Lenovo's Fourth Quarter Losses...

[archer6]

It never ceases to amaze me when I read articles like this.

I think to myself, here we are... a large body of Lenovo's installed base of users. A group of passionate enthusiasts of the ThinkPad brand. A group who if listened to, truly listened to, would provide Lenovo with all of the information it needs to improve the product, thereby increasing sales significantly and attracting new customers. After all there is nothing better than our raving reviews and spreading the word to the people we know.

Here are a couple of excerpts from the article and a link.

"Lenovo reported on Thursday a net loss and sales decline for both the fourth quarter and fiscal year ended March 31. The Hong-Kong-based PC maker watched its annual revenue shrink to $14.9 billion, a drop of 8.9 percent from the previous year. Including restructuring costs and one-time expenses, the annual net loss totaled $188 million."

"But Lenovo placed most of the blame on its meager fourth-quarter global PC shipments, which dropped 8.2 percent from the previous year. To combat the downturn, the company had already announced a cost-cutting and restructuring program"

To which I ask... why don't they get serious about reading our forum, addressing the issues we so fairly report, and build a better product?
After all who better to consult with than your customers?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-102463 ... 7-1_3-0-20

[rkawakami]

Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment...

Some of the things that we Thinkpad enthusiasts may be asking for, may tend to increase the costs involved in designing and constructing a system. At this point in the global economy, I'd say that most people are looking for a good deal; a euphemism for "cheap". Certainly there are some things which could be implemented for little or no cost, but asking for titanium rollcages, the fastest video processors and 4:3 Flexview LCDs would seem to me to be counterproductive to lowering costs for the general masses.

On a related note, I'm shocked to see a deal like this: http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=76759 (SL400 or SL500 for $399). Even when I was gainfully employed, I never really considered purchasing something like a new T series Thinkpad since they were at least 50% more than some of the other systems being offered at the time. Only by picking up systems that were two (or three) generations behind the (b)leading edge curve could I participate in the Thinkpad experience. I've been playing with an SL500 for the last couple of weeks and although the keyboard layout is drastically different than Thinkpad-normal, it doesn't have the flexibility of a "real" Ultrabay, has a squished (and glossy) WXGA display, it's still a very capable system to use with everyday life.

[beaker]

Competing on price is a losing proposition for Lenovo. Today, I priced a x60s replacement battery and X301 via the website. The battery I bought was HALF-PRICED on ebay and will be delivered sealed in a Lenovo box. An X301 w/ SU9600 can be bought cheaper from a Lenovo partner than last year's X301 SU9400 as of right now today. The best deals in terms of accessories and the absolute best Thinkpad configuration are not available on Lenovo's website. If you want a Thinkpad configuration which has been out for more than six months, then go through the website by all means.

And what are you buying? Replacement parts can be (and will be from my experience) used except for batteries (which are 1/2 price elsewhere). Why was my time wasted when I had to send THREE used (sorry REFURBISHED) pieces of garbage cdroms back to Lenovo before they sent another USED cdrom that worked?

Competing on price is a William Amelio "Dell" mentality. I have always thought the Chinese are quick to recognize failure, and correct their mistakes.

[archer6]

@ Ray,

Actually I like your points, as I _was_ rather focused on the high end of the spectrum, when writing my post. My frame of mind was more like "I know they can do this" as opposed to a laser like focus on cost control. After all there is no denying that the ball game has changed with the economic meltdown.

Suddenly my field of vision, when out in public places like Starbucks, is picking up an amazing number of Netbooks on tabletops as opposed to full fledged notebooks. At least when it comes to the general public. Where I still see our much loved ThinkPads, especially tablets are when the pharmaceutical reps are meeting between their appointments with Doctors. Or the corporate types like myself that have used ThinkPads as their laptop of choice for mission critical work, where reliability is a must.

I enjoyed your comments on the SL500 a machine that I've often wondered about. Your endorsement is as good as gold, I admire your depth of experience and contributions here on the forum.

Cheers...

[tomh009]

Competing on price is a losing proposition for Lenovo. Today, I priced a x60s replacement battery and X301 via the website. The battery I bought was HALF-PRICED on ebay and will be delivered sealed in a Lenovo box.

A Lenovo box, and possibly even from a Lenovo-authorized factory. But most likely sold directly (without Lenovo authorization) from the factory, bypassing the Lenovo distribution chain altogether. Even when the cheap Chinese goods on eBay aren't counterfeit as such, they are often still unauthorized.

[bill bolton]

Suddenly my field of vision, when out in public places like Starbucks, is picking up an amazing number of Netbooks on tabletops as opposed to full fledged notebooks....

The paradigms in computing are changing, yet again, and the real impact of computing clouds is starting to bite at all levels. All the "laptop" suppliers are struggling with what that means.

