The Swedish maker of accessories for mobile phones, Krusell, has been silent since August or so but they now came back with a bang and published the numbers of the top 10 selling phones derived from their accessory sales for both October and November 2009 in quick succession.
I am only giving you the November positions (hint: the October ones are in brackets). It goes like this:
1.(1) Apple iPhone 3G
2.(-) Nokia 3720 Classic
3.(8) Nokia 6303 Classic
4.(-) Nokia E52
5.(2) Nokia 5800 XpressMusic
6.(-) HTC HD2
7.(-) Nokia E71
8.(-) Sony Ericsson Naite
9.(6) Samsung B2100
10.(5) Nokia 6700 Classic
() = Last month’s position.
The iPhone seems to be the darling of Krusell-accessory-buying customers (which may or may not be a matter of concern – depending on your taste. Nokia’s performance is fairly noteworthy though. A little reminder that the Finnish giant is anything but dead. And don’t be fooled: Krusell has stores all over the world, including in the US, which makes the overall top 10 performance of Nokia phones all the more impressive.
As to how meaningful these stats are, I refer you to earlier thoughts (see also here).
The conference formerly known as Symbian Smartphone Show (or something along those lines) is back this year as the Symbian Exchange & Exhibition (or SEE09). It kicks off this Tuesday in London’s Earl’s Court Exhibition Grounds and boasts a rather impressive line-up:
Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia Founder and one of TIME’s 100 most influential people) will be the headliner. There will be keynotes and panels with senior executives from the world’s leading vendors and carriers, including Nokia, IBM, Sony Ericsson, NTT DoCoMo, Vodafone, Qualcomm, Texas Instruments, Samsung, as well as application pros from the BBC, Guardian, GetJar, Navteq and many, many more.
SEE09 is the world’s largest event for the Symbian platform, which is – even if recently often maligned – still the largest smartphone platform anywhere!
Attendance is FREE. You can register here (it’s not too late…).
I’ll be there, too, so please drop me a line if you want to meet for a coffee (or beer at the party – attendance of which is also FREE). See you in London this week then!
After much huffing and puffing, Vodafone unveiled yesterday what everyone had been waiting for for months and months: its new Vodafone 360 concept, which will replace Vodafone Live! It launches on – drumroll – LiMo-OS Linux phones from Samsung with touchscreen and GPS and, for the H1, AMOLED display (yum!), WiFi, HSDPA, etc, etc, etc. and also supports a fairly big range of Nokia (not on the N97 though!) and Sony Ericsson devices (although, judging by the screenshots, it doesn’t look as sexy on those).
The 360 thing is, according to the press release
a brand new set of internet services for the mobile and PC which gathers all of a customer’s friends, communities, entertainment and personal favourites (like music, games, photos and video) in one place.
It has an address book with nodes into Facebook, IM (Windows and Google) and will “soon” also cover Twitter, Hyves and StudiVZ (the German Facebook clone). Two tailor-made (!) handsets that use a proprietary (!) interface based on LiMo’s release 2 mobile Linux OS. Users can create groups across different networks (which is very neat!), an app store with 1,000 apps at launch (no word so far what this comprises) and syncing with your computer.
So is this the big thing then? Here’s the good, the bad and the ugly:
The Good
- The service reaches out. It acknowledges (this is a big step for most carriers!) that users have a life outside their carrier. Facebook, Live Messenger and Google Talk are a bit thin, I’d say, but let’s cut them some slack; the others will follow.
- It has a couple of neat twists built-in: I mentioned a few above but there is also a feature that uses some spooky thing called the “Vodafone’s proximity algorythm” and which basically automatically favourites your most-loved people: the most frequently contacted people (like your mom?) come closer to the front.
- At least on the custom-built devices, it looks much better than previous attempts by carriers to make something look and feel a little more user-friendly.
- I hear that the whole widget-thing should be really neat. Now, I haven’t seen any of it as yet but the concept sounds good.
- It works across different operating systems (at least LiMo and Symbian).
As a funny side remark, the PR blurb points out that
The beauty of Vodafone 360 is that all the services work together and they are easy to use.
So they weren’t before, huh? 
— sorry, couldn’t resist…
The Bad
Some commentators mentioned that the cloud-hosted address book and generally aggregation of contacts, networks etc through a provider rather than through the handset would tie people to the provider more closely (which might not actually be anything Vodafone would object to). I am not sure how tough it would really be (as you have your computer back-up), so easy on that.
It is still very much a closed-circuit affair: It is Vodafone and no one else. It is proprietary, tailor-made and not open. This is not good (and, yes, I know that the oft-cited iPhone is proprietary and tailor-made, too). Alas, its applications are not – unless your name is Spotify; then it takes a little longer…
The Ugly
The underlying proprietary thinking is nothing I can see working longer term. In a world that is (Vodafone press speak)
a substantiator of Vodafone’s new brand expression – ‘power to you’ – which is focused on putting the customer in control and enabling simple and easy to manage communications, both mobile and fixed
this is also a little bit of a contradiction.
