Those figures are NET PHONE SALES REVENUES for the quarter being reported, Puget... not profits. Look at the PROFIT statements for each company. Nokia sells phones... and not much else. Their profits for the entire 2nd quarter 2010 were a paltry $282 million... on their entire revenue. They just fired their CEO for poor performance over the past several years.
No one but YOU is challenging these figures. They seem to have been accepted as factual by people who know how to check these financial statistics... and they have been reported by a lot of other pundits. You are willing to accept Gartner's unsupported predictions for four years from now—based on absolutely NOTHING but wishful thinking—as gospel truth and factual, but are unwilling to accept analysis based on company reports of actual reported profits in audited financial statements? That really doesn't make sense, Puget. One is nose picking, using bias assumptions; the other is reproducible from the same data by other analysts.
I'm reporting facts as published. You are merely speculating.
I know, which is why I called BS on the asymco data! That's the ONLY data they had on that post that Anti linked! It wasn't even profits, it was revenue! Yet apparently it was supposed to be proof of some claim about 47% of the EBIT of the industry...
No one but YOU is challenging these figures.
Which is interesting, because they simply don't hold up. It would be interesting to see what data created those numbers, because EVERY LINK PROVIDED by anyone else used this asymco data as the source. And asymco doesn't say where it got the data.
Hey, if you want to suck down random, unverified data on the Internet, be my guest!