There is not a single desktop system in the computing space of the corporate client I am working with now. In another few years it will probably be a case of not a single laptop.

Cheers,

Bill B.

[tomh009]

There is not a single desktop system in the computing space of the corporate client I am working with now. In another few years it will probably be a case of not a single laptop.

A "netbook" isn't really conceptually any different from a "laptop" or "notebook" -- it's just another variation on that continuum. Different buyers will choose different models (such as W, T, X, SL, netbook etc) based on their needs, just as they do today. For some people, the 17" screen is mandatory, whereas others will primarily value maximum mobility or battery life.

Now, handheld devices, whether iPhone, BlackBerry or UMPC, are indeed a different paradigm, but I very much doubt that they will replace laptop-style devices anytime in the near future.

[spuddog]

Once again we see corporations pursuing cost reduction rather than profit maximization. It does not make any difference how much it costs to make a product as long as you can sell it for more than you pay for it. ultimately businesses that compete on price alone will be undercut. By offering a product that has differentiating features a company may not make the most money, but will be able to survive.

Scott

[Performa636CD]

Even though the ideas from these boards are great and could really help Lenovo, there's a good chance they won't read posts on these boards. Many other companies are like that...they generally ignore their loyal customer's opinion from message boards. This could be for many reasons, including time and cost of monitoring, and even if the boards did produce good ideas, as already mentioned, they may only improve the product, but only by increasing price or in ways only a VERY small % of their customer base will recognize. For example, how many people "collect" laptops? How many people use their laptops for more than two years? People act surprised when I tell them I expect my laptops to last over 3 years, and that I buy them with the intention of using them for at least 4-5 years. When visiting colleges, my guide told me that upon graduation student weren't allowed to keep their school issued laptops. Why I asked, and the answer: "who wants a 4 year old laptop?"

[dr_st]

I daresay that Lenovo's fourth quarter losses really did have to do with the overall decline in PC shipments, which are caused by the global economic recession. I sincerely doubt that any feature or combination of features they could put in their Thinkpads to make them even better than they are would make any difference in this particular case.

I do agree with archer6, that Lenovo could benefit by listening to the opinions of these forums, since it hosts the most dedicated Thinkpad enthusiasts.

Even though I don't believe that the total population of the active members here alone forms a significant customer base in terms of numbers, I think that many of the ideas suggested by members here would be welcomed by many other Thinkpad users and potential users, which would have an effect on sales and propagation of the brand.

[underclocker]

Without question, the decline was based on the global recession. Most companies have seen reduced revenues and have been shrinking their employees (which use computers). Many have chosen to buy equipment off lease and use existing equipment longer or have just deferred purchases or just don't need any more machines since they have plenty for the existing employees. Most corporations are still using XP, so they certainly do not need more processing power for most employees.

While we all believe in Lenovo and ThinkPads, most corporate buyers and home users do not. They just use a machine for 2 to 4 years and then get a new one. Most of the world is not passionate about ThinkPads or any electronics at all, for that matter.

I would say the only possible way for Lenovo (or any other manufacturer) to get a sales edge would be to introduce something the others do not have. The only thing I can think of, which has been mentioned on this forum, is bringing back standard sized (4:3) LCD's to laptops. That might actually increase sales.

[archer6]

I'm certainly enjoying all the great thought provoking responses to this thread.
One of my original thoughts was not that the sales decline was due to a lack of product quality, selection, or features. As obviously economic conditions worldwide always play a huge part in it, even when not as drastic as the recent downturn.
My thoughts were more along the lines of what can Lenovo do to increase and maximize the sales opportunities that still exist? This is where I believe there is great room for improvement and thus an increase in revenue. After all there remains a segment of the market that is yet to be tapped. That segment are the people that do have the resources, and are willing to pay for the best notebook available providing it is equipped with all of the best features. These do not have to be revolutionary or exclusive, but rather simply be all inclusive in one series of ThinkPads.
.
For example, I know many people that would quickly give up their current laptop (of any brand) for a ThinkPad that has the best display, the broadest choices of resolutions, backlighting, the highest quality keyboard, and one that runs cool, quiet & fast. Those are just a few examples of qualities that would comprise a ThinkPad so popular and highly sought after that it would quickly become known as the finest laptop one can buy. A laptop that could very well minimize & reduce the PC vs. Mac argument. Just think, if the press raved about this new model as the best laptop of all, what the impact would be. If you and I could tell all the people in our sphere of influence about this great machine it would certainly make a positive difference in ThinkPad sales. Much like the current iPhone vs BlackBerry debate in the smartphone arena, a world class ThinkPad would draw a lot of attention. Would it solve all of Lenovo's financial woes? Of course not. But it would certainly put them in a better light. And any improvement or positive press & related attention is better than remaining status quo. Remembering that the road to recovery begins with a single step, I see this as a step in the right direction for Lenovo.
.
Cheers...

