| Author |
Have Sony Ericsson finally taken the lead in global mobile phone solutions? |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-23 11:06:00, Super G wrote:
@ vanquish: Your smart statements amazes me.
Anyway, mib does have a point whether you like it or not. Just face facts. Smartphones are selling more and more, whether people care for their features or not. Nokia is doing exactly what has happened to PCs. Nokia is making cheap, affordable smartphones. They become commonalities. Not everyone buy a PC for what it can do. Many buy it for gaming. Yet, some prefer a good game console.
 does not have a viable player in the competition at the moment. They have a very competitive product (technically speaking, although EDGE is a must), but sales figures are disappointing vs other smartphones. That's very clear. Sure UIQ is nice, but S60 (which can do basically the same stuff or more) sells much more. Merely the UI is different. UI is not a qualifier for defining a smartphone (And paying 100s of Euros more to get a touchscreen is questionable). The OS is, and here both share Symbian OS.
I'm waiting for the day when will license S60.
|
|
No one is saying Smartphones aren't selling quicker than non-smartphones but what we ARE saying is it will be a long time before they start selling in greater quantities!!!!!!!
Affordabililty might be the common denominator. In the UK the Networks heavily subsidise nearly all handsets.
However I would rate a smartphone with a Qwerty keyboard and Touch screen over one without!! | |
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-23 11:46:32, mib1800 wrote:
friend, claim what market leadership? SE is languishing in 6th position if u hv not noticed.
and
I did not say anything about Nokia "leading mobile solutions". I only highlight the fact (from stats) that Nokia is leading in smartphone sales.
|
|
Are you for real?
|
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-23 03:59:46, mib1800 wrote:
I can't quite see why u keep harping on this point. I hv always been talking about high-end segment. Let me ask you what is the percentage of high-end to overall phone market (in volume). Would a ballpark figure of 20% be reasonable? Smartphone volume overall is 6-8%. This percentage share will increase in the years to come. I'll let you do the sum.
|
|
Please read my posts, I am speaking of the high-end market. The cross-section I refer to is within the high-end market, or do you assume that only certain 'types' buy high-end mobile phones?
I have no doubt that smartphones will play an increasingly important role as time goes by, again you can see this from reading my posts.
Quote:
|
For the nth times, it doesnt matter whether people really use (or want ) smartphone features, the fact is that smartphone is sucking up volume in the high-end segment. So if u throw in a K750 to compete in this high-end, there may be a chance it get steam-rolled over.
|
|
I disagree. Smartphones are not 'sucking up' volume at all. If you were to actually consider for a moment how much of Nokia's product range is made up of smartphones and then also take into account that Nokia sell the most mobile phones; it isn't a huge leap to arrive at the logical conclusion that smartphones are selling more because they make up an ever increasing proportion of the world's biggest selling mobile phone manufacturer's product range!
As for the K750 being 'steam-rolled' over, why should it be? Unless one specifically wants smartphone capabilities thenwhy would one choose a mobile that has inferior specifications on basic features common to all mobile phones (and desired by the majority of the public)?
I think what we have here is a misconception that smartphones are somehow 'the default' option for customers seeking a high-end phone. If this isn't true then why state that the K750 may be 'steam-rolled' over? This scenario might possibly have some value in it if smartphones were the deafult option, but since they are not it seems clear that this is blatantly false logic.
As has been covered many times in this thread, smartphones and non-smartphones do not compete with one anothe ron the same terms, no matter how much you may wish to the contrary.
Quote:
|
At this moment I believe SE dont hv any phone to compete with the likes of thumb-based smartphone like s60, mpx220 or Xphone2. Well, maybe not entirely as SE has S700. But then again S700 is selling too little to be considered a serious challenger.
|
|
Why should SE? SE haven't focused upon smartphones, instead relying on one model a year to 'hold the fort'. If SE thought that the smartphone market was mature enough they would release more, they obviously don't, so they won't.
The S700 isn't marketed as a smartphone, quite why you are trying to compare it with one I don't know. Again we see this nonsense of trying to directly compare smartphones and non-smartphones.
Quote:
|
When K750 comes out, whether SE will target K750 to get a slice of this segment is left to be seen.
|
|
More false logic.
Quote:
|
I think everyone would agree that the design of 6600 is nothing to shout about. In fact, it is not too pleasing at all with its size, thickness and weight. These factors would put people off buying at the first instance if they were just, I quote "looking for basic features" unquote. And yet 6600 sold in the millions. Can you explain that? (pls don't use the rhetoric "..because it is a Nokia"  )
|
|
I wasn't aware that you set the standard for what society deems pleasing to the eye!
