The industry leader's share of the market shrank to 28.9% from 34.6%
All make competitors are catching them up.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3786497.stm
Nokia has two fundamental problems.
"One is its relationship with operators to provide them with personalised phones and the other is a product portfolio that is not competitive with the models offered by its rivals."
Nokia Market share crash...
Maybe if most of the Nokias weren't so darn OOGLY and anti-ergonomic they'd have a better chance of retaining market share.
7600 is Frisbee shaped, perfect for hurling across the room,
7700 looks like Stormtrooper couture, someone needs to deflate the 6600, and I would go on, but I think I'll take the only halfway decent phone model, the 6230, and go home
7600 is Frisbee shaped, perfect for hurling across the room,
7700 looks like Stormtrooper couture, someone needs to deflate the 6600, and I would go on, but I think I'll take the only halfway decent phone model, the 6230, and go home
I'm wondering who is funding this so called analysis? Last week I read something totally different, about Nokia regaining its market share. Nokias problem is not its handsets, its how it sells them. The reality is that the market has been comoditised and now its simply a case of who sells the cheapest. Many users have no brand loyalty and unlike Finland will go with the handset thats cheapest and most often heavily subsidised by their network. I've never understod anybody who would ever want a Samsung(anything) nor a Siemens phone(having owned 2), but both companies have been quite successful reinventing/reinvigorating their respective market positions.
Users these days are not really interested in shelling out hundreds on a new phone. Plus not everyone is interested in all the new services pioneered by Nokia and SonyEriccson either. Most of the BBC stuff is nothing other than FUD, having contradicted itself only last week.
That said, if you read anything coming from the PDA world you'd imagine from the "analysts" that the PDA is dead, long live the smartphone. In the end, the truth is generally quite different and if you read the "analyst's" reports from the smartphone side, users are nto interested in really anything other than FM radio, express on covers, sms and cheap calls.
In the end its all about branding, Nokia does not want to sacrifice its brand for Vodaphone and personally I don't blame them. Would anyone want a Saunalahti or Sonera phone......ehhhhhhh
Users these days are not really interested in shelling out hundreds on a new phone. Plus not everyone is interested in all the new services pioneered by Nokia and SonyEriccson either. Most of the BBC stuff is nothing other than FUD, having contradicted itself only last week.
That said, if you read anything coming from the PDA world you'd imagine from the "analysts" that the PDA is dead, long live the smartphone. In the end, the truth is generally quite different and if you read the "analyst's" reports from the smartphone side, users are nto interested in really anything other than FM radio, express on covers, sms and cheap calls.
In the end its all about branding, Nokia does not want to sacrifice its brand for Vodaphone and personally I don't blame them. Would anyone want a Saunalahti or Sonera phone......ehhhhhhh
Who is this dog Franks?
what about the 7610? Its just like the 6600 and "deflated".deojuvame wrote:Maybe if most of the Nokias weren't so darn OOGLY and anti-ergonomic they'd have a better chance of retaining market share.
7600 is Frisbee shaped, perfect for hurling across the room,
7700 looks like Stormtrooper couture, someone needs to deflate the 6600, and I would go on, but I think I'll take the only halfway decent phone model, the 6230, and go home
How much wood would a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood?
Who funds the analysis? Gartner does and sells the details for a very high price.
Last week, you may have seen this, I do not know the primary source, it is not given:
In many markets Nokia phones are also subsidised, but unfortunatley they are currently so unnattractive, that here, when available for just one Estonian Kroon, people are choosing phones that are more attractive, at higher prices.
Samsung are making some very attractive phones that, unlike Nokia phones, are small, good looking, ergonomically sound and reliable. Many of these models are only just becoming available in Finland. Siemens phones use Nokia technology and package it in a much better way. Look at Siemens phones to see what Nokia could ahve been, if they were not so arrogant in the market.
Siemens and Samsung have done what all manufacturers SHOULD do. They are offering products that are wanted by their clients, unlike Nokia which has tended to offer what it wants first and what their clients wanted second. It has, IMHO been some time since the Nokia portfolio offered a range of desirable phones. Just look at their first, abortionate, clamshell design, compare with the Samsung and Sharp models, even the Ericsson model.