[Performa636CD]

Without question, the decline was based on the global recession. Most companies have seen reduced revenues and have been shrinking their employees (which use computers). Many have chosen to buy equipment off lease and use existing equipment longer or have just deferred purchases or just don't need any more machines since they have plenty for the existing employees. Most corporations are still using XP, so they certainly do not need more processing power for most employees.

While we all believe in Lenovo and ThinkPads, most corporate buyers and home users do not. They just use a machine for 2 to 4 years and then get a new one. Most of the world is not passionate about ThinkPads or any electronics at all, for that matter.

I would say the only possible way for Lenovo (or any other manufacturer) to get a sales edge would be to introduce something the others do not have. The only thing I can think of, which has been mentioned on this forum, is bringing back standard sized (4:3) LCD's to laptops. That might actually increase sales.

What is it with you all and 4:3 screens? Why do you like them so much? They're so un-ergonomic to me!

[tomh009]

I still like the 4:3 screens, but I'm now used to the 8:5 on my X200s ... I really think that the number of people who would switch to ThinkPads just to get 4:3 screens is vanishingly small in the big picture. And it's not enough to offer one model: there would have to be multiple ones. In the end, I don't think the economics are there for Lenovo.

[underclocker]

What is it with you all and 4:3 screens? Why do you like them so much? They're so un-ergonomic to me!

First of all, I said "...bringing back standard sized (4:3) LCD's to laptops. That might actually increase sales."

Why? Most of the world still works vertically, not horizontally. No problem for desktop displays that rotate, but working on documents, the Internet, or anything but spreadsheets and movies, on a squat, wide screen is not ideal. Un-ergonomic, is squat displays. Ergonomics would follow how people work, vertically. (Don't confuse carrying a closed laptop with working on a laptop.)

Basically, the move to widescreen has forced many people up to 15.4" displays (just to have approximately the same vertical as a standard 14.1" LCD) which translates into a bigger overall machine, more weight, less battery life, more waste, etc.

I said "might" because people will pretty much get used to anything...eventually.

[pianowizard]

but working on documents, the Internet, or anything but spreadsheets and movies, on a squat, wide screen is not ideal...
Basically, the move to widescreen has forced many people up to 15.4" displays (just to have approximately the same vertical as a standard 14.1" LCD)

The above is true only for people who maximize their documents and view one document at a time. For viewing two documents side by side, I've found that even 1600x1200 isn't always enough. That's one of the reasons I upgraded my T43p and R50p to 2048x1536, but the downside is that things look too small. For me, the sweet spot is 1920x1200, both for desktop and laptop monitors -- I have a Dell 2408WFP at work, and a 2407WFP at home. I recently got a 1680x1050 Acer LCD (my first experience with this res) and realized that its extra 5% width over UXGA makes tiling two documents signicantly easier. So, I may actually prefer 1680x1050 over UXGA, even though the latter has 8.8% more pixels.

I lost interest in Lenovo's Thinkpads after they started the current triple-digit models, but they would win back my interest if they introduced something with a 13.3" 1680x1050 screen!

[underclocker]

There are always exceptions to generalizations. Working on documents side by side on a laptop would constitute a very small minority. However, you have a good point. If your eyes are good enough, then a very high resolution widescreen is a reasonable alternative to a standard ration LCD, for some people.

And you are correct about desktop widescreens, if you can get one large enough, the ratio just doesn't matter!

[Performa636CD]

First of all, I said "...bringing back standard sized (4:3) LCD's to laptops. That might actually increase sales."

Why? Most of the world still works vertically, not horizontally. No problem for desktop displays that rotate, but working on documents, the Internet, or anything but spreadsheets and movies, on a squat, wide screen is not ideal. Un-ergonomic, is squat displays. Ergonomics would follow how people work, vertically. (Don't confuse carrying a closed laptop with working on a laptop.)

Basically, the move to widescreen has forced many people up to 15.4" displays (just to have approximately the same vertical as a standard 14.1" LCD) which translates into a bigger overall machine, more weight, less battery life, more waste, etc.

I said "might" because people will pretty much get used to anything...eventually.

I actually have to say that people work horizontally. We read left to right, not up and down. But given how large one wants their words, I can see how someone can prefer 4:3 over widescreen as a matter of preference. But the need to have two documents open really requires a wide screen or two screens.

Whenever I have a window open, whether it's video (especially movies), Word documents, webpages, or e-mail, I always prefer to have the window be much wider than it is tall. And given applications like IM messaging programs, iTunes, etc. even if I want my "main window" to be square or close to the 4:3 ratio, I have some room to the side for my IM program, or can modify both my main window and iTunes to have them both open on the same screen without having to cycle through my windows (or use Expose on OS X).