The 6600 offers a good range of basic features, which customers can identify with, it also has the look of an ordinary mobile phone, agains omething most customers appreciate. One only has to look at some of Nokia's more whacky designs to see that both critics and customers tend to be put off by such designs.
I would also imagine that the massive advertising campaign instituted for the 6600 was at least partially useful in persuading people to buy the handset.
Two examples I can give you of people who bought the 6600:
Example 1.) The business user - bought the 6600 to check e-mail and read the news whilst commuting to work in the morning.
Example 2.) The student - bought the 6600 because he liked the look of it and because it had a camera and video player.
These are two reasonably conflicting reasons for buying the product, one is a work related motive whilst the other is very much not. The features both want can be found in other handsets, but to be fair the business user did use some of the smartphone features. The fact that both were happy with the overall design seems to indicate that the mark you set for the 6600 is quite as universal as your statement would at first suggest.
Whether you like it or not many people do buy Nokia because it is their default standard. Nokia have a huge market presence and people respond to that. Whether you like the fact or not, many people buy Nokia because they 'go with what they know'.
Quote:
|
I think you should leave this hypothesis to the psychologists (unless of course u r a qualify one).
|
|
I won't bore you with my Psychiatric qualifications.
Quote:
|
I think most psychologist wont agree with you because u r going against human behaviour: 1) u r assuming people r not interested in finding out more of what they r buying and 2) u r assuming that people r not greedy (just go to buffet dinner and u will see how wrong u r)
|
|
It seems to be you who us doing too much assuming with this response!
I am not assuming that people are not interested in finding out what they are buying at all, far from it. My point is that people find out what they actually need from a product, extra features are superfluous to their needs and tend not to enter into the buying decision.
The average Joe going to buy a new televsion may very well be told that it has a range of sound options and that the display features certain amazing qualities, but these sort of thing aren't important to him. The average man on the street wants certain features that he knows about e.g. picture quality, sound quality and reliability. He probably doesn't care less what the screen is coated with or if the sound system can be hooked up to certain speakers to provide a difference in quality he probably can't and won't appreciate.
This analogy is applicable to mobile phones. If you were to actually observe someone buying a mobile phone then you would hear them asking certain questions e.g. does it have a camera? what are the ringtones like? what's the battery life like? can it play mp3s? etc. Most people don't understand smartphone applications, not because they are stupid, but because they have no real interest. For customers to be interested in something it has to have relevance to their lives, smartphone features simply don;t at the moment, except for a minority.
Quote:
|
Let's just stick to fact we know ==>i.e. smartphone sales is growing faster than the rest of market. So if SE dont hv a viable smartphone, then it is losing out in this HIGH END segment. As simple as that.
|
|
No it isn't as simple as that. Once again you equate the high-end market with smartphones, which is only partly true. You also assume that SE is a unique company, unique in the respect that it isn't interested in making money. If SE's own research, plus that of others, identified a situation, in which SE were losing out then SE would hardly sit back and see themselves loose business.
Furthermore you are assuming that an increase in smartphone sales sales is attributable to smartphone features. You take no account of the customers who buy a smartphone simply for its basic features or who are given one as an upgrade without appreciating that it is a smartphone.
Unless one actually examine the factors involved then one can make all sorts of statements. I could claim, with a certain degree of validity, that t-shirts were going out of fashion because they weren't selling as well in December (in the UK) as they were in June. Of course I would have to ignore the fact that summer wear traditionally does not sell well in winter months, but this is tantamount to what youb are doing in assuming that smartphone sales increases are attributable to smartphone capabilities alone.
Quote:
|
I just dont see why u want to continuosly dispute this fact.
|
|
I was taught something at nurserey school that has stayed with me for the rest of my life. I shall try and remember the exact quote ... ah yes, "... because I'm right and you're wrong!" 
_________________
"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 2005-03-23 11:32 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
Mib! quote:"1) Who say high-end phone must be a smartphone? Only u did. "
I never said that it was so, I only referred to the many times you inferred that it was. I'm not going to look for more examples since the ones I've already given are obvious enough.
Okay, so you now say you are only talking about sales.
To complete the circle for the thousandth time, the forum title is "Have Sony Ericsson finally taken the lead in global mobile phone solutions?" not "Do SE have the biggest marketshare"
Ferrari are a world leader in performance technology, but they don't sell too many cars.
You keep insisting that this whole debate is about sales (and smartphones ), but I think peeps on this thread want to discuss some other aspects of the topic. 
