Apple's Royalty Payments to Nokia Estimated at $608 Million Up Front, ~$138 Million Per Quarter
Deutsche Bank analyst Kai Korschelt today estimated that Nokia will be receiving on the order of a 420 million euro ($608 million) lump-sum payment from Apple as part of a patent litigation settlement between the two companies.
The estimate, based on previous patent-related settlements in the industry, assumes a 1 percent royalty rate on all iPhones sold through the first quarter -- 110 million phones at an average selling price of $550. Korschelt also says that Apple would likely send Nokia recurring revenue payments covering future iPhone sales at the same rate, payments that would come in at around 95 million euros ($137.6 million) per quarter based on current sales, to cover ongoing licensing.
It's a significant sum for Nokia. The Finnish company is feeling tremendous pressure in the market as it abandons its old Symbian-based smartphone strategy and transitions to Microsoft's new Windows smartphone OS.
A report from Japanese analyst house Nomura, which got quite a bit of coverage yesterday, stated that the situation at Nokia was so poor that Samsung -- and perhaps even Apple -- would pass the Nokia in smartphone shipments this quarter. Of course, Nomura's numbers are based on an expectation of a massive drop in sales from Nokia as it transitions operating systems -- think the entire continent of Europe suddenly not buying Nokia phones -- plus a near doubling in smartphone sales by Samsung over the previous quarter. Samsung's mobile phones have been booming on the strength of Android, but that much growth in one quarter seems unlikely. Nokia is in trouble, but almost certainly not that much trouble.
Robert Cozza, mobile devices analyst at Gartner, poured water on Nomura's report, telling MacRumors:
In 1Q11 Nokia smartphone sales were double those of Samsung, so it seems optimistic to see this overtake in 2Q. If Nokia's new Symbian devices will fail with consumers over the next couple of quarters then we could see this overtake from Samsung on Nokia happening in 3Q.MacRumors also spoke to Ramon Llamas at IDC about Nokia's chances:
Nokia is very fast at turning things around. They're currently in transition mode, and anytime you're going to be transitioning from the way things have been to the way things are going to be, it's not going to be without some series of dips in revenue.And now Nokia gets to enjoy a little bit of the spoils from Apple's success as well. Time will tell if they can turn it around themselves.
Nokia has just provided the overall smartphone market with a gift: it's exposed itself and its vulnerabilities to everyone else. Lots of vendors are going to be able to turn up the heat.
Top Rated Comments
(View all)
This should prop up their expected dismal (again) quarterly showing.
When your products suck ass because you were colossally negligent for nearly four years I guess you can live off royalties. Why not.
So LTD - you admit that Apple was in the wrong and Nokia was justified in suing and that winning the suit was legit?
I admit that if Apple owed money to Nokia for use of their patents then they need to pay like anyone else. But that was never at issue.
If Nokia was asking for more than what everyone else was paying then we had a problem, in which case it was right for Apple to hold out.
I'm not sure what there was to "win" here when Apple would have had to pay Nokia something anyway. We all knew that. The only question was how much. That's what the dispute was about. Not whether Apple owed anything.
Not much of a contest to begin with, though. You've got an innovator at the top of their game, and then you've got an example of wilful negligence gone very bad. Nokia can use every cent they can get. Good for them. Better buyout bait at then end.
LOL. Run for congress - you're great at sidestepping.
Now Nokia is not only negligent (in your opinion) but WILLFUL? Too funny. You also start my saying IF Apple owed money - and then you stated that Apple did owe Nokia money - the question was how much. Do you see how you shape your posts to serve your purpose/twist it anyway you can to keep Apple ahead in the arrangement?
Here's the fact. Nokia owned patents. Apple used them. Apple was sued and lost and now has to make restitution. There's no patent trolling going on. There's a legitimate patent holder who enforced their rights via the legal system.
BELIEVE me - if this were Apple's patents and Nokia was sued and lost - you'd be shouting how great it is that someone who dared opposed Apple got shot down. Of that I am certain.
Again, please don't make false statements.
Apple wasn't paying, they got sued. Even macrumors posted this;
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/10/22/nokia-files-iphone-related-suit-against-apple-regarding-wireless-patents/
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/11/apple-files-countersuit-against-nokia/
Update: According to the court filing posted by Digital Daily, Apple accuses Nokia of demanding unreasonable licensing terms, including reciprocal access to intellectual property owned by Apple, for a variety of its patents.