And plus, my eyes are located to the side of each other, not on top of each other. I'm pretty sure my field of vision is wider than it is tall.

I'm not trying to be rude, as I was truly surprised how many people here love their 4:3 screens. I figured there must be some reason, like some common application you all use that's ideally used on a 4:3 screen or something.

[RealBlackStuff]

On a 4:3 (or 5:4 [1280x1024] which I use on my monitor) screen you don't have to scroll so much, that's why people prefer those screens.
I too hate any wide screen laptops.

[hausman]

What is it with you all and 4:3 screens? Why do you like them so much?

I really think that the number of people who would switch to ThinkPads just to get 4:3 screens is vanishingly small in the big picture. And it's not enough to offer one model: there would have to be multiple ones. In the end, I don't think the economics are there for Lenovo.

An analogy. Just as I prefer 4:3 screens for the many reasons mentioned above, I also prefer a manual transmission over an automatic for many reasons, e.g. better control and traction in adverse conditions like snow, higher gas mileage, more driving "fun", etc. If I was looking for a new "family" car I'd still prefer a manual transmission. However I realize that there's diminishing demand for them and therefore auto makers no longer offer them except in a small subset of their product lines, e.g. sports cars.

P.S. While lower cost is also a plus, it's not the primary reason for me to prefer a manual transmission. In the case of 4:3 I suspect that, to the contrary, those panels now cost more compared to widescreens so notebook manufacturers have even less incentive to offer them.

[Performa636CD]

On a 4:3 (or 5:4 [1280x1024] which I use on my monitor) screen you don't have to scroll so much, that's why people prefer those screens.
I too hate any wide screen laptops.

But using that reasoning, with more words per line using a widescreen, that should reduce how often you need to scroll down...well at least with word processing programs.

It's also my experience that a vertical strip of screen is more useful than a horizontal strip of screen. This is because of IM programs.

[RealBlackStuff]

It's also my experience that a vertical strip of screen is more useful than a horizontal strip of screen.

Gotcha!
Another great argument for a 4:3 screen, which give you more vertical space than a wide screen!

[GomJabbar]

It's also my experience that a vertical strip of screen is more useful than a horizontal strip of screen.

I agree!!!

[pianowizard]

Gotcha!
Another great argument for a 4:3 screen, which give you more vertical space than a wide screen!

I think Performa636CD was referring to a vertical strip of extra space that's next to a non-maximized window, where you can fit something small such as an IM program. A horizontal strip of extra space isn't as useful.

[rkawakami]

Yes, but a 15" diagonal 4:3 screen is taller than a corresponding 15" diagonal wide-screen display (be it 8:5 or 16:9) and thus offers more vertical space for "gadgets". If document viewing is the norm, I'd much prefer an SXGA+ screen over a WSXGA, given the same diagonal size.

However, let's throw out the anchor on this screen resolution tangent and get back to the original topic...

[tomh009]

There are always exceptions to generalizations. Working on documents side by side on a laptop would constitute a very small minority. However, you have a good point. If your eyes are good enough, then a very high resolution widescreen is a reasonable alternative to a standard ration LCD, for some people.

Indeed. There is one key application where I find that the X200s screen wins big over the X61: working on photos in Photoshop. With the images themselves being a 3:2 ratio, and then having to fit two separate vertical toolbars/docks on the screen, the 1440x900 on the X200s has just about perfect proportions.

For working on Word documents, though, more height would be nice. The two-page view is just a tad small on a 12" screen.

[Performa636CD]

I think Performa636CD was referring to a vertical strip of extra space that's next to a non-maximized window, where you can fit something small such as an IM program. A horizontal strip of extra space isn't as useful.

Yes, that's what I meant, thanks.

[Performa636CD]

Indeed. There is one key application where I find that the X200s screen wins big over the X61: working on photos in Photoshop. With the images themselves being a 3:2 ratio, and then having to fit two separate vertical toolbars/docks on the screen, the 1440x900 on the X200s has just about perfect proportions.

For working on Word documents, though, more height would be nice. The two-page view is just a tad small on a 12" screen.

I think optometrists smile every time laptop with a screen under 12 inches is purchased.

I think my 12" PowerBook has taken 5 years off the life of my eyes.

[bill bolton]

A "netbook" isn't really conceptually any different from a "laptop" or "notebook"

That's like saying a laptop isn't conceptually different from a desktop! After you've used a laptop for awhile it become quite clear that there is a huge conceptual difference between a desktop and a laptop.

Use a netbook in a true computing cloud environment for a while and the same sort of conceptual gap starts to become very apparent.

Cheers,

Bill B.

[bill bolton]

Working on documents side by side on a laptop would constitute a very small minority.

How did you determine that?

Cheers,

Bill B.