Diary analysts note

Over the past couple of weeks, Habr has delivered several posts (and a couple dozen tantrums in the comments) about the purchase of Nokia by Microsoft and the role of Elop in this process (for example: 1 , 2 , 3 ). As a result of numerous discussions, as well as anonymous plums from super-reliable sources, leading mobile analysts finally established themselves in the opinion that Elop was sent to Nokia to destroy it and sell it to Microsoft at a lower price.

In the last of these topics, someone iliabvf inquired about my opinion on this issue - obviously, six months ago I published a post in which, as it seemed to many, I defended Elop.

Dear sofa analysts! Under the cut there are two tables that you will undoubtedly interest.
')


Here is the distribution of power in the mobile phone sales 10 years ago, in 2003

Nokia 34.70%
Motorola 14.50%
Samsung 10.50%
Siemens 8.40%
SonyEricsson 5.10%
LG 5.00%
Panasonic 3.20%
NEC 2.60%
Alcatel 1.40%
Sagem 1.20%
Others 13.30%

(number of units sold phones, source: gsmserver.com/articles/sales2003.php )

But the distribution of forces in the sales market for the current year:

Samsung 24.7
Nokia 14
Apple 7.3
LG Electronics 3.9
ZTE 3.5
Huawei 2.6
Lenovo 2.5
TCL Communication 2.3
Sony Mobile Communications 2.2
Yulong 1.8
Others 35.1

(number of units sold phones, source: www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2573415 )

And here is more fun, separately on smartphones:

Samsung 31.7
Apple 14.2
LG Electronics 5.1
Lenovo 4.7
ZTE 4.3
Others 40

(from the same place)

Noticing anything? Let's tell: the paradigm shift “cool vendor phones” to “identical flat shovels with a touch screen” could survive 2 (two) manufacturers: Samsung and LG. (Two and a half, if you count half of Sony Ericsson, and that one is more dead than alive.) I honestly don’t know why - but I suppose that, due to their initial paradigm, “we constantly throw away as many models as possible into all segments of all markets. "

Now to how Elop "reduced the cost of Nokii." Wipe your eyes: in the ass market, chew companies with a history of eminent brand-package-patents-and-all-cheap. Motorola, HTC, Blackberry, Siemens Mobile, Panasonic Mobile, BenQ Mobile, Ericsson, NEC Casio Mobile Communications, Alcatel-Lucent, thousands of them, hesitate to list. Who needs your Nokia for 7 billion, wild dumping on the market, all mobile players have got rid of mobile units or have already got rid of it.

None of the old market players was ready for the fact that the mass consumer, instead of the beautifully colored plastic whistles, would like a shovel on an android. Remember, once the main money was made on "designer" phones - Motorola RAZR cost 800 bucks at the time of release, and nobody cared that she had 5.5 megabytes of memory inside.

And now the manufacturer of the premium class is exactly one (Apple), all the rest compete mainly with features and price. Siemens and Motorola, suddenly, life is not prepared for this. And Nokia too.

Yes, more on the issue of mobile operating systems that Nokia developed so abruptly and that Elop ditched to switch to WinFon. Look around: in the market for these cool operating systems, no less than the former giants of the mobile-industry-top-fans: PalmOS / WebOS, Motorola EZX Linux, BBX, BlackBerry Tablet OS, Sallfish, Ubuntu Phone, FirefoxOS, Bada - choose any, half of them lie for free in the form of source codes!

This is what I need. Nokia in 2009 confidently and with the song went straight to hell. It was possible to wait when she stupidly went bankrupt (and Nokia would go bankrupt enchantingly, with her 100 thousand employees), and buy for a dollar - and absolutely no need to send any Trojan horses there. Thanks to Elop, Microsoft bought not a bankrupt, but a company with a more or less stable position in the market, with three years of experience working closely on its axis and with a more or less interesting niche in the market. And those members of the board of directors who hired Elop to sell the company, they already knew what options they had for further “development”. And how to evaluate this activity from a moral point of view is, excuse me, not to me.