Through the present suit, Nokia has asserted unfounded claims of infringement and breached licensing commitments it made to license on F/RAND [Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory] terms all patents that it claimed were necessary for a party to practice standards. Nokia has also violated those licensing commitments by demanding unjustifiable royalties and reciprocal licenses to Apple's patents covering Apple's pioneering technology -- patents unrelated to any industry standard. This attempt by Nokia to leverage patents previously pledged to industry standards is an effort to free ride on the commercial success of Apple's innovative iPhone while avoiding liability for copying the iPhone and infringing Apple's patents.
Apple denies that any of Nokia's patents cited in its own lawsuit are "essential" to standards, but even if a court should rule any of the contested claims valid, Apple should be granted F/RAND licensing terms, which Nokia has refused to offer.
I don't purport to support anything LTD says, but you guys need to do some homework. Nokia's say in the dispute was that Apple didn't pay, yes, but Apple's reciprocal say in the dispute was indeed that Nokia wanted terms in violation of F/RAND commitments. I don't see how that was in any way a false statement as quoted.
Edit: I like how I got negged for posting factual information with links. That's rich.
Some of you aren't getting it. There was a reason Apple held out on paying Nokia. It was never in dispute that they owed anything.
Most of Nokia's IP relates to international wireless standards, and the licensing of this particular IP, such as GSM, is a far different beast than other IP. There's really no way around *not* licensing it to others, and no way around others *not* having to use it.
There are, however, rules that the licensor of this IP must abide by, namely and in particularly under Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory terms, known as FRAND. As you can tell, this sort of thing doesn't at all apply to all IP. However, Nokia's is quite fundamental to the mobile industry, i.e., GSM. Nokia must license according to reasonable terms. The issue was, what was meant by Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory.
Apple alleged that Nokia's terms were *not* Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory whereas they are required to be. We don't know exactly hoe much Nokia was asking. We know that Apple did not have a lot of similar patents that Nokia had to license under FRAND, so we can just as well assume that they were asking for more than what Apple thought was justified.
Given that this cue didn't go on for very long, means that that one of the parties had to give in to the other. We really don't know who tapped out first. However, do note that Apple already had three of the patents excluded already. Further, one of the parties needed the deal (as in, money) more than the other, and given the early resolution, they needed the deal *now.*
Draw your own conclusions.
Yes - one of the parties DID need the deal. Apple. You'd like to think people (like me, perhaps) don't get it - or you. The problem is - we do. We don't agree and we're looking at this situation from a holistic point of view - not one of a 100 percent faith believer in Apple.
You will never be seen on these boards as someone with perspective. Because you have none. Even when/if you post with some clarity in thought - the problem is, you're known to have this incredible unwavering bias.
Good luck with WP7 though ... you'll need it!
[ Read All Comments ]
T-Mobile today announced that it was altering its existing Simple Choice plans, adding more data, a new pricing tier and no-added-cost international texting from the United States.
Simple Choice...
The SlatePro TechDesk is a new Kickstarter project featuring a desk that has been designed with built-in docks and cutouts to accommodate several different Apple devices. It comes with multiple...
Jawbone today updated its UP app to version 3.1, adding several new features to improve its Jawbone UP fitness band. Multiple enhancements have been made to sleep tracking, with the app including...
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Apple CEO Tim Cook for lunch yesterday at Apple HQ in Cupertino, California.
Netanyahu is traveling through the United States for the American...
Shares of video and pixel processing company Pixelworks have climbed over 40 percent after the company revealed a strategic relationship with Apple that contributed significantly to the company's...
In the time of the first Apple v. Samsung trial in 2011, Apple requested an injunction to prevent Samsung from selling its Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets within the United States. Apple...
Science and technology company Azoi has unveiled the Wello health monitoring case for the iPhone 4S, iPhone 5 and iPhont 5s, allowing users to track various human metrics such as blood pressure,...
Six Apple executives received more than 30,000 shares of stock in the form of restricted stock units or RSUs according to a series of filings with the SEC. RSUs are typically issued to employees to...
