Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 896 | Thanked: 978 times | Joined on Feb 2011 @ Greece, Athens
#71
*lumiaman: ouch... you hurt my feelings there ... booohoooo


*marxian: I know the difference man. but still this chart show the rapid change of dynamics
 

The Following User Says Thank You to HELLASISGREECE For This Useful Post:
Guest | Posts: n/a | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on
#72
Being #1 for 14-15 years isn't helping them now. Not one bit.

All of this talk about OPK or Elop being the blame doesn't change anything about today. Nokia is less than 2 Euros a share, their sales and share are basically crap. And it's getting worse with each and every day.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to For This Useful Post:
Posts: 273 | Thanked: 463 times | Joined on May 2011 @ Athens
#73
Lets not feed the lumia(troll)man any more and happily ignore his BS.
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Zoxir For This Useful Post:
zerojay's Avatar
Posts: 2,669 | Thanked: 2,555 times | Joined on Apr 2007 @ Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
#74
I blame Arjan.

Last edited by zerojay; 2012-10-12 at 01:40.
 
Posts: 771 | Thanked: 393 times | Joined on Feb 2012
#75
fight between darkside (symbian manager) and the force (OSSO/maemo/meego manager+team) causes Star Wars will never have 7th Episode
__________________
5800XMN8808N9
 
Dave999's Avatar
Posts: 7,074 | Thanked: 9,069 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Moon! It's not the East or the West side... it's the Dark Side
#76
Originally Posted by gerbick View Post
Being #1 for 14-15 years isn't helping them now. Not one bit.

All of this talk about OPK or Elop being the blame doesn't change anything about today. Nokia is less than 2 Euros a share, their sales and share are basically crap. And it's getting worse with each and every day.
That's untrue. Being first for 14-15 years is a huge advantage today.

Nokia has sales channels, brand recognition and so forth. But above all they have done it before and that gives the company easier to attract money from shareholders. Whitout all the success in the past, very few would investing today. But at the moment, there is no problems to get new shareholder willing to buy shares. I bet they would even push in more dollars if Nokia asked for it.
__________________
Do something for the climate today! Anything!

I don't trust poeple without a Nokia n900...

Last edited by Dave999; 2012-10-12 at 06:27.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dave999 For This Useful Post:
Posts: 285 | Thanked: 1,900 times | Joined on Feb 2010
#77
Originally Posted by Hacker View Post
This is a case study on why top organizations need top talent in leadership. But the question is HOW? How does a company as important as Nokia was to Finland, with so much talent there, end up with poor leadership? A good leader can manage egos and get unproductive internal conflict handled.

Does anyone have any insights or links on the leadership quality problem?
As far as I know, leadership problems were some kind of "public secret" for a long time. It was known that Nokia had bloated middle management who only cared about their own a**, which made the company work incredibly inefficient. My contacts in Nokia said the same thing - project would start and when things were progressing at full speed someone could simply pull the plug and scrap everything to get some "savings" to make papers look good. And then all that would start again from the beginning... When rumors of OPK's ousting begun spreading, my recipe for Nokia would have been to kick out most of the bloated management and flatten the organization as much as possible. If it was done early enough, it might have saved Meego, but Elop came onboard too late for that. However, it's still questionable if Windows Phone move was the correct one.

Organization got bloated during times Nokia dominated the business. It's possible that leaders didn't realize this until it was too late or they considered chopping the organization to be bad pr. Afterall, Nokia's rise begun during extremely hard times when there was huge unemployment rates and lives of many people were permanently ruined. It would have been hard to lay off loads of people, especially when company was making reasonable profit. I guess that's the reason Elop came along in the first place instead of Vanjoki.
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to JulmaHerra For This Useful Post:
Guest | Posts: n/a | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on
#78
Originally Posted by Dave999 View Post
Nokia has sales channels, brand recognition and so forth.
They disassembled their own .com websites to stop sales from happening where they'd benefit the most. With the release of their WP7 devices, a lot of carriers have turned their backs to them, and to purchase a device now, you have to go to Amazon or other sites for their higher series.

But above all they have done it before and that gives the company easier to attract money from shareholders. Whitout all the success in the past, very few would investing today.
People are buying stock now speculating they will either: A) turn things around or B) get rid of Elop and their rather ineffective board. Nothing besides their portfolio of patents is keeping them worth much now.

But at the moment, there is no problems to get new shareholder willing to buy shares. I bet they would even push in more dollars if Nokia asked for it.
Wanna bet? Their trade volume has also declined in the last 2 years right alongside their stock price.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to For This Useful Post:
Dave999's Avatar
Posts: 7,074 | Thanked: 9,069 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Moon! It's not the East or the West side... it's the Dark Side
#79
Originally Posted by gerbick View Post
They disassembled their own .com websites to stop sales from happening where they'd benefit the most. With the release of their WP7 devices, a lot of carriers have turned their backs to them, and to purchase a device now, you have to go to Amazon or other sites for their higher series.



People are buying stock now speculating they will either: A) turn things around or B) get rid of Elop and their rather ineffective board. Nothing besides their portfolio of patents is keeping them worth much now.



Wanna bet? Their trade volume has also declined in the last 2 years right alongside their stock price.
Ok, so you don't think they still befitting at all at the moment from years and years as the top devices manufacturer and brand around the world?
__________________
Do something for the climate today! Anything!

I don't trust poeple without a Nokia n900...
 
tissot's Avatar
Posts: 1,839 | Thanked: 2,432 times | Joined on May 2009
#80
Originally Posted by gerbick View Post
They disassembled their own .com websites to stop sales from happening where they'd benefit the most. With the release of their WP7 devices, a lot of carriers have turned their backs to them, and to purchase a device now, you have to go to Amazon or other sites for their higher series.
Honestly, direct sales via site are not a mass market sales (if even marginal) channel for company like Nokia. And Nokia getting Lumia 920 and Lumia 820 to AT&T is way more powerful than selling N95 from their own flagship store or from own site back in the day.

It's about connections and having local presence. Why example Nokia has got it's Lumia 820 and Lumia 920 to be sold via China Mobile with 650 million subs. Something HTC has not managed to do.
Or why Jolla with 50 people workforce was able to do a deal with world largest mobile phone distributor. Something that no other that sized company in as fierce market could even dream about.



Nokia is knee deep in **** at the moment, but nobody can't say that their past doesn't offer advantage to them.

Last edited by tissot; 2012-10-12 at 17:40.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to tissot For This Useful Post:
Reply


 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:55.