The BBC has no 'editorial line' on mobile phones, they report what comes across the desk and can be fact checked. There are contradictory signals in the marketplace, but even Nokia is now opening up to the sad state of play in Nokialand.
Sales of PDAs are disappointing. Sony has just announced that due to poor performance they are leaving the US and European PDA markets. This does not mean that the smartphone market is flourishing, the opposite is the case. The reality is that nobody has yet found a compelling reason for the mass market to buy into using electronics to do what paper and an ordinary mobile can do better. THe smartphone and pda are niche products and will likely remain that way for some time to come.
Here is some data on smartphone and PDA sales, they are tiny in comparison with phone sales.
http://www.theregister.com/2004/04/20/e ... pda_sales/
Most analysts do not have sides, they may have a point of view justified by their research, which is by the nature of the market place never complete, yet with buyers of information baying for the latest insights.
It is, however, almost certainly true that most users of mobile telephony products are interested in cheap calls, although as Nokia now knows, clip on covers are going the way of the dinosaur; why pay extra for a phone that is necessarily bigger to accommodate the external shell? The challengers to Nokia offer no such superfluous items in their popular offerings. They concentrate on design: function, useability and appearance.
Many people are very happy to by an operator branded phone. In Japan, NTT Docomo phones have no manufacturer branding at all, other than an anonymous code. One reason for Nokia's poor showing in Japan was their pig headed refusal to sell a phone without the Nokia brand emblazoned upon it. Silly thing is that a Nokia phone is easily recognisable as such, to those who care, those who don't care, well... they don't care. I do not mind if my phone has a little ladybird stuck on the cover and of course Vodafone's brand is, in its markets, probably as easily identified as any of the manufacturers who supply them as branded, or OEM models.
BTW, in among the bad news about Nokia's market share, they still sold 5 Million more handsets in Q1 '04 than than the same period last year.
Last week, you may have seen this, I do not know the primary source, it is not given:
Yes, the market is commoditised, it is an obvious and natural progression. Nokia can not turn back THAT tide , but their unwillingness to move along with it and benefit from the economies of scale (and scope) that they enjoy are now costing them dear, other manufacturers are now almost at Nokia's position in this respect; a parlous situation for the firm.The Financial Times said yesterday that Nokia was regaining European market share thanks to price cuts, but a sampling of retailers published on Friday by Dow Jones Newswires said the market share loss was continuing or had been halted at best.
In many markets Nokia phones are also subsidised, but unfortunatley they are currently so unnattractive, that here, when available for just one Estonian Kroon, people are choosing phones that are more attractive, at higher prices.
Samsung are making some very attractive phones that, unlike Nokia phones, are small, good looking, ergonomically sound and reliable. Many of these models are only just becoming available in Finland. Siemens phones use Nokia technology and package it in a much better way. Look at Siemens phones to see what Nokia could ahve been, if they were not so arrogant in the market.
Siemens and Samsung have done what all manufacturers SHOULD do. They are offering products that are wanted by their clients, unlike Nokia which has tended to offer what it wants first and what their clients wanted second. It has, IMHO been some time since the Nokia portfolio offered a range of desirable phones. Just look at their first, abortionate, clamshell design, compare with the Samsung and Sharp models, even the Ericsson model.
The BBC has no 'editorial line' on mobile phones, they report what comes across the desk and can be fact checked. There are contradictory signals in the marketplace, but even Nokia is now opening up to the sad state of play in Nokialand.
Sales of PDAs are disappointing. Sony has just announced that due to poor performance they are leaving the US and European PDA markets. This does not mean that the smartphone market is flourishing, the opposite is the case. The reality is that nobody has yet found a compelling reason for the mass market to buy into using electronics to do what paper and an ordinary mobile can do better. THe smartphone and pda are niche products and will likely remain that way for some time to come.
