8 ms·

Google to close Motorola smartphone factory in Texas

60 points by oori 12y ago

oori 12y ago
Google's Motorola Mobility has said it will close its Fort Worth, Texas factory after its Moto X smartphone failed to appeal to consumers. The facility - which is the only smartphone factory in the US - opened in May of last year. At its peak, the factory employed 3,800 people, although now only 700 workers remain.
- pyre 12y ago
  It's only been open a year and is already down to 700 workers from a peak of 3800?
  - higherpurpose 12y ago
    Maybe most of the original ones were contractors.
    - pasbesoin 12y ago
      Having read about this in a Fort Worth paper, apparently most of the current "employees" are contractors. I gained the impression that this was always the case. P.S. Meaning, people employed by a third-party contracting company. You know the drill...
- gonzo 12y ago
  but Android is winning.
owenwil 12y ago
Is it Google closing this, or Lenovo, now that the sale has completed? It seems to me that the agenda has changed now that it's changed hands.
- IBM 12y ago
  The deal will close later this year according to the WSJ. It's still owned by Google.
  - the_ancient 12y ago
    Which probably means Lenovo has no interest in buying the factory and Google will have no use for it after the sale
- makomk 12y ago
  Yeah, Lenovo aren't going to get the same symbolic benefit from manufacturing in the US as Google did.
ZeroGravitas 12y ago
It's not really a smartphone factory though is it? It just assembles the custom casings.
_wmd 12y ago
Woah, talk about fickle.. The future of manufacturing is going to be standard platforms with high customization around them. Common components and then customized wrappings, if you will. The reason is that consumers are pretty sophisticated and want their own thing but you can't build a phone for each and every person that's different. It's very difficult to achieve that…with a supply chain that's in Asia, even with modern jets. It has as much to do with time zones and culture and language. There's reasons why in a (creative) hyper-competitive industry you're going to end up with advanced manufacturing in the U.S. And this is a trend that we're beginning to see in many industries — Eric Schmidt, 2013-08-02 http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/baig/2013/08/01/eric-schmidt-dennis-woodside-on-making-motox-in-us/2609785/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/baig/2013/08/01...
- psbp 12y ago
  You realize that Motorola has been sold to Lenovo, an asian company?
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - _wmd 12y ago
    Yes thank you, I was reminded by the 4th sentence of the article. If you continue reading all the way to the 5th sentence, you'll discover that deal has not yet been finalized.
    - psbp 12y ago
      I doubt Lenovo would appreciate a contract in a market they're not necessarily interested in pursuing.
      - eloisant 12y ago
        Lenovo definitely wants the brand recognition and distribution network of Motorola in US, but I don't see why they would want to keep the factory there.
scragg 12y ago
Moto X is a good phone. It was a huge disappointment when I heard about the price at launch. It could not compete on price with the Nexus line. Add that to the fact only AT&T customers get the moto customizer. Too bad, I live within a few miles of the factory.
- drewnick 12y ago
  You can customize the Moto X from any carrier now, the exclusive ATT deal ended last year.
- jug6ernaut 12y ago
  > It was a huge disappointment when I heard about the price at launch. It could not compete on price with the Nexus line. Sigh. The nexus line is sold AT COST. If you expected a retail phone to compete against a phone that is not trying to make any money you will always be disappointed.
  - jonathansizz 12y ago
    Well, the Moto X and the Nexus 5 are now indeed the same price. Motorola did have several major glitches with the Moto X launch: price too high, quality control issues at the assembly plant, mediocre camera software, customization limited to AT&T contracts. By the time they'd fixed those problems, they'd missed the boat. I bought my Moto X a few weeks ago and it's the best phone I've ever seen, but all the buzz has moved elsewhere. I hope for their sake that Motorola get the launch of the forthcoming X+1 right, because they make a very strong line of phones and I'd love to see them succeed.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
gonzo 12y ago
"Don't be evil."
- beaner 12y ago
  What is evil about this?
  - hosay123 12y ago
    Perhaps it would be better to ask an employee who 8 months ago may have started a family on the strength of a loud endorsement to move manufacturing back home. What's the real harm? Just a few empty promises, no laws broken and a mere 700 dashed spirits, but it's all worthwhile in pursuit of the dream - whatever it happens to be this quarter.
    - DannyBee 12y ago
      So they should do what the army does, and spend billions to produce tanks that end up somewhere in the desert because the army doesn't want them, and it may cause some job loss?
      - hosay123 12y ago
        Of course not, that wouldn't be good business, but we're not concerned with that here. The parent comment asks what is evil about it, which is to ask whether it is moral to spend millions on an advertising campaign that implies job security, and less than a year later turn those same jobs into a fire sale. There is a huge continuum of possibilities for how the Motorola sale should play out, but when the reality is an extremely profitable corporation pulling the rug from under 700 low wage contractors with minimal notice, despite explicitly claiming the contrary less than a year previous, just setting fire to the building and walking away somehow strikes me as a particularly immoral outcome.
        tptacek 12y ago
        So they should instead do what?
bobbles 12y ago
Maybe if they wanted the launch to be a success they should've opened it up to more than one country and more than one carrier
spinchange 12y ago
It's been reported that Google senior management was never really committed to Motorola or the handset business[1]. The fact they took so long to launch a new flagship product (after first trying to use the IP arsenal against Apple while simultaneously winding down much of Motorola's other lines and businesses) and then selling the company mere months after the launch of it, seem to back this up circumstantially. I will say this, The Moto X is a really solid product. The smart display, speech recognition capabilities and Moto Assist make it one of the nicest Android phones I've ever used for practical purposes. The Moto G and Moto E look to be really solid values as well. The bad thing about this kind of corporate maneuvering here in the states is it makes the "American-made" angle they were playing for PR & political purposes seem manipulated and cynical. Maybe that's just not that important to most people though. I'm sure it was important to the people working there. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/motorolas-super-powered-google-phone-2014-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/motorolas-super-powered-googl...
- QuantumChaos 12y ago
  >Maybe that's just not that important to most people though. It's not important to me: I'm satisfied that the theory of comparative advantage shows that free trade is good, and protectionism (even in the form of individuals preferring goods made in their own nation) is harmful to all countries. Presumably Google will put a positive spin on anything they do, and make the arguments that are best received by the public, not the most logical arguments. >I'm sure it was important to the people working there. Switching from supplier A to supplier B will always be bad for supplier A. Does that mean we should never switch suppliers? Or maybe it means we should always switch supplies (since it's good for supplier B).
  - spinchange 12y ago
    I almost elaborated in my comment that for me personally it wasn't about protectionism, as much as a desire for a country that literally invented many high technology industries to simply regain some basic capacity and infrastructure to produce those goods again. I don't think it's incongruous to value free trade and the advantages of specialization and globalization but also like to see one's country able to produce more physical goods than just hamburgers or lattes.
gdewilde 12y ago
Technically users have a ton of influence on products but it doesn't seem very organized. Websites are usually limited to product information but it shouldn't be to hard to expand the info with production locations, political situation and wages. Profit distribution tells me a lot about a product. To support billionaires paying the lowest wages in the world could just be weird enough that one doesn't want to have any part in it. I think a cool technical solution would be to increase the prices by an abuse scaled donation to a relevant aid organization. That way the end user doesn't have to investigate all the ins and outs of the geopolitical circus. Comparing features is already hard enough.

