Gizmodo article about "why europeans buy nokia's" was quite offensive.
The author, himself a brit, followed the classic "i was the first one to own a nokia but stopped 10 years ago when they lost the plot".
Following with people buy nokia's because they are cheap.
With that sort of tech journalism no wonder the americans are so confused. Telling a population of 300M that Nokia is doing so well because its cheap and so easily available is inaccurate and detrimental to the phone market. HTC, Samsung, Motorolla now enjoy the US market with Android's support. Nokia is so popular in the UK/Europe because - it is dependable (yes i said that). Nokia is used widely in the business community (my firm of 120k employees gives each employee a nokia), Nokia's give you a lot of functionality for very little (free maps, no lock down?).
Anyway i've lost interest in my own post but basically what i mean to say is just because Nokia isnt jumping on the Android wagon and it stands as a strong european company (unlike the Asian HTC, Motorolla etc who are basically slaves to the american market) which is the envy of the Americans as it refuses to get on its knees to serve the Americans at their conditions.
As for Nokia losing so much profit - well the world is ever changing. Nokia i suppose historically hasnt been a consumer blood sucking company. I've yet to actually pay for a Nokia handset (where as i feel as i should). True the carriers in the UK subsidise the phones heavily but the N900 given away free on a £35 p/m contract? thats theft. Wheras Apple charge you that PLUS the cost of their handset. Basic analysis but easy to see why Apple is making so much money.
I did not read the financial reports. I merely quoted what Gizmodo said - "profit". Maybe in the US profit is used to mean net income or maybe Gizmodo intentionally used net income as profits to paint as bad a picture of Nokia as possible. Either way your issue should be with Gizmodo and not with me. Unless I am expected to read the financial reports of a company before quoting something from an article
You consider a quote from gizmodo credible ? No the issue is with you, and your zeal to mock Nokia. You ought to know better Hahaha
You consider a quote from gizmodo credible ? No the issue is with you, and your zeal to mock Nokia. You ought to know better Hahaha
Very funny. I have no zeal whatsoever to mock Nokia given that in ten years of owning mobile phones I have never owned anything other than Nokia. What I do know is that Nokia has always been king but is far from king now and something needs to be done to arrest the situation before it gets even worse. I think Nokia recognises that which is why it has taken on a new CEO.
Are you insane? You think a company distributes all its profits in dividends? That is far from the case. Nintendo for example is sitting on billions and billions of cash. The board decides out of the available profits how much to distribute. Decisions will also be made as to how much to pay staff and how much to spend on R&D.
A company which brings in mad profits and has lets say $10bn cash is almost more likely to spend more on R&D than a company that has only $500m cash.
And yes increasing R&B budget does not automatically result in an exact proportionate increase in product quality but can you seriously suggest that increased cash on R&D and getting the best staff on board does not increase likelihood of increased product quality?
And the shared view here that things are so rosey at Nokia (shared with Nokia execs it seems) and they should continue as they have been may be the reason why Apple has come out of nowhere and blown them away and why it will not be a shock to see HTC do the same.
you must be insane and missing the big picture. afaik nokias r&d spending has been about the same except a drop because of 50% less new models to market -decision. so r&d budget hasn't dropped from 9 million to 300k.......
you must be insane and missing the big picture. afaik nokias r&d spending has been about the same except a drop because of 50% less new models to market -decision. so r&d budget hasn't dropped from 9 million to 300k.......
I am not saying it has dropped. I am saying a reduction in R&D budget (as well as other cost cutting) is a possible effect of falling profits (and therefore less cash). Just like during the recession many companies laid staff off. Because they had less cash they needed to cut costs and easy way to cut costs is to cut staff. For a tech company R&D is another way to cut costs.
If you feel that is not the case then I fear it is you that is insane and missing the big picture. It may take 5 years of falling profits for Nokia to cut R&D. It may take another company 1 year. It is an executive decision and will vary from company to company and industry to industry. But it is certainly a possible effect of falling profits and reduction in cash pile.
I am not saying it has dropped. I am saying a reduction in R&D budget (as well as other cost cutting) is a possible effect of falling profits (and therefore less cash). Just like during the recession many companies laid staff off. Because they had less cash they needed to cut costs and easy way to cut costs is to cut staff. For a tech company R&D is another way to cut costs.
If you feel that is not the case then I fear it is you that is insane and missing the big picture. It may take 5 years of falling profits for Nokia to cut R&D. It may take another company 1 year. It is an executive decision and will vary from company to company and industry to industry. But it is certainly a possible effect of falling profits and reduction in cash pile.
whats this thing with possible, vary, may etc? Your statement was a bit more solid earlier wasn't it?
