Stephen Elop: the focus of much Nokia shareholder anger

7. Maxwell.R (Posts: 214; Member since: 20 Sep 2012)

They didn't sell the mapping service. They sold rights for Microsoft to use the service for a number of years, guaranteeing revenue for Nokia.

8. tadaa (Posts: 267; Member since: 18 Apr 2013)

they didn't

6. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)

Lets see if he calls XBOX a burning Platform :)

10. elitewolverine (Posts: 5184; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)

Because before him Nokia was on such good footing against droid/apple. Without MS, they would be like BB looking for a buyer. MS has saved so many nokia jobs it is not even funny.

19. illiad (Posts: 128; Member since: 07 Feb 2012)

saved so many nokia jobs?? if nokia had got into android, or even just linux, they would be getting **more** staff!!!

a few months later, wonder if MS does some staff trimming.... :/

25. StreetNerd (Posts: 819; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)

if they went the android way they would have become the next HTC, they cant compete with the vertically integrated Samsung business.... Samsung is king

31. Finalflash (Posts: 3107; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)

Right just like Apple is going HTC because they can't compete with the vertically integrated Samsung. If Nokia didn't have to wait 3 years for WP 8 and get stuck with ageing garbage like MS's other WP OSes they could have fought Samsung 1 to 1 with Android and would likely be the equivalent of Apple right now. But no, they let 3 years go before they had a competitive anything and now they're with the same idiots who were too little too late getting into the hardware business too little too late. They will also lose to the vertically integrated Samsung (and even LG/Sony) because guess what hardware components MS makes......NOTHING. Stop making excuses and just watch what remains of Nokia burn. Their Xbox division is still in the red, their hardware (surface) division is still in the red, and now this division is about to get even more red.

34. jedpatrickdatu (Posts: 167; Member since: 24 Jan 2013)

To be fair to Elop, Nokia was already dying rapidly with Symbian before he became CEO.

Also, Apple uses iOS, not Android. iOS is pretty different from Android so that does not put them into direct competition with Samsung. That's what Nokia wanted - a different OS.

If Nokia went Android, they are not likely to win against Samsung, because the name "Samsung" has already become synonymous with Android in the mass market. Have a look at the other Android competitors like Sony and LG - surviving, but not thriving. HTC is even dying despite their high quality phones. Nokia could have had the same fate.

40. MartyK (Posts: 819; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)

Nope, you're wrong,
HTC was the king of andriods, then Samsung came along and listened to what the people wanted, which was hardware and power.

Nokia was known for its hardware and quality, they chose to wait and go with window.. If they would put a android phone and window phone out, which do you think will sell the most?.

33. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)

They got bought out in a desperate move as rumour was that they were contemplating moving to Android.

35. Whateverman (Posts: 3262; Member since: 17 May 2009)

But HTC is still alive and kicking. It's their own fault they aren't doing well. Not even Android can save a company that doesn't market itself. Motorola is even doing a better job than HTC right now. Not to mention the lack of support and the hit or miss 4 Ultra Pixel cameras. Nokia would have crushed them all. Well, maybe not Samsung, but they have taken a huge chunk of the pie.

36. microsoftnokiawin (Posts: 1178; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)

in 2011 Samsung wasn't king no one was king and meego would've taken Nokia a long way further than Wp back !

43. nokia12 (Posts: 486; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)

@streetnerd and those saying if nokia went android they would be like htc , please stop this comment it's a lame excuse..

why is htc failing despie creating sturdy hardware ?

because of Pricing and marketing failure .

htc phones are more expensive than samsung counterparts , there are hardly any advertisements . This is their own problem , nokia might look very small to you guys because you are in USA , but come out of it and see other parts of world , the popularity that microsoft and apple as a brand recognition is to you there , nokia was more than that here...
look at n9 despite being released in minor , less quantity, with no support and overpriced price sold more than entire lumia range in 2011 . what does that tell you ? you talk about vertical integration of samsung ? news flash for you samsung was windows oem before nokia was if samsung is also on windows phone then how can you say samsung has advantage ? samsung earlier was also on symbian but nokia still kicked samsung ? the reason is people wanted androdi but since nokia did not have android they went the samsung way because of no choice.. lets say that in any senario even if samsung had beaten nokia , you easily could expect nokia to be no 2 , all places from 2nd spot to 8th spot are held by local chinese players .. they all are making profits .. maybe not as much as samsung but those companies are healthy and look at nokia.. i could go on and on showing you facts

46. Tomfromsouth (Posts: 76; Member since: 02 Apr 2012)

Disagree, Nokia strongest point has been cameras and is such their selling point. They have an advantage over any other Android manufacturer in that aspect. My presumption is people don't buy Nokia specifically for WP (then HTC would be doing just as well as Nokia in the WP division), and rather the selling point is the Nokia brand name they have built for having outstanding cameras (possible amongst others such as maps and music). Would they have done better on Android - difficult to say - but they definitely would've given them an edge HTC don't have. And I own an HTC One X and yes I admit Nokia produces better camera phones.