Here is some data on smartphone and PDA sales, they are tiny in comparison with phone sales.
http://www.theregister.com/2004/04/20/e ... pda_sales/
Most analysts do not have sides, they may have a point of view justified by their research, which is by the nature of the market place never complete, yet with buyers of information baying for the latest insights.
It is, however, almost certainly true that most users of mobile telephony products are interested in cheap calls, although as Nokia now knows, clip on covers are going the way of the dinosaur; why pay extra for a phone that is necessarily bigger to accommodate the external shell? The challengers to Nokia offer no such superfluous items in their popular offerings. They concentrate on design: function, useability and appearance.
Many people are very happy to by an operator branded phone. In Japan, NTT Docomo phones have no manufacturer branding at all, other than an anonymous code. One reason for Nokia's poor showing in Japan was their pig headed refusal to sell a phone without the Nokia brand emblazoned upon it. Silly thing is that a Nokia phone is easily recognisable as such, to those who care, those who don't care, well... they don't care. I do not mind if my phone has a little ladybird stuck on the cover and of course Vodafone's brand is, in its markets, probably as easily identified as any of the manufacturers who supply them as branded, or OEM models.
BTW, in among the bad news about Nokia's market share, they still sold 5 Million more handsets in Q1 '04 than than the same period last year.
Sales of PDAs are disappointing. Sony has just announced that due to poor performance they are leaving the US and European PDA markets. This does not mean that the smartphone market is flourishing, the opposite is the case. The reality is that nobody has yet found a compelling reason for the mass market to buy into using electronics to do what paper and an ordinary mobile can do better. THe smartphone and pda are niche products and will likely remain that way for some time to come.
It becomes more of an issue of image, style, and "coolness" more than anything else. A little over a year ago I thought I was doing myself a favor by getting a basic-model PDA, inspired by my geek DH who was also getting one for himself. I used it mostly for storing reminders, meetings, project ideas, shopping lists, and the calculator function. I didn't like the fact that it needed regular back-ups, otherwise the battery would inevitably go dead just at the moment when you need to look up important information, and you lose the memory when replacing the batteries. You also have to learn the code for how to write with it, and if it's not exact the text won't come out right, and by the time you get through erasing and rewriting this and that, it would, as you say, be faster to write it on paper. The screen also wears down, so even though you tap in the right spot it might not go back to the correct menu etc. Very frustrating. Mine has since broken, and I'm leaning towards not getting another one.
Former expat in Finland, now living in New Hampshire USA.
My ass analysts don't have sides, if you'd call the guesstimation they do analysis. Normally a report is paid by someone and inevitably it showers one party with praise whilst pouring scorn on its competitors. Do you rememberthe report Gartner did for Nokia, stating that in 2007 and I'll paraphrase here, phone camera sales would dwarf standard digital cameras and that no one would want a digital camera anymore. From what I've seen the cameras on all phones are atrocious.
Siemens uses the same OS and thats pretty much it. In fact most manufacturers use Symbian, pretty much to lock out Microsoft. In the end Nokia has tried to provide more functionality than their competitors and sacrificed form factor, also they where late providing flip-open phones where IMO people who want that buy sharp or samsung and even then its a basic matter of user taste and nothing else.
Siemens uses the same OS and thats pretty much it. In fact most manufacturers use Symbian, pretty much to lock out Microsoft. In the end Nokia has tried to provide more functionality than their competitors and sacrificed form factor, also they where late providing flip-open phones where IMO people who want that buy sharp or samsung and even then its a basic matter of user taste and nothing else.
Who is this dog Franks?
Hmm, The "loyality to Nokia" in Finland is only based on the fact that Nokia is a finnish company, not that nokia makes very good mobiles.jcooper wrote:Many users have no brand loyalty and unlike Finland will go with the handset thats cheapest and most often heavily subsidised by their network. I've never understod anybody who would ever want a Samsung(anything) nor a Siemens phone(having owned 2), but both companies have been quite successful reinventing/reinvigorating their respective market positions.
So in other countries, where the patriotism isnt a major decision-point, Nokia loses shares of the market because
1. there are much more companies in the mobile-market than 4 years ago, and especially asian companies are coming strongly.
