3 ms·

Look at Nokia's share price over the last 10 years. It went from $40 down to $10 even before Elop was hired. During his reign it bottomed out at a couple of buc

Look at Nokia's share price over the last 10 years. It went from $40 down to $10 even before Elop was hired. During his reign it bottomed out at a couple of bucks before going back up to about $4 until the acquisition announcement. But by the time he started the price had already fallen 75%, and there was no sign of that decline abetting. The iceberg had already hit, and its name was Apple. Then came the the leaked memo. That was a very costly management mistake, but you don't need a MBA case study to see that, especially after Elop himself admitted it [1]. That's like a storm hitting after the iceberg, and that's the one Elop steered into while the ship was damaged and taking on water. But scrapping Symbian was a necessity, so the storm was inevitable. However, it's folly to think there was only one reason Nokia chose Windows Phone. Things are never that simple. It's known, for example, that they were also actively in talks with Google but could not reach an agreement, leaving Google quite disappointed, as can be surmised from the snarky tweet from Gundotra. I can think of multiple reasons why they went with Microsoft: 1. Google's "Android compatibility test" meant they would be forced to use Google Maps, making their own competing investment in maps useless and a complete write-off. Seeing how they are holding on to their mapping division, it's clear they value it greatly. Worse, we see from the SkyHook lawsuit that Google captures all location data that Android phones collect to improve their maps data. So by making Android phones, Nokia would literally be helping a competitor improve their maps data. I'm guessing this was the real deal-killer. 2. MSFT was willing to provide the billions in cash infusion to keep Nokia on life support. 3. Being the flagship Windows Phone maker, they could get more leverage over Microsoft than they could get over Google. 4. They feared (some would say rightfully) Samsung's dominance in Android, especially since Samsung has vertical integration that can compete with Apple, plus a humongous marketing budget. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Elop#.22Burning_Platform.22_and_Windows_Phone_strategy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Elop#.22Burning_Platfor...

josh2600 13y ago
Jeez, how old do you think the iPhone is? The real threat to Nokia started in 2007 with the introduction of the 3G. They, like Blackberry, couldn't see the iPhones brilliance, BUT Nokia had other non-smartphone divisions that were producing cash. I'd argue that pre-Elop, Nokia was on life support but stable. The burning platform memo was the iceberg and you can see the wreckage. Consider this: Nokia is getting whomped in the Smartphone division because they keep making phones that US consumers never get. You've still got this cash cow of a feature phone business and one day you say "screw it, let's change operating systems". If you don't publish that goddamn memo, the cash flows continue and you're still roughly stable while you figure your shit out. If you publish the memo, even the feature phones stop selling. Pre-Elop Nokia was bad. Post-Burning Platform Nokia is dead. Scrapping Symbian was necessary, but Nokia would hardly be the first company to transition operating systems (most of them don't burn their operating systems before the new one is almost ready). No, IMHO, Elop killed Nokia with a memo. I understand but disagree with your point.

josh2600 13y ago

Jeez, how old do you think the iPhone is? The real threat to Nokia started in 2007 with the introduction of the 3G. They, like Blackberry, couldn't see the iPhones brilliance, BUT Nokia had other non-smartphone divisions that were producing cash. I'd argue that pre-Elop, Nokia was on life support but stable. The burning platform memo was the iceberg and you can see the wreckage. Consider this: Nokia is getting whomped in the Smartphone division because they keep making phones that US consumers never get. You've still got this cash cow of a feature phone business and one day you say "screw it, let's change operating systems". If you don't publish that goddamn memo, the cash flows continue and you're still roughly stable while you figure your shit out. If you publish the memo, even the feature phones stop selling. Pre-Elop Nokia was bad. Post-Burning Platform Nokia is dead. Scrapping Symbian was necessary, but Nokia would hardly be the first company to transition operating systems (most of them don't burn their operating systems before the new one is almost ready). No, IMHO, Elop killed Nokia with a memo. I understand but disagree with your point.