I for one would be interested in a more feedback from people about SE competition that isn't about s60 or market share. For example what do people think about comparative handsets from other oems; are they more ergonomic, are they easier to use, do they compromise on features, how do they compare in quality, what networks are they compatible with?
These are the questions relevant to the title of this thread I reckon  |
Super G
Joined: Mar 07, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: France
PM |
@ dave uk
I know the title of that thread. I have some early posts in it...
I disagree with the conclusions. I dont think has taken the lead in blah blah (ah, but vanquish came up with the title, no wonder. It couldnt be more vague, hence this thread going banana. People react on ":se: taking the lead", no matter what lead it is.).
I believe 6680 is THE actual mobile phone that has everything a mobile phone can possibly have today. WCDMA, EDGE (Class 10), great screen, two cameras, S60, hot-swap MMC, etc etc. In terms of integration, difficult to beat that at the moment.
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-23 11:41:17, max_wedge wrote:
@Super G, I don't think it will ever happen. s60 is only the predominant os because Nokia is pushing it regardless of the market demand for smartphones.
|
|
Still selling like hot cakes. There is demand for such phones. Nokia has created a whole new market here, and has not yet made a significant footprint in that particular market, because makes a smartphone as a high-end phone, which is completely wrong a way of thinking. If you want to sell in big numbers, dont just target high-end, but target mid-end, budget. Their problem is very likely UIQ which requires a touch screen. Hence I think should license s60 or develop their own smartphone witha normal keypad.
Quote:
|
What problem do you have uiq (or palm or pocketpc for that matter)? they all have strengths and weeknesses.
|
|
I have not problem with UIQ whatsoever. I said its good.
But, I'm very skeptical one could evey make a budget phone supporting UIQ.
Quote:
|
And NOONE is arguing that Nokia don't lead the sales market in Smartphones, we just don't accept that smartphones are the sole criteria for high end phones that can claim market leadership in handset technology (not sales, the two things are completely different beasts).
|
|
A high-end phone is defined as per its pricetag. Full point. Whatever that phone supports whether its a smartphone or not.
Quote:
|
And EVERYONE knows that smartphones have a very good chance (almost 100%) of becoming a standard (cept maybe scots, though I don't trust mib's interpretationof what he said). But what sort of standard? Across all handsets, mid to high end, high end only? The dust is yet to settle, and SE has by no means forsaken the smartphone market.
|
|
Smartphone as I said should address all ends of the market. Likely difficult for low-ends, but certainly mid-end must be available. has no offering there, and I doubt they will have if they only use UIQ. , trust me, license s60 and you will sell a lot of phones.
Quote:
|
Okay so they are a little late on the replacement to the P910, but I'm sick of the Nokia supporters saying that the P910 can't compete, well of course it can't. No SE fan is comparing the P910 against the latest nokia smartphones. On the same lines some Nokia fan dumped on the Comparison of the K750 against a current Nokia saying it wasn't fair since the K750 wasn't out yet!
|
|
P910 can compete, technically (if you forget EDGE). You got me wrong. But its pricetag is hurting its competitiveness.
Quote:
|
I do think SE are leading the market; they are pushing handsets in terms of hardware integration technology, not os technology. Nokia and all OEM's are benefiting from the lead SE has set and continues to maintain in hardware development.
|
|
Yes, is certainly leading its 6th position in the market.
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
@super g, re: "Hence I think SE should license s60 or develop their own smartphone with a normal keypad." I agree. I just think they will do their own, not s60. And yes they will have some work to do to make it budget.
I mentioned somewhere I think it's possible, but unlikely, that SE could bring out a candybar hard screen UIQ phone along with the next touchscreen model.
Despite our slight differences of opinions dude, you are atleast giving reasoned arguments.
"Yes, SE is certainly leading its 6th position in the market.", Is the title of this thread about market share? Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think it was. 
|
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-03-23 14:03:39, Super G wrote:
... (ah, but vanquish came up with the title, no wonder. It couldnt be more vague, hence this thread going banana.
|
|
Please try and contain your posts to the debate and refrain from petty personal squabbles. Thank you.
Quote:
|
I believe 6680 is THE actual mobile phone that has everything a mobile phone can possibly have today. WCDMA, EDGE (Class 10), great screen, two cameras, S60, hot-swap MMC, etc etc. In terms of integration, difficult to beat that at the moment.
|
|
And yet people aren't quite pushing each other out of the way to get one ...
Quote:
|
Nokia has created a whole new market here ...
|
|
No, Nokia has substituted much of their range for smartphones, essentially fencing many of their customers into buying one.
