Slashdot Mirror
Does RIM's "Huge Loss" Signal Wider Handset Market Deterioration?
zacharye writes "RIM was expected to deliver a nightmarish, -30% year-on-year revenue decline into the May quarter — the company issued its latest profit warning just four weeks ago. Yet it ended up missing the lowered consensus estimate by 10%, generating just $2.8 billion in sales. The reasons for RIM's decline are well-known and will be rehashed again over the next 24 hours. But the size of the F1Q13 sales miss raises another question: apart from Apple and Samsung, is the handset industry drifting into serious trouble?"
I'll venture a guess that in 10 years, RIM's fall from grace will probably be a great case study in business schools around the world.
How a successful company managed, through horrible fore-sight, atrocious product management and lousy business management, to squander an insurmountable lead in the enterprise market is amazing.
On to the story at hand: there is no doubt that the wider handset market is in all kinds of trouble. Apple clearly makes most of the profit, and Samsung picks off what is left. What does this leave the other players? Nothing. Clearly there is no competition in the iOS market, and Samsung has a huge lead (and massive fab capabilities). Unless one of the other players steps up and makes a handset that, you know, you'd actually want, then they're dead.
End of story - this isn't that complex. Make a product people want. The competition has showed you the way....
Cemil.
RIM was in the same place two years ago, with a nasty software stack and no ecosystem. They responded by buying QNX. Even with the latest delays they are still going to from purchase to market faster than Apple did with OS X. Same fundamental problem, same solution, dramatically different outcomes.
OSX might have saved Apple from extinction, but it wasn't enough to make them thrive. The Ipod did that.
Qnx might save some residue of RIM but if they want to thrive again, they will need a fresh beachhead in a new market.
The handset industry is facing the same problem as the PC industry did during the 80's and we will end up with 2 or 3 large players.
oh you mean just like happened to handset industry in 1996? and again in 2000? and again in 2004? and 2008?
hint: handset industry is in perpetual trouble, always been, always will. the bigger players manage with their momentum over the bad times, like motorola & samsung have done(even moto ended up getting chopped up, since last time they had a hit was with the original razrs) and how nokia is doing now after almost a decade of good times. it remains to be seen if blackberry is too big to fail or not in this regard.
the difference to pc industry is obvious though, you can't as easily just buy the parts and throw them together - another difference is IP rights, which basically bar any new entrees to the market(only small niche players are tolerated without getting sued by the big 5) even though anyone can buy the devices from the subcontracting factories.
and rims huge loss just signals rims situation - they hit their market peak. their actual problem was that they were never a global player and another problem is that they kept just hiring more and more people during their good times - that's another thing these companies do, they hoard engineers on the good times even if they don't have anything worhwhile for them to do - so expenses balloon when their profits balloon and then if they have a period of not having a hit phone in the stores it's doomsday instantly.
also - bb only ever had a lead in very few countries. they were never a truly global contender - however they did have growth until now.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
All of the above used the same OS, and all were competing on price. Sony did try to distinguish themselves in the design department, but they couldn't match the Apple design team. HP made some handsome machines, but once booted, they looked like everyone else. They were all Microsoft's bitch, and though it gave an advantage in some markets, they had no control of the quality of the OS. In the end, they were boring in design and use. Their products were associated with work. Booting up your home computer shouldn't remind you of the crushing boredom of your beige box in your cubicle.
photosMy Photostream