So, the Nokia is Sold

[irnbru]

how will this effect the Job Market here? Will we hear more lay-offs and job cuts in IT again ?

No Microsoft will pour billions into Finland, probably move all their other businesses here. Stop hiring cheap labour. Only hire Finns here (paying good rates of pay). With the billions of extra tax revenue created things look pretty rosy for the future.

[Flossy1978]

Is that sarcasm or for real?

Why would a company come to a country where the wages would be rather high, compared to moving everything to a country where wages are low, like India etc?

[Adrian42]

Why would a company come to a country where the wages would be rather high, compared to moving everything to a country where wages are low, like India etc?

There is a relationship between quality and price.

Many companies have gotten back from moving their software development to countries like India after they saw the average quality they got there.

For simple repetitive tasks like testing India is perfect, but for actual software development you often get a much better result in Europe or the US.

[rinso]

Finland has a relative strong IT potential.
And with the Nokia lay-offs in the past, there is a reservoir of IT-res who will become cheaper over time (when the hand-outs dry up)

Why would a company come to a country where the wages would be rather high, compared to moving everything to a country where wages are low, like India etc?

Nokia also used this option, but it found a balance between outsourcing and home quality.

[irnbru]

Is that sarcasm or for real?

Why would a company come to a country where the wages would be rather high, compared to moving everything to a country where wages are low, like India etc?

Because Microsoft cares.

[gfunho]

Nokia also used this option, but it found a balance between outsourcing and home quality.

Or didn't find it (and that is why this happened).

[irnbru]

For simple repetitive tasks like testing India is perfect.

The old ones are the best.

[Adrian42]

Nokia also used this option, but it found a balance between outsourcing and home quality.

Or didn't find it (and that is why this happened).

Nokia was selling more smartphones than Apple and Samsung combined when Stephen Elop took over.

Burning all non-Microsoft platforms was a clever way for lowering the value of Nokia until it was cheap enough for his master to buy...

[gfunho]

Nokia was selling more smartphones than Apple and Samsung combined when Stephen Elop took over.
Burning all non-Microsoft platforms was a clever way for lowering the value of Nokia until it was cheap enough for his master to buy...

Except in the deal with Microsoft back then they received 1.000 million €uro that they needed to pay their salaries. Without the deal, they would have had no money. Market share was going down very fast, symbian phones were undesired, Meego did never reach the market (still has not, since Jolla has not delivered yet a single unit and the N9 was definitely NOT Meego, but a refurbished Maemo).

They needed a deal with somebody that offers 2 things: a desirable mobile OS and cash up front. With the MS deal they thought they will get 2, but they only got 1. The cash. When they tried to negotiate with google and ask for money to start using Android, they did not get any money for it. So there was not much that they could do.

When you are in this condition and you need money and you have zero possibility of financing (hello, southern european crisis), you might get the money in exchange for conditions that are NOT favorable to you.

--

Now they are out of cash again and they need to sell the bad part of the company to be able to finance themselves again. First think they wanted, cash up front and a financing line of 3 times 500 million (so another 1.5 billion in financing). The financing is needed probably to pay salaries again. The 32k employees that go to MS also reduce Nokia's payload quite a bit.

The line of facts did not start with Elop coming as CEO. Elop was the CEO put by Nokia board exactly for this. To get a deal with Microsoft that lets them survive ( even if a lot smaller ) in the long term.

However, If you want to believe that this is only the fault of a stupid canadian CEO and that with Vanjoki now they will be market leaders, be my guest.

[Adrian42]

Nokia was selling more smartphones than Apple and Samsung combined when Stephen Elop took over.
Burning all non-Microsoft platforms was a clever way for lowering the value of Nokia until it was cheap enough for his master to buy...

Except in the deal with Microsoft back then they received 1.000 million €uro that they needed to pay their salaries. Without the deal, they would have had no money.

That's nonsense, and you couldn't be farther away from the truth.

The decision to switch to Windows Phone was in February 2011.

Nokia made profits through all of 2010.
In the 3 months of Q4 2010 alone Nokia had € 750 million profits.

As a matter of fact, prior to Stephen Elop there had only been one quarter (Q3 2009) in the whole millennium when Nokia was not profitable.

Nokia's financial problems only started after the announcement of the switch to Windows Phone, and Nokia was making losses of nearly € 5 billion in the 1.5 years after that announcement.

One might argue about many aspects of the switch of Nokia to Windows Phone, but when you claim that the reason was the Nokia needed cash then that is the exact opposite of the facts.

[Upphew]

Except in the deal with Microsoft back then they received 1.000 million €uro that they needed to pay their salaries. Without the deal, they would have had no money.

That's nonsense, and you couldn't be farther away from the truth.

The decision to switch to Windows Phone was in February 2011.

Nokia made profits through all of 2010.
In the 3 months of Q4 2010 alone Nokia had € 750 million profits.

As a matter of fact, prior to Stephen Elop there had only been one quarter (Q3 2009) in the whole millennium when Nokia was not profitable.

Nokia's financial problems only started after the announcement of the switch to Windows Phone, and Nokia was making losses of nearly € 5 billion in the 1.5 years after that announcement.

One might argue about many aspects of the switch of Nokia to Windows Phone, but when you claim that the reason was the Nokia needed cash then that is the exact opposite of the facts.

And here is the proof of that nonsense: http://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NYSE/C ... ent/Assets