Quote:
|
Their problem is very likely UIQ which requires a touch screen.
|
|
UIQ 3.0 does not.
Quote:
|
A high-end phone is defined as per its pricetag. Full point. Whatever that phone supports whether its a smartphone or not.
|
|
Incorrect. A high-end phone is one, which has a wide range of high quality features, whether they be smartphone features or not. Price is not an indicator of whether a product is high-end or not. That logic would then suggets that the more expensive the phone the more high-end it is. Poppycock!
Quote:
|
Smartphone as I said should address all ends of the market. Likely difficult for low-ends, but certainly mid-end must be available. has no offering there, and I doubt they will have if they only use UIQ. ,
|
|
Must they? Apart from Nokia no manufacturer is devoting as much time end effort to smartphones. Perhaps they recognise that most customers simply aren't interested at the moment.
[/quote]
trust me, license s60 and you will sell a lot of phones.
[quote]
Trust me, be the largets mobile phone manufacturer in the world and substitute much of your product range for smartphones and you will sell a lot of phones.
Quote:
|
P910 can compete, technically (if you forget EDGE). You got me wrong. But its pricetag is hurting its competitiveness.
|
|
The Pxxx series was never designed to appeal to a broad market, it was designed to appeal primarily to business users.
Quote:
|
Yes, is certainly leading its 6th position in the market.
|
|
SE are currently ranked 6th in the world, hardly surprising when you take into account the fact that they don't divert a huge amount of resources to comepeting in markets such as Africa, India, China, etc. SE's strongest market is Europe, where they are doing really rather well.
SE have a regional approach, they have built a strong base in Europe and they are now starting to slowly expand out into other markets with a greater presence.
_________________
"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 2005-03-23 13:28 ]
[ This Message was edited by: scotsboyuk on 2005-03-23 13:43 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
@scots,
Quote:
"No, Nokia has substituted much of their range for smartphones, essential fencing many of their customers into buying one."
Right On! That is exactly why smartphones have a steam on in the mid range market. I watched that happen too, man. I remember seeing one model after another eaten up by s60, and all my nokia buying friends just kept on buying nokias "they're the best man" not even knowing they were smartphones!
Nokia dumped s60 on everyone, exactly because they want to own the symbian market!
But SE won't let it happen, sorry Super G, it ain't gonna happen!! |
dave_uk
Joined: Mar 06, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
@Super G
Absolutely agree with you that the 6680 is a very impressive handset. I will wait until I actually see it before deciding whether it fulfills the potential the spec suggests. Even so, I would prefer the 2MP camera, FM Radio, and certainly the aesthetics of the K750i, though whether they're even truly comparable (given the status of the 6680 as a smartphone - which, incidentally, the Nokia consider to be a business phone) is open to question. And EDGE and PTT are an utter irrelevance to us on this li'l Island. Also, with only 10MB internal, it had better become a whole lot easier to get hold of Dual-voltage RSMMCs than it currently is, if you are to be able to use the capability of this phone!
I would, however, certainly question your theory that smartphones should not be confined to the top-end of the market. We have established a number of things thus far:
1. We cannot prove the validity of this either way.
2. The weight of (educated) opinion suggests that we should accept that a vast number of Nokia (and therefore S60) smartphone users are smartphone users by coincidence and not by design (in terms of intention to use "smart" features).
3. Certain posters here have a desire to turn the discussion away from the true thread topic...
It is not arguable that Nokia sell more smartphones (and more of every other kind of phone) than . There are statistics to prove this beyond doubt. However, we are not talking solely about quantity, nor is this an accurate representation, in this market, of quality. The "Average Joe" is not a member here(!) and uses their phone to make calls and send text messages - I presume nobody wants to question this most obvious of statements (dangerous assumption with certain present company).
What I interpret the title as meaning (far from being vague, as you suggest) is much more about innovation, the development of technology and the clarity of direction for the future. , having pioneered Bluetooth, been at the forefront of Symbian (along with Nokia/Psion/Motorola) and for the very reason that they don't produce mass-market saturation, seem to know exactly where they're going. For me, and it is a matter of opinion, it is Nokia who have the catching up to do. There is one factor that you are all (edit: I have just seen scots' post - frightening telepathy!) failing to consider:
It is fair to say that Nokia has adopted Series 60 and has UIQ. Now, up till now, devices have all been based on versions of UIQ that required a pen-based touchscreen interface. The introduction of UIQ 3.0 will open up the capability to introduce this OS into mid-range handsets (which has not been an option so far, solely for this reason) and to produce a variety of handsets, with different form factors, based on this operating system. Since the P910i has been widely acclaimed as the best smartphone ever produced, it stands to reason that this new UI (which everyone seems to have forgotten about) could shake up the entire global market, if, as MIB and his band of brothers have suggested, everybody really does want a smartphone. If not, those people will remain contented with the likes of the K750i (if it's imaging you're into) or the W800 (if you're a music lover) as the best of the non-smartphones.