47. Tomfromsouth (Posts: 76; Member since: 02 Apr 2012)

And one more thing, receiving the golden handshake he got for frankly a poor performance and using personal reasons is not an adequate excuse. How many more jobs and innovation could've been injected into Nokia the $25mill had gone to staff and development. Its bull. If the staff are unhappy then they have every right to direct their anger at him.

49. nokia12 (Posts: 486; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)

yes nokia was already declining when elop took over but the pace was slow and it would have taken 5-6 years at least at that pace to die but with the help of elop he managed to destroy it in 3 years. ok let's remove that point but answer these questions

it was clear nokia needed another OS but why windows phone ?
he said differentiation

how do you differentiate on windows phone ? its too limited almost all look and work the same way , if differentiation was aim android was a clear choice with unlimited possible customisation

2) there were no apps and ecosystem and were not expected to be at least for 2 years it was a new OS

3) are you a pyschic or clairvoyant who knows the future ? then why would you not make a plan B . there is risk it might work and it might not . if it dosen't you agree to give up without even trying ? putting all eggs in 1 basket ? they could have at least tried experimenting with android at least for once to see how market reacts ? look at samsung it is available on android , windows , bada now tizen also they tried with every OS only android worked for them so they stick with it

4) android was more like symbian , and why would you release the famous burning platform memo instead of slowly transitioning . ok it was a leaked memo but still then why would you go on and say no matter how good nokia N9 sells they will not release in major markets ? it sold exceptionally well without any advertisements .. the profits from its success could have been used easily in promoting WP

5) lets say if everything had worked acc to plan and windows phone had become successful then nokia would have paid a lot more to microsoft in royalty than they gave 1 billion per year and keeping microsoft the puppet master of nokia . a partnership is a mutual benefit situation not a slave situation

48. nokia12 (Posts: 486; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)

i agree nokia's strongest selling point was for camera , they have the best cameras but the hate for Windows phone exceeded the desire to have the best camera . People did not wanted to compromise with android so they settled for a good enough camera which samsung and others provided along with their favorite Operating system . In fact People choose nokia only for Brand + camera +quality .. they never choose it for windows phone, also do remember the fact windows phone limitation made nokia overpriced , when android had 1 gb ram nokia was giving 512 mb ram phones, this trait continued till this q4 2013 . not nokia's fault only windows phone fault . only lumia 520 was ahead in hardware specs and it succeeded because it was sold at a loss . just imagine how lumia 520 would have been if it had android . nokia could have easily overtaken samsung

45. taikucing (unregistered)

lol actually there are many Nokia lovers who want Nokia installed with android. My friends bought Samsung not because they love Samsung, but because there are no android devices from Nokia.

13. 14545 (Posts: 1537; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Yeah, that should be more clear now than ever before. I think the market cap is 1/4 of what it was before he took over. A company man was all he ever was.

16. SAYED-EJAZ (Posts: 225; Member since: 10 Oct 2013)

Dont complain elop only..who said nokia to make deal with him(microsoft).
Its all nokias fault. If nokia were genious they would opt android before any other oem .!

21. illiad (Posts: 128; Member since: 07 Feb 2012)

its the brainless execs that killed it.. there *were* some good linux phones, but they just dissappeared...

14. 14545 (Posts: 1537; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

At this point, they didn't have much of a choice. They are so far gone thanks to him that they had to take what they could get.

18. Beijendorf (Posts: 340; Member since: 27 Aug 2013)

Microsoft had already given Nokia a big cash injection of the money included in the deal, and the stock value relied heavily on the deal going through.

They had the option to risk losing their money and possibly never recover it or saying yes.

20. bon24x7 (Posts: 206; Member since: 30 Aug 2012)

hope Nokia will make a comeback in 2016 with Android or Sailfish based phones..?

22. illiad (Posts: 128; Member since: 07 Feb 2012)

I do believe the main part of the 'deal' was nokia will NOT do phones anymore...

37. microsoftnokiawin (Posts: 1178; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)

i believe there's not part of part of the deal that stats that however there's a part of the deal that they can't release a Nokia branded phone until 2016 January the 1st ! they can release other phones though !

15. 14545 (Posts: 1537; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

While, yes, it was too late. Nokia should file suit against him for fraud. Especially with how this has played out recently. I wouldn't get that hack one red cent. They should have dumped him long ago though, you are correct about that.

23. illiad (Posts: 128; Member since: 07 Feb 2012)

its the stupid salary and retirement contracts these big companies do.. to honor the retirement contract, it would bankrupt the company!!!

27. PBXtech (Posts: 1032; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)

Parachute clauses for failed CEO's is ludicrous. I completely believe in bonuses for making corporations successful but to give people a lifetime's worth (+) of money for running a company into the ground, or to the point of having to sell needs to end. It's the entitlement mentality that all the banks had when the banking industry was collapsing.

30. 14545 (Posts: 1537; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

I actually agree with you. I don't understand how one gets paid even if a company fails. That doesn't even make sense. If my company goes under, even being a "professional" employee, I don't continue to get paid. (generally speaking, obviously there is a chance for severance, but usually doesn't happen) So why give these terrible, and with Eflop I mean terrible, CEO's a check for 3 years salary for bankrupting the company?