2. Nokia doesnt have any attractive products at the moment besides the 6230. Nokia has slept over a bunch of trends (Clamshells..) or invested on the wrong ones (NGage...). Nokia has lost plenty of its "coolness"
3. the Nokia quality isnt really good compared to other competitors. With cheap noisy plastic-parts in their mobiles, users abused as beta-testers (also done by others like Siemens and its SX1) and poor features (no stereo-mp3 player for a high-end mobile like the 6600? I have to take out the battery to change the Memory-card for an Ngage?)
So basicaly your comment on Samsung and Siemens might look ok if you are self-centered on Finland, but the rest of the world thinks different... and thats where the money is made
Here in Finland, I have done everything I can to blend-in with the Finns, I've changed my hair color, wore differnet clothes, got different
Whatever happened to that company that were going to start making disposable phones for ten bucks or something.... hop-it, hop-out, hop-in..... hop *something*.... I remember there being a fair bit of "media buzz" about them, and then it all went quiet....
It wasnt a TERRIBLE idea....if it is *possible* to reduce the manafacturing costs to such an extent you could buy your pay-as-you-go card with a disposable phone.... same type of model as disposable cameras.....
.... of course the question is, as a disposable phone probably wouldn't be such a fashion item, whether there'd be money in it... but I leave that up to the market analysts.
It wasnt a TERRIBLE idea....if it is *possible* to reduce the manafacturing costs to such an extent you could buy your pay-as-you-go card with a disposable phone.... same type of model as disposable cameras.....
.... of course the question is, as a disposable phone probably wouldn't be such a fashion item, whether there'd be money in it... but I leave that up to the market analysts.
"Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is gooood.........."
- Phil. 17th June 2004
- Phil. 17th June 2004
Siemens uses a Siemens OS, the SX1 is their only symbian phone and they wont make another one as it seems considering allthe trouble they had with the OS. Their future main mobile lines (S65, M65, C65) all have Siemens OS.jcooper wrote:Siemens uses the same OS and thats pretty much it. In fact most manufacturers use Symbian, pretty much to lock out Microsoft. In the end Nokia has tried to provide more functionality than their competitors and sacrificed form factor, also they where late providing flip-open phones where IMO people who want that buy sharp or samsung and even then its a basic matter of user taste and nothing else.
Symbian is not as widespread as you say. Even nokia doesnt make all its mobiles with Symbian, then look how many other manufacturers mobiles models use Symbian. Its a very small %. A lot of companies had problems adapting Symbian to their own models and prefer homemade solutions.
And looking at how more and more mobiles get megapixel-cameras, gardner was right. The digital camera will be a major feature of future mobiles. Making assumptions for the situation in 3 years based on todays technological standard is a bit weird.
Here in Finland, I have done everything I can to blend-in with the Finns, I've changed my hair color, wore differnet clothes, got different
The significant thing is not the OS, Symbian, but the platform. Nokia have done as Intel did in PCs and produced platform designs, these underly the OS, so Siemens and quite a few other firms used the Nokia Series 60 reference platform as it is cheaper to buy in a paltform and modify it than to design from scratch, particularly if the buying firm is behind in the development race.
Strategicaly it is good for Nokia as they are the platfor mholders and thus are in a better position to advance and modify it. On the downside, if you give, or sell the design to another firm, they can learn from it very fast. That seems to have happened. It works for Intel, because they have soemthing to sell, the chipsets, that mobo manufacturers dont make. In phones it is differnt, Nokia do not AFAIK sell chipsets.
Strategicaly it is good for Nokia as they are the platfor mholders and thus are in a better position to advance and modify it. On the downside, if you give, or sell the design to another firm, they can learn from it very fast. That seems to have happened. It works for Intel, because they have soemthing to sell, the chipsets, that mobo manufacturers dont make. In phones it is differnt, Nokia do not AFAIK sell chipsets.
