| Author |
Have Sony Ericsson finally taken the lead in global mobile phone solutions? |
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-10 04:39:38, mib1800 wrote:
one thing is for sure. SE is lightyears behind Nokia/Moto in high-tech smartphone, the most important category in coming years.
If SE cannot even come up with a strong, viable and sellable OS-enabled phone, dont even talk about innovation.
Nokia has 3G+Edge+PTT+Megapixel+smartphone all-in-one pocketable size. SE has nothing that even come close.
|
|
I remember debating this with you a while ago so I shall try and be brief so as not to recover old ground.
The smartphone argument is utter nonsense. It is quite telling, in my opinion, that the P900, never mind the P910, still sells very strongly when it is a relatively old handset. SE primarily focus upon high-end handsets and their smartphones are no different, with updates being approximately a year apart.
SE do not release as many handsets as Nokia or Motorola or Samsung so it isn't at all surprising that we have not seen a new smartphone since the P910, that will presumably change this year, with two smartphones being expected.
The idea that smartphones will 'rule the roost' is erroneous in the short term for the simple fact that the majority of customers do not want a smartphone at the moment. Joe Bloggs is quite happy if his mobile can take pictures and play his favourite music; he cares considerably less about whether or not it can run a Powerpoint presentation or display sales figures in Excel. SE recognise this trend and cater to the market accordingly, with the bulk of their products being aimed at providing people with top notch handsets that do the things they want them to do.
As the market matures and moves towards more data intensive applications then Joe Bloggs may want a smartphone that can act as a PDA. One should not forget, however, that advanced smartphones are never going to be truely mainstream; how many non-executives really need to fax people on the move or be able to access corporate networks?
SE are doing what they have always done, concentrate on providing customers with what they want, not with whacky designs that lack key features or are difficult to use.
_________________
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC
[ This Message was edited by: scotsboyuk on 2005-03-10 12:42 ] |
|
|
senninha
Joined: Jan 05, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
sure nokia sells the most phones and costs less, while SE is expensive and is 'only' no. 6 in the world in volume. they are obviously on different strategies.
would you rather buy a ford or a porsche? would you rather shop ar walmart or at armani? do you wear a timex or a breitling?
but if you're going to charge a premium price, you damn well better have premium technology to back it up.
volume isn't everything you know. BMW sells less than a quarter the number of cars that GM does in a year. but guess what? in terms of company valuation (no. of company shares outstanding x share price) BMW has surpassed GM in market value. interesting concept huh? |
phsychomantis
Joined: Jan 24, 2005
Posts: 146
PM |
If you want to talk about p series then i have to tell you that SE had to stop its production in japan as it became too expensive because of royalties they have to pay to nokia for using their operating sys
This message was posted from a WAP device |
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
@senninha
A very valid point!
Sales aren't everything and I think that we can see that very clearly in the mobile phone market. Nokia may very well sell more handsets than anyone else, but if one looks to the brand name one finds that it is not associated with quality by the majority of Europeans and certainly not by the Japanese or Koreans; I have found that a number of Americans seem to regard Nokia as a mark of quality though.
Nokia is the default, they produce a great many handsets and they appeal to a very wide ranging customer base; they will probably be at the top spot, in terms of sales, for many years to come because of this.
The other manufcaturers have come to realise that it is very difficult to compete with Nokia in terms of volume, so companies like SE don't try. Instead they focus on securing their brand name and providing higher priced products. Nokia increasingly looks like a company in trouble with regards to its high-end products in my opinion. If one looks to the 6630 one will see a 3G smartphone that can't make video calls! Nokia have had to release another 3G smartphone, the 6680, that can; two attempts at something that should have been accomplished in one isn't a good showing in my book.
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
Sales mean nothing.
You simply cannot compare the sales of Nokia and the Sales of Sony Ericsson and then make judgements on the success of the two companies for the following reasons.
Nokia has had a head start by YEARS to conquer huge markets like India and China and it is these that contribute to the Global sales figures. It would be a miracle if Sony Ericsson ever caught up in those markets but they are making good headway. LG and Samsung are also huge sellers on their home turf.
Sony Ericsson, while being a young company,has managed to become Number 2 in Western Europe (Gartner) in a short space of time.