60 points by oori 12y ago

oori 12y ago

Google's Motorola Mobility has said it will close its Fort Worth, Texas factory after its Moto X smartphone failed to appeal to consumers. The facility - which is the only smartphone factory in the US - opened in May of last year. At its peak, the factory employed 3,800 people, although now only 700 workers remain.

pyre 12y ago
It's only been open a year and is already down to 700 workers from a peak of 3800?
- higherpurpose 12y ago
  Maybe most of the original ones were contractors.
  - pasbesoin 12y ago
    Having read about this in a Fort Worth paper, apparently most of the current "employees" are contractors. I gained the impression that this was always the case. P.S. Meaning, people employed by a third-party contracting company. You know the drill...
gonzo 12y ago
but Android is winning.

owenwil 12y ago

Is it Google closing this, or Lenovo, now that the sale has completed? It seems to me that the agenda has changed now that it's changed hands.

IBM 12y ago
The deal will close later this year according to the WSJ. It's still owned by Google.
- the_ancient 12y ago
  Which probably means Lenovo has no interest in buying the factory and Google will have no use for it after the sale
makomk 12y ago
Yeah, Lenovo aren't going to get the same symbolic benefit from manufacturing in the US as Google did.

ZeroGravitas 12y ago

It's not really a smartphone factory though is it? It just assembles the custom casings.

_wmd 12y ago

Woah, talk about fickle.. The future of manufacturing is going to be standard platforms with high customization around them. Common components and then customized wrappings, if you will. The reason is that consumers are pretty sophisticated and want their own thing but you can't build a phone for each and every person that's different. It's very difficult to achieve that…with a supply chain that's in Asia, even with modern jets. It has as much to do with time zones and culture and language. There's reasons why in a (creative) hyper-competitive industry you're going to end up with advanced manufacturing in the U.S. And this is a trend that we're beginning to see in many industries — Eric Schmidt, 2013-08-02 http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/baig/2013/08/01/eric-schmidt-dennis-woodside-on-making-motox-in-us/2609785/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/baig/2013/08/01...

psbp 12y ago
You realize that Motorola has been sold to Lenovo, an asian company?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- _wmd 12y ago
  Yes thank you, I was reminded by the 4th sentence of the article. If you continue reading all the way to the 5th sentence, you'll discover that deal has not yet been finalized.
  - psbp 12y ago
    I doubt Lenovo would appreciate a contract in a market they're not necessarily interested in pursuing.
    - eloisant 12y ago
      Lenovo definitely wants the brand recognition and distribution network of Motorola in US, but I don't see why they would want to keep the factory there.