But I will say that it seems to be the nicest operator-built environment I have seen so far. And for this to come from the world’s largest operator is no mean feat and might actually yield some results. Go on, guys, tweak it, improve it, show us!
After many rumours and ominous statements that it was “reviewing its activities” Namco Bandai confirmed today that EA Mobile will thenceforth act as its distributor for mobile games outside the US and outside any app store.
After Taito and Eidos, EA Mobile just gobbled up another major distribution deal and the exodus from J2ME games distributed via carriers continues. It also means that EA’s dominance over the operator decks has just increased a little more yet again. It had estimated (back in June) that its 2009 mobile revenues would reach $185m (although this arguably includes Apple’s and other people’s app stores as well as embeds).
What is worrying is that this cements the oligopoly of games distribution in all major markets. EA Mobile, Gameloft occupy the top 2 slots very comfortably with Glu an equally comfortable but distant third. I-Play, Digital Chocolate, Real and Connect 2 Media are fighting for place and Xendex, Handy Games and a few others seek (and sometimes find) niches to prosper. THQ Wireless, Vivendi Games Mobile have departed. Player X found a new home under the mighty wings of Zed. And then? If the above companies all manage to maintain a healthy business, this might be enough; there are silverback gorillas in every market segment. If not though, this might become a doomed sub-sector; the limelight would then be on the (failed) ecosystem operators tried to build: overly fragmented with everyone of them wanting it just so and just their way rather than agreeing on a largely unified structure and processes pressed margins from a system that has been tough from the outset (handset fragmentation and international spread mean fairly high cost per capita anyway).
The accumulation of external properties arguably also mean that EA will need to run a business that is almost a combination of a publisher and an aggregator (with its very own challenges). The issue of shelf position (will they give Tetris and the Sims undue preference over Space Invaders, Pac-Man and Cooking Mama?), the commercials of their own deals (they anecdotally paid Hasbro a handsome sum), and the generally dominant position will all come into play and it is inconceivable (well, is it really?) that their partners will continue to play ball.
It might of course only be a brief interregnum on the way to an app store world. Smartphones are very much on the rise and, in that world, such stores seem to rule. Apple has taken the lead, Android followed suit and new stores are springing up almost by the day, which also includes operator-led ones: Orange already has one, Verizon Wireless has announced one (mobile web-based) and so has Vodafone (which might actually be bigger than Apples) as well as many others. The OEM all do the same (even though some carriers want to disallow them): Nokia Ovi, Blackberry App World, Sony Ericsson, LG, Samsung, you name them, they have it. The question of course is if that might mean the same thing all over again: will they again want it all just so? Will they again have it just their way so that a user would have the unique flavour of operator X on handset Y in this unique way, meaning that – again – thousands of SKUs would be required to service them? Groundhog Day? I hope not!
Image credit: http://www.antitrustreview.com/files/2007/07/files51lsaydhrsl.-ss500-.jpg
With what seems a month taken off for summer vacation (at least there was no list available), Swedish phone accessory maker Krusell has again provided us with their top 10 list of mobile phones for the last month. As you probably know by now, they are measuring this by looking at handset-specific accessory sales.
So here it is:
1.(2) Nokia 5800
2.(3) Nokia N97
3.(4) Nokia 6303 Classic
4.(5) Nokia 3109/3110 Evolve
5.(-) Nokia E51
6.(7) Nokia 6301/6300/6300i
7.(-) Samsung i8910 Omnia HD
8.(-) Nokia 6700
9.(8) Samsung B2100
10.(-) Nokia E71
() = Last month’s position.
This list is a bit of an odd one (and, yes, I know that I have voiced concerns about its accuracy before): how come the iPhone 3G shot in from nowhere to #2 in June and, by August has disappeared again completely? What happened to all the HTCs? Gone? Sudden shift in customer demand? Or were Krusell’s products for the respective models maybe just pulled from some stores? Or maybe it’s the looks? It’s odd, odd, odd…
Last week, there was the Mobilebeat conference on, and – amongst many other things – a lot of guys felt they had to air their opinions on the future of mobile apps or, errh, no apps. They spoke so elaborately about it that even the revered FT (albeit in its blog section) and the BBC felt compelled to run stories. Amongst others, the CEO of “indie” app store Get Jar and Google’s wonderful Vic Gundotra, VP Engineering and also equipped with this most valleyed of all Silicon Valley job titles, i.e. “Evangelist” (I would really like one like this, too!), in his case for developers spoke about where they saw information and entertainment on mobile phones going in the future and how the ecosystem would look like.
Now, let’s get serious.
What was Said?
First, GetJar‘s CEO sees the market for mobile applications becoming – get this – as big as the Internet (woah!). He then said also that it would peak at about 10m apps (in total?) by 2020. Hmm. GetJar then went on to warn that the number of developers would drop “drastically” and that only about 10% would be able to survive. The others would take their skills elsewhere. So where then? To the web? (This is of course interesting also because GetJar will deliver Sony Ericsson’s App Store…).