I think the best judge of whether SE is taking the lead is the industry itself. Unless you think all those awards that SE have been winning, INDUSTRY AWARDS, are a figment of someones overactive imagination.
http://www.sonyericsson.com/s[....]mplate=pc5_1&zone=pc&prid=2080 |
phsychomantis
Joined: Jan 24, 2005
Posts: 146
PM |
Nokia 6630 is aimed at edge rather than wcdma and on edge it is not practical to make video calls
This message was posted from a WAP device |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
@phsychomantis, Of course Nokia would do that, and it will only make SE pick up on a new OS, rather than put up with Nokia restricting their development.
Symbian is by no means the only phone OS, and even cheap PDA phones like imate have Windows Mobile on them (the imate retailed at the same price as the K700i)
Nokia can be reasonable about licence fees and continue to make money from SE, or they can spurn SE and gain a little more marketshare (but only if a SE Windows Mobile smart phone was a flop) If it took off, Nokia would still have smart phone competition.
So it seems to me excessive Symbian OS fees would only disadvantage Nokia in the long run. |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
@scotsboyuk
let's not start another debate on positioning of smartphone vs non-smartphone. but just to highlight some fact. Nokia sold 1.8m smartphone (mostly series60) in Q2/04. This increase to 3m in Q3 and in Q4/04 the number is 5 million. This is a huge number when compared to the total of 12m SE phones sold in Q4/04.
whether u accept it or not, nokia smartphone is enroaching into the territory of non-smart premium phone like K750/S700. and it is a fact that SE does not have anything as capable as Series60.
Does SE have a 3G+smart like 6680 ==> No.
Does SE have 3G+Edge+smart like 6630.==> No.
Does SE have Edge+PTT+smart like 3230.==> No.
Does Nokia have something like K750/W800. Yes - 6230i/6681/6630 |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
sorry but carrier technology is not the main consideration most people use when buying a phone.
I personally find the menu and use of the nokia smart phones no better than a K700i, in fact worse. The may be "smart phones" but just because Nokia have a high proportion of smart phones means nothing.
I would step into a SE implementation of symbian (P800,900,910) in a heart beat, yet I always find Nokia smart phones clunky and boring.
|
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
@max_wedge
if P910 is so good, then explain to me why there are 15 times more people stepping into a Nokia smartphone than a SE's. (statistically Nokia sells 5 times more phones than SE's) |
batesie
Joined: Feb 13, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
quality not quantity comes to mind 
[addsig] |
Arne Anka
Joined: Nov 05, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
@phsychomantis
SE do not pay any licence fees to Nokia. UIQ is not owned by Nokia and neither is Symbian. Looking at the ownership of Symbian, Nokia is the largest owner. But have not own majority. All manufacturers (Nokia, SE, Samsung etc.) using Symbian pay licence fees to Symbian (not Nokia) and the amount is equal for everybody.
http://www.symbian.com/about/ownership.html
[ This Message was edited by: Arne Anka on 2005-03-10 14:40 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
mib1800 those phones you mention all come up short compared to K750 and W800.
Cameras, memory, and abundance of features all better in those two SE models.
The only thing you mention that I have to concede is Nokia have a better range of EDGE and 3G handsets. This board has already conceded that SE don't have as many handsets in each class as Nokia, so it would be expected that they don't have a huge choice. I suspect SE are waiting for carriers to settle on a broadband technology, before they commit to giving all their phones broadband.
I suspect within 6 months we'll start to see broadband phones (edge, 3G, or both depending on the market for broadband) coming from SE in greater numbers.
|
DragonEye
Joined: Sep 26, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Canada
PM |
I would love to see series 60 by SE...It would rule.... sadly i don't think we ever will...
Shaolinmonk on HOFO Official PHONE JUNKIE
My P1i Review
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=152437&start=0 |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
@mib1800
"if P910 is so good, then explain to me why there are 15 times more people stepping into a Nokia smartphone than a SE's. (statistically Nokia sells 5 times more phones than SE's)"
Ditto batesie
Nokia have a greater proportion of smart phones in their line up, and also have a greater marketshare, so it's obvious that they will sell more smart phones.
This only means they have a Woolworths approach (high volume low profit margin) to selling phones, it doesn't mean they are more advanced than SE. |
|
|
Posted: 2005-03-10 13:40