28. PBXtech (Posts: 1032; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)

Meego showed a wealth of potential, not only was it versatile but it had a rich developer community being built up to support it. I would have loved to see Nokia develop Meego further.

51. nokia12 (Posts: 486; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)

nokia did not become number one in windows phone , it was left alone as other competitors backed out .. samsung,htc hardly released phones and never marketed it the way they did it with android , secondly most of the 4 % market share you see came from lumia 520 which was sold at a loss.

before elop nokia was no 1 with 38 % market share after elop nokia was no 1 in the 4 % market share what a success ..!

53. UrbanPhantom (Posts: 949; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)

Are you suggesting that Nokia was doing well before Elop took over? Also, who pointed the gun at them and forced them to hire Elop as their CEO? Nobody! Don't not pretend that the blame rests only upon Elop shoulders: Nokia was badly managed long before he ever showed up on the scene...

54. nokia12 (Posts: 486; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)

no i am not saying that check comment no 43,48,49.. nokia was loosing market but at a slow pace elop could have turned it around but instead he accelerated the process of decline by not giving users what they wanted , every analyst , consumer was expecting nokia to adopt android hence the world was shocked when he adopted microsooft not only that but exclusivity . there were huge protests if you remember

yes the board of directors are equally responsible for supporting elop , he should have been fired back when he released the burning platform memo but he had the support of board who let him do the damage. it is also said that most of the board members also held shares of Microsoft but i don't know how much truth is in it.. you want a average CEO ? look at thornton heins , though he failed but he looked at what users wanted , looked at various strategies he could adopt he was open to adopting android as well , they also had a plan B , Plan C as well .. but nokia if plan A succeded they are slaves of microsoft , if not they are still slaves of microsoft and eventually sold

57. UrbanPhantom (Posts: 949; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)

My guess is that Nokia decided to sell their devices and services a while ago, even before Elop showed up on the scene. They probably had some contact with Microsoft, which accounts for why they choose Elop to become their CEO. It's worth understanding that Elop didn't really trick anybody: Nokia's board of directors decided to sell to Microsoft, and Elop simply adopted policies that guided them towards that particular destination...

Could Nokia have survived by producing Android mobile devices instead? Possibly, but they choose not to align themselves with Google. At any rate, Nokia still gets about 7 billion in cash for this deal, so they're not exactly broke. I like their products too, but it's all just business (shrug). I have yet to cry for any company, regardless of the quality of their products!

Oh, and RIMM (aka BBRY) was just badly managed period. Thorton Heins didn't appear to have any special qualities, and the company will probably end up being sold off in pieces. That's what happens when you fail to adapt successfully to changing conditions in the technology industry. It sucks if you owned BBRY/RIMM stock, but that's life. Winners and losers (sigh).

60. downphoenix (Posts: 3165; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)

being the best Windows Phone manufacturer is like being the home run record setter for high school baseball... it means bupkiss. Good job, but nobody will remember you for it.

56. nokia12 (Posts: 486; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)

exactly ms is going to fail so hard not only that zte, huawei,samsung , htc won't even make windows phone now .. who wants to compete with microsoft when they control their own OS .. during these 3 years most of the original finnish engineers have been replaced by microsoft employees ... its only on paper that its still nokia division.. it has been changed to microsoft already by elop

58. UrbanPhantom (Posts: 949; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)

Microsoft won't fail, as much as you desire to see that happen. Lumia phones are top quality, and WP8 OS is good too, and will become even better and more competitive with the new updates. People who think Microsoft is worse than Google or Apple are just being silly. They are all huge corporations, and behave roughly in the same manner...

I know this may come as a shock to some, but Google is not a humanitarian organization, nor does it specialize in promoting freedom of speech/expression, or democracy for that matter. They make lots of money doing business with authoritarian dictatorships, the same as the other two. The myth that has developed about Google going to great lengths to fight for civil liberties and privacy protection doesn't change the fact that they are part of the corporate community. The only thing Wall Street care's about is consumerism and profits!

Put your faith in something else, and stop taking sides. Which gangster do you love most? All of em' are killers ;o)

59. nokia12 (Posts: 486; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)

i base my opinion on reasons not what i feel..

i agree with you microsoft = apple= google all are same , but again the reason that i believe it will not sell because it will not carry the name "Nokia" on it . again You have to look out of USA , where microsoft holds a much darker image .. sure but if you think apple is the worst of the 3 when it comes to patent wars , microsoft is the worst when it comes to partnership.. every company they have partnered with has been doomed and eaten check their history .. read about the skype fiasco .. The advantage that WP had over android was WP was very fluid on low end hardware .but with jump in hardware specs at low level now minimum is 1 gb and android 4.4 kitkat optimized for 512 mb phones that advantage also seems to be disappearing.. so once again i ask what advantage does windows phone brings now ?

don't say it is fast and fluid .. ios , android kit kat , wp all 3 are on the same level now. again wp is because of nokia brand today remove nokia branding and it wil be less successful .. they will be able to carry some of the momentum nonetheless.. since mostly people won't realize it is not nokia who made this phone for the next 1 year

61. livyatan (Posts: 867; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)

I completely agree