Skip to main content

Unavoidable or Machiavellian?

There's a bit of a rush to proclaim Stephen Elop's part in the last few years of the Nokia mobile story as that of a Trojan Horse, planted there to drive Nokia's value down and allow Microsoft to snatch the business up on the cheap.
 
That's a bizarre conclusion to reach when you consider the risks that Microsoft have acquired with the business. In fact it's probably safe to say that Nokia's poor financial position drove Microsoft to the purchase rather than the other way around.

Nokia sells better than three in four Windows Phones. Nokia was running out of money. Nokia had significant political and procedural problems. The risk to Microsoft was that Nokia failed and pulled out of the phone business, or worse sold it to a rival. Leaving Microsoft's platform ambitions in tatters.

Actual sales of Lumia handsets are growing nicely, so jumping in to take ownership now makes no other sense, unless you consider the disastrous financials at Nokia as the compelling reason to complete.

Was Stephen Elop's role that of a Trojan Horse or was he guilty of incompetence? Neither. Nokia's problems were so deep and entrenched that turning the business around was taking a significantly longer time than anyone expected.

Nokia had been a slave to its Symbian division for too long. The software was outdated and their handsets slow in arriving; turning out to be ill conceived and poorly executed when they finally did. The Maemo/Meego output was technically superior but politically obstructed within the company. The result? Three tablets and two handsets over a period of several years. Samsung churns out that many new products every weekday morning before lunchtime.

And Samsung was the major factor in pushing Nokia to Microsoft. Whilst many question why Android wasn't chosen a review of the state of the market in 2011 clearly demonstrates that Nokia had no other choice. Samsung were rampant on Android and neither Sony-Ericsson nor Motorola were able to compete. For Nokia, adopting a new platform, with limited funds to support development and such strong competition this would have only hastened the end.

Ultimately the gamble with Windows Phone failed, but Microsoft's financial support allowed the company to transition to the new platform and start to grow a market share

Can Microsoft develop the business further? That's the big question. Failures with the Kin, Zune and Surface suggest that customers just don't want Microsoft branded hardware devices. The Xbox is the only notable exception and that doesn't really shout about its origins. A Nokia Lumia is inevitably going to sell more than a Microsoft one.

With mobile devices demonstrably the future of technology Microsoft has to deliver on its $7bn gamble. And that's looking like a mammoth task right now.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…

WhartonBrooks Indiegogo Windows 10 Mobile Even More Doomed To Failure Than Usual

WhartonBrooks is currently crowd-funding its latest Windows Mobile smartphone on Indiegogo. If crowdfunding isn't already a bad enough idea, a company trying to crowdfund a Windows Mobile device should be warning enough for you.
Not that anyone seems to be taking the project too seriously. With a few weeks left to run the campaign has managed to ensnare just 2% of its $1.1m target.
If you want a better indication of how few Window Mobile loyalists remain I doubt there is one. Of 3,900 Windows Phone enthusiasts Wharton Brooks was seeking for its new phone, it has managed to entice just 50.
Windows for Phones is dead, even if the corpse hasn't stopped twitching yet.