Hmm, correct me if I am wrong, but Series 60 is nothing else than a Softwareset/Userinterface based on the Symbian OS. You have 3 different sets of Series, the Series 60, 90 and UIQ. Its like a desktop for the underlying-Symbian OS.dusty_bin wrote:The significant thing is not the OS, Symbian, but the platform. Nokia have done as Intel did in PCs and produced platform designs, these underly the OS, so Siemens and quite a few other firms used the Nokia Series 60 reference platform as it is cheaper to buy in a paltform and modify it than to design from scratch, particularly if the buying firm is behind in the development race.
Strategicaly it is good for Nokia as they are the platfor mholders and thus are in a better position to advance and modify it. On the downside, if you give, or sell the design to another firm, they can learn from it very fast. That seems to have happened. It works for Intel, because they have soemthing to sell, the chipsets, that mobo manufacturers dont make. In phones it is differnt, Nokia do not AFAIK sell chipsets.
"Optimized for the Symbian OS and available to be licensed by external OEMs, the Series 60 Platform is a source code product that manufacturers can port and integrate into their own hardware designs. Series 60 Platform 2nd Edition is based on Symbian OS v7.0S."
http://www.series60.com/technicalinfo
Besides Nokia and Siemens for their SX1, series 60-mobiles are seldom (Samsung has one and also Sendo, as well as a bunch of very small other manufacturers which are not really relevant for the bigger market).
Sony-Ericsson uses the UIQ with their P800/900. All these series are based on Symbian if i remember correctly.
As I said, I dont know of any other Siemens (to stay with that example) based on the series 60. Do you have any more info on that?
Here in Finland, I have done everything I can to blend-in with the Finns, I've changed my hair color, wore differnet clothes, got different
I am not an expert, I don't play one on TV, but AFAIK the platform sits UNDER Symbian, as your cite notes, it is optimised for Symbian, but it is not the only choice. I would think of it, as akin to DOS under Microsoft's care. Optimised to run WIndows, but capable of being used on its own or with other operating systems. Microsoft's control of the produc enabled them to maintain a competitive advantage.
Yes, Series 60 is a software platform, unlike the Intel reference systmem which is a motherboard design, designed to speed the introduction and implementation of Intel chipsets and processors.
BTW there are five series 60 vendors, who according to Nokia ship some 60% of all mobile phones.
Yes, Series 60 is a software platform, unlike the Intel reference systmem which is a motherboard design, designed to speed the introduction and implementation of Intel chipsets and processors.
BTW there are five series 60 vendors, who according to Nokia ship some 60% of all mobile phones.
"The Series 60 Platform consists of a user interface (Series 60 UI) for the user to navigate and interact with the phone's data and software, and some programs (Series 60 applications) that provide advanced functions for the phone, for example messaging and calendar. Series 60 Platform runs on top of an open operating system (Symbian OS)."
http://www.series60.com/faq
So it seems series 60 REQUIRES symbian. You cant make series60 run on your own proprietary OS.
That would also explain why there are so few series60 mobiles from other companies than nokia.
Smartphones only make about 5-10% of the 2004 market, so their importance is not that high i think.
The fact that the 5 vendors that have licenced series 60 make 60% of the market share doesn´t mean they make these 60% with the series60 or symbian. As I said, Siemens and Samsung for example have only one symbian/series60 mobile in their portofolio. Other big players like motorola have none.
Dont we have some Nokia-people here to enlighten us about the series 60 and symbian?
http://www.series60.com/faq
So it seems series 60 REQUIRES symbian. You cant make series60 run on your own proprietary OS.
That would also explain why there are so few series60 mobiles from other companies than nokia.
Smartphones only make about 5-10% of the 2004 market, so their importance is not that high i think.
The fact that the 5 vendors that have licenced series 60 make 60% of the market share doesn´t mean they make these 60% with the series60 or symbian. As I said, Siemens and Samsung for example have only one symbian/series60 mobile in their portofolio. Other big players like motorola have none.
Dont we have some Nokia-people here to enlighten us about the series 60 and symbian?
Here in Finland, I have done everything I can to blend-in with the Finns, I've changed my hair color, wore differnet clothes, got different