scragg 12y ago

Moto X is a good phone. It was a huge disappointment when I heard about the price at launch. It could not compete on price with the Nexus line. Add that to the fact only AT&T customers get the moto customizer. Too bad, I live within a few miles of the factory.

drewnick 12y ago
You can customize the Moto X from any carrier now, the exclusive ATT deal ended last year.
jug6ernaut 12y ago
> It was a huge disappointment when I heard about the price at launch. It could not compete on price with the Nexus line. Sigh. The nexus line is sold AT COST. If you expected a retail phone to compete against a phone that is not trying to make any money you will always be disappointed.
- jonathansizz 12y ago
  Well, the Moto X and the Nexus 5 are now indeed the same price. Motorola did have several major glitches with the Moto X launch: price too high, quality control issues at the assembly plant, mediocre camera software, customization limited to AT&T contracts. By the time they'd fixed those problems, they'd missed the boat. I bought my Moto X a few weeks ago and it's the best phone I've ever seen, but all the buzz has moved elsewhere. I hope for their sake that Motorola get the launch of the forthcoming X+1 right, because they make a very strong line of phones and I'd love to see them succeed.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

gonzo 12y ago

"Don't be evil."

beaner 12y ago
What is evil about this?
- hosay123 12y ago
  Perhaps it would be better to ask an employee who 8 months ago may have started a family on the strength of a loud endorsement to move manufacturing back home. What's the real harm? Just a few empty promises, no laws broken and a mere 700 dashed spirits, but it's all worthwhile in pursuit of the dream - whatever it happens to be this quarter.
  - DannyBee 12y ago
    So they should do what the army does, and spend billions to produce tanks that end up somewhere in the desert because the army doesn't want them, and it may cause some job loss?
    - hosay123 12y ago
      Of course not, that wouldn't be good business, but we're not concerned with that here. The parent comment asks what is evil about it, which is to ask whether it is moral to spend millions on an advertising campaign that implies job security, and less than a year later turn those same jobs into a fire sale. There is a huge continuum of possibilities for how the Motorola sale should play out, but when the reality is an extremely profitable corporation pulling the rug from under 700 low wage contractors with minimal notice, despite explicitly claiming the contrary less than a year previous, just setting fire to the building and walking away somehow strikes me as a particularly immoral outcome.
      - tptacek 12y ago
        So they should instead do what?

bobbles 12y ago

Maybe if they wanted the launch to be a success they should've opened it up to more than one country and more than one carrier

spinchange 12y ago

It's been reported that Google senior management was never really committed to Motorola or the handset business[1]. The fact they took so long to launch a new flagship product (after first trying to use the IP arsenal against Apple while simultaneously winding down much of Motorola's other lines and businesses) and then selling the company mere months after the launch of it, seem to back this up circumstantially. I will say this, The Moto X is a really solid product. The smart display, speech recognition capabilities and Moto Assist make it one of the nicest Android phones I've ever used for practical purposes. The Moto G and Moto E look to be really solid values as well. The bad thing about this kind of corporate maneuvering here in the states is it makes the "American-made" angle they were playing for PR & political purposes seem manipulated and cynical. Maybe that's just not that important to most people though. I'm sure it was important to the people working there. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/motorolas-super-powered-google-phone-2014-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/motorolas-super-powered-googl...

QuantumChaos 12y ago
>Maybe that's just not that important to most people though. It's not important to me: I'm satisfied that the theory of comparative advantage shows that free trade is good, and protectionism (even in the form of individuals preferring goods made in their own nation) is harmful to all countries. Presumably Google will put a positive spin on anything they do, and make the arguments that are best received by the public, not the most logical arguments. >I'm sure it was important to the people working there. Switching from supplier A to supplier B will always be bad for supplier A. Does that mean we should never switch suppliers? Or maybe it means we should always switch supplies (since it's good for supplier B).
- spinchange 12y ago
  I almost elaborated in my comment that for me personally it wasn't about protectionism, as much as a desire for a country that literally invented many high technology industries to simply regain some basic capacity and infrastructure to produce those goods again. I don't think it's incongruous to value free trade and the advantages of specialization and globalization but also like to see one's country able to produce more physical goods than just hamburgers or lattes.

gdewilde 12y ago

Technically users have a ton of influence on products but it doesn't seem very organized. Websites are usually limited to product information but it shouldn't be to hard to expand the info with production locations, political situation and wages. Profit distribution tells me a lot about a product. To support billionaires paying the lowest wages in the world could just be weird enough that one doesn't want to have any part in it. I think a cool technical solution would be to increase the prices by an abuse scaled donation to a relevant aid organization. That way the end user doesn't have to investigate all the ins and outs of the geopolitical circus. Comparing features is already hard enough.