It is here where Google comes in. Gundotra said that, according to Google (and who would question them), the web had won. Even (!) Google was struggling with the device fragmentation in mobile and many, many applications could be delivered through “incredibly powerful” browsers as well. He even borrowed Steve Jobs for his argument, pointing out that the Apple CEO had announced that the iPhone was “Built for the Web” upon its launch.
There were others who contributed: Nokia’s Head of Services reminded everyone that Nokia was there to help with its Qt (Cutie, geddit?) cross-platform application network . The Symbian Foundation’s Executive Director, Lee Williams queried the need for more app stores and called, instead, for more than “just a bucket of apps”, which should look like an aisle with the very stuff that specific consumer is interested in and which (s)he could wander down at leisure.
They all however concluded that it [scil. the mobile web] was not there yet. Hm again… Let’s try to disentangle this all:
The Needle in the Haystack
Upon the launch of the app store and the wondrous stories of the iShoot developer Ethan Nicholas who coded in his bedroom after work only to resign from his day job weeks later because he made more money than he had ever thought. A lot of developers read that and, since it is the wet dream of every games developer (earn cash with an honest game without the “suits” fiddling with your game in between; anyone remember Copeland’s skateboarding turtle?), embarked on the journey themselves. And then they found, oops, it does not work that way? Why not? Well, because there are more than 400 applications going live every day. And with the sheer number of them, it could well be that the best app ever written is already out there but buried deep a couple of categories down in the app store.
This is no big surprise. It is how it works in any sector: one smart kid is not enough, you also need the environment and a lot of other building blocks to have a winner (as reigning F1 World Champion Lewis Hamilton is painfully realizing this year).
In the app store’s (and a gazillion other) case, this means that you have to make sure that you gain some attention. From Apple (or any other app store operator), from the press, from the users out there. And this is not news. There have been very well written pieces about this galore (see here for just one of them).
So will this mean the fall of a lot of the developers that went about their business thinking the app store magic would do away with centuries of business logic (there is a reason why companies have sales & marketing departments, you know…)? Yes, very probably. But does that mean the app model is flawed? No.
The Hit Dilemma
One of the Mobilebeat participants, namely Playfish, creators of some of the most successful Facebook games who released on the iPhone, too, complained about the hit-driven nature of games on the App Store. Whilst I am painfully aware of this dilemma, one has – again – to point out that this is pretty much how most of the economy works, too, unless, that is, one builds a superior and dominant brand (Tetris would be the example for the games world).
Other industries know this, too. Everyone knows IBM is a leading computer maker. Hardly anyone remembers that the Dutch electronics giant Philips used to be one of the biggest players in that market (not even Wikipedia mentions this); their CeBIT booth was bigger than IBM’s throughout the 70′s and early 80′s (my dad worked for Philips then; I need to dig out some pictures). What happened? Hey, they missed some crucial disruptive innovations and they were history…
What I want to say is that no one is immune to the demand for constant innovation and improvement (otherwise some Firefox will sneak around the corner and steal market share). The reason why this hit dilemma is more painful in mobile games than elsewhere is the relatively small size of the market to date: it is more difficult to build reserves than in other, more established sectors.
How Many App Stores? Mee too, me three, me four, …
With Apple’s roaring success with the app store, the whole industry stampeded to put out their own, and they have been moderately successful or failed. But it is early days! Why did they fail? Because they equally had hoped that one thing and one thing only (just name your bucket of apps an “app store”) would heal the painful failure of the sector in converting otherwise gladly paying users to also using, consuming, contributing to entertainment and information on their mobiles. Now, this overlooked that Apple’s model did not only consist of a storefront. It also consisted of a fairly simple developer programme (with a click-through agreement), a fair(er) revenue share to the developers and unprecedented ease of use in getting to the app of one’s choice. Try and apply this to, say, the launch of Nokia’s Ovi Store…
So do users need more than one store? No, not in general. If you can get all you ever need, want or desire from one destination, you don’t need another one. This however becomes a little precarious with a view to monopolizing channels. You would never know if there are not some that are a little more equal than you… So, having Firefox, Chrome, Opera, etc. next to Internet Explorer did the world a ton of good. And having Nokia, Sony Ericsson, the carriers working on alternatives to Apple’s app store is arguably of equal value. Will the user care? It depends on the execution: Google’s superior search algorithms made the old-style catalogue model previously found in search engines superfluous; why do I need to sort something if I have a little fairy that races to get me what I want in no time? So: if I have a bucket that comes with a little fairy, I don’t need long, long supermarket aisles. I’d rather get it home-delivered by the search fairies.
It’s the Usability, stupid!
Now to the key question: separate apps or web? Now in Google’s case, their pleading is somewhat obvious: well, they would, wouldn’t they?
