Essay on Asia and Huge Subsidies Nokia

However that in 2007 the market of Nokia Company started to decrease and the reasons for that is the new competitions like IPhone from Apple that introduced smartphones, along with Android by Google, and Samsung. Even though Nokia Company results for 2012 were pre much good by having 101982 workers across 120 countries along with sales in more than 150 countries, and the reports for revenue were around 30€ billion. Nokia was announced to be the second largest world for mobiles phone makers in terms of unit sales after Samsung, with having world wide market share 18.0%. However that Nokia Company for current days has 3.2% in smartphones and they lost 40% of their revenue in mobile phone in Q2 for 2013. Nokia was listed in fortune global 500 to be world’s 274 largest companies for 2013 from revenue sides. So Nokia Company has good products, services, and reputations. Knowing that their products are good and have nice services, yet comparing to others like Samsung and Apple they are weak because those provide an outstanding products and services which consist of smartphones. So Nokia want instead of providing a good services and products to become like their competition and provide an outstanding products and

Nokia will have to manage this change closely in order to make sure that they are working as efficiently as possible. For this, they would need to communicate well, as this will run through all the stages on the workforce. Elop achieved this primarily with the burning platform, but would need to pursue this through the reinvention. Training is very important when dealing with emerging products because they need to be of a high enough standard in order to gain a market share. Therefore, the workforce have to be well trained so that they understand the tasks that they are given. Nokia must also check on how individuals are coping with the change to prevent

So, that why I chose Nokia Company to do this research and solve the problems that company has. I have two objectives from this research. First, I want to solve the problem that Nokia Company have it in their technology. They should make a new technology for their produce to avoid any problem. The second objective is advancement again to the marketplace and to compete with other companies to be the first company in produce mobile phone like in past.

Nokia now facing hard time. The company which was dominating the market for years now do not any entity in the market. They mainly focused on middle class and lower class people which was the main problem. They should focus on higher class people who can afford better quality phone with better features and application. If they starting doing it again I am sure people will again attracts to Nokia phones and the company will start once again.

Another reason that I feel this negotiation could be successfully completed was due to the fact that Microsoft and Nokia’s priorities aligned well at the time. Both companies saw the other’s products and capabilities as being complementary to what they already offered, which gave executives from both companies further incentive to

In this following report I will discuss the phone industry and analysed it in great detail. I will analysis the market structure and try and understand why the mobile industry falls to heavily oligopoly structure. I will highlight all the structures, however I will discuss in detail how, for example Vodafone can be incorporated in the porter’s five forces method to show how the mobile industry has devolved over the years and to understand if consumers are driven by the actual technology of the phone but if it driven more by style.

Rumours that Microsoft intended to buy Nokia had been floated since Elop joined the company. Reaction to the deal was mixed.

Nokia’s leadership engaged in actions which successfully guided the company in creating a new set of values

Nokia failed to seize and transform the opportunity to dominate the smartphone era due to top management team homogeneity which led to identity trap and made them unable to adapt to changing environment from the period of 2006 to 2013 and was sold off to Microsoft by 2014.

The main reasons behind the plummet of Nokia were due to lack of data concerning their competitors. The top level association had no data concerning how their competitor’s rank was that is IPhone. A researcher shouted Vuori said that top level association of Nokia got the wrong believed concerning the pace of progress that their competitor had and were managed to trust that the procedure that they were acting was adequate plenty to address to the menace that their competitor poses. So it is clearly described that due to their one unclear data they were drop dead. Journalist D. Bhatt (2001, page 68) quarels that “To capitalise on vision, an

The aim of this project is to identify how Nokia has approached its market and what has enabled the company to

The Nokia-Microsoft Alliance appears to be a well-calculated alliance of two major merchandising organizations that are both at the top of their respective business industries. A few of the major points with this merger are the organizations are established, they are both pushing and looking toward the future and subject matter experts are at the heart of each organization. There are always lessons learned when organizations are coming together in a merger weather good or bad it is very important to capitalize on both situations. In the end, the lessons learned will dictate what could have been done better for future business endeavors.

The case study provides a brief analysis of what transpired at Nokia and how the strategy implemented by the management team from the period of the 1990s up to the 2010 led to the company losing its market shares at both ends of the mobile phone industry.

According to the financial data in third quarter of Nokia, it remarked a decline trend in overall business profitability. The consensus could be mostly caused by huge market investments and fast rate to expand the trade chain. The table below presents the financial statements during 2007 and 2008.

Nokia taught a lesson which is opportunity knocks once, and the neighbors do the rest of the time. As a firm, right decisions should be made at the right time in order to catch the opportunity. Nokia made wrong decisions while it was facing the opportunity, so it declined year by year. When Nokia missed the best time for transformation, its day had gone even though it had some right moves. Therefore, Nokia has been becoming a negative example for other firms.