphill battle whereas it truly could have been avoided.

Same happened to BB, even they changed their management with little success. Tells you what happens when you lose a step in this highly competitive market.
BB is a different story, but with similar ingredients. Bad management, bad decisions, bad delays and a misunderstanding of how the market was going to change. Those are the similar ingredients. BB thought their enterprise inroads would keep them ahead of most; it didn't. BB also thought that nobody wanted a touch screen; they were 100% wrong there. Nokia disregarded touch, but built it anyway. There's some other differences... but BB was just plain arrogant whereas Nokia was just plain disillusioned.