Have finally taken the lead? I'm not sure that they can claim that yet (some inroads into market share are needed to justify this claim) but I am damn certain that they are well on the way and 2005 might just be their year!
_________________
This message was posted in an envelope
[ This Message was edited by: dave_uk on 2005-03-23 14:06 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
@dave I think your last paragraph is accurate, atleast as far as the long haul goes.
I think SE have been leading the market in innovation since they started. Other OEMs are either focussing on quantity, copying the others, or jumping into bed with microsoft for the image factor.
However SE's innovation will only allow them to keep the title of leading global mobile phone solutions provider in the long term if they can translate innovation into sales. They don't have to be number one in sales, but if they languish at 6th for too long it will impact their development budget and they could either collapse in on themselves, or become an exclusive manufacturer for tight lucrative markets (like Japan where they already have some high priced japanese only models).
|
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
@max
As I have said before, SE have been following a regional strategy to date. They have concentrated their efforts upon Europe (especially Western Europe) and Japan.
As SE stablise their business performance (it wasn't all that long ago that they were registering losses) they will be able to expand more thoroughly and with a greater impact into markets like India and the Amercas.
It is very much a long term process and I don't think we should expect to see SE leaping ahead of Samsung or Motorola, nevermind Nokia, anytime soon. From their current strategy one can perhaps see a policy of establishing themselves well within specific markets rather than trying to dominate the global market as a whole.
SE know that they have neither the resources or the manufacturing capability to be a truely global player at the moment. Nokia and Samsung try to appeal to broad cross-sections of the market, SE don't. SE concentrate on certain products and know how to aim for their target market.
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
I agree that SE know exactly what they are doing now. I think their shaky start may have been due to teething problems rather than failure of SE's starting game plan.
But I've never sat in an SE boardroom.
I think a big part of the strategy behind forming SE would have been recognising the perfect marriage of Ericsson's experience as an innovator in mobile phone technology, and Sony's manufacturing and marketing experience in the mass market.
Interestingly, as far as marketing goes, has anyone noticed Sony have dropped support for atrac in the W800? This is an example of marketing manipulation (essentially what drm is designed for) efforts by Sony that have been rejected by the phone buying public. Sony never even considered dropping atrac in their walkmen, it wasn't until the hbm30 that they even had an mp3 player!! Now they have the first walkman that doesn't even support atrac, and it's a phone!
The relationship between Sony and Ericsson has led to Sony having a less penny pinching attitude towards drm.
It may have had a shaky start but it's a relationship with a lot of potential. |
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
@max
There was something not that long ago about how Sony were shaking up their business practices to become more competitive.
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
hmm, interesting.
Just did a bit of a google; this is what sony's new ceo said: "We look forward to joining our twin pillars of engineering and technology with our commanding presence in entertainment and content creation to deliver the most advanced devices and forms of entertainment to the consumer," Sir Howard said.
http://www.aurorawdc.com/ci/000296.html
It's obvious they see the mobile phone as a key element in content provision. The reason they aren't so focussed on smartphones, is because content doesn't need special software. They want to give you a handset all ready to go, not something with software on that the user can accidently delete and then not be able to download content. |
Super G
Joined: Mar 07, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: France
PM |
@ dave uk
I do certainly appreciate your reasoning and posts, even if we may have some diverging opinion -to some extent.
UIQ3.0 as correctly pointed out offers alternatives to pen-based input. I was referring to earlier version of UIQ that didnt have other alternative but pen-based earlier. Anyway, you understood that judging from your last post.
I think UIQ3.0 will offer completely new market opportunities to and as such will allow to do what Nokia does with s60, no doubt about that. Though could still license s60 I do believe in fact it has hit not to have any cheap smartphone to date. Sure they have very good non-smartphones that are real hits, but they could have more (without competing with their own range). What Nokia is showing to the market (and in fact pioneering) is that you can sell millions of smartphones without people necessarily knowing they get a smartphone. And it works. Smartphones are not the mainstream, but their proportion in the market will continue to explode whether people knowingly buy a smartphone or just the phone part of it. | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2005-03-23 11:48
