*time will tell, I suppose. A shame that they didn't win vs Samsung. Kind of obvious that neither they nor Ericsson could compete against such a giant* It seems that the market might have completely ignored the positive aspects of the company’s fundamentals and decided to weigh-in more on the negative aspects. Long-term fundamentals are usually what drive market outcomes, so it’s worth paying close attention. https://simplywall.st/stocks/fi/tec...r-its-gloomy-performance-on-the-stock-market/ Nokia has existing licensing agreements that will keep IP revenue stable. Its research and development investment will pay off in the medium term. As the telecom industry transitions to 5G, Nokia’s IP revenue may grow from patent renewals. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4372004-why-nokia-is-fading-from-5
Samsung will not get every 5G equipment contract. There's plenty of room in the global market for everyone to make money. Nokia and Ericsson could be the suppliers of choice for other nations and cellular.carriers.
Nokia cellular equipment is upsettingly expensive. They have a wide array of compromises to make their equipment easier to afford but it always involves reduced function that will impact service or upgradability. But, equipment cost is cheap with Nokia, compared to their maintenance contracts. I don't know anything about Samsung cellular equipment. I will offer the idea that I doubt Samsung cell equipment is as powerful as Nokia, based entirely on ignorance. At some point, Nokia is either going to have to abuse their customers a bit less or lose business because there is a lot of gravy to attract competition. Good on Samsung for eating Nokia's lunch.
True.(thanks for bringing this up) Ericsson got the deal with Bell and Nokia signed with Telus. Telus had recently announced that European vendors Ericsson and Nokia will also support the deployment of its 5G network. https://www.rcrwireless.com/2020061...cts-samsung-electronics-5g-network-deployment
Makes me think of how Motorola dominated communications equipment. Every public safety system in The USA was Motorola. The 1st cellphones. Now look at Motorola. Not where it was. Nor IBM and Xerox. Where every business used IBM and Xerox. Nobody sees that today.
This is the best analogy I've read, regarding Nokia. While Nokia punishes incumbent customers with their pricing model, they are going to have a difficult time gaining new customers or even compete for significant expansion of existing customers. I'd like to know a lot more about Samsung cellular gear. If it is viable, at all, they will gain a lot of customers and I would expect the system to evolve quickly, closing the technology gap to Nokia.
I suspect there are many factors beyond pricing and the best technology. People considering bids have multiple considerations. It's not the best? It's not the cheapest? How does it integrate with existing equipment? What's the timeframe for implementation? How much will ongoing maintenance cost? Are they offering bribes and kickbacks? Or at least I would consider bribes and kickbacks.
Blackberry has a 5G phone coming out also. Remember Blackberry and Palm Pilot? I still have Nextel phones, a base station, + amplified antennas, and a complete Motorola 2way radio system, along with shoebox full of Blackberry and Palm Pilots. My garage has enough obsolete technology to open a museum. It keeps my old car stuff company. A management change is needed? Maybe.
The GM/Nikola partnership causes me to think GM is on the way out. It will sustain Nikola for a little while but, ultimately, you can only drag a dead body for so long before Bernie figures out what's what.
Got it for the rocket shot from around 5.50 to 8.00. Noticed some unusual options flow on the 2/19 $10 Call this morning! Locked in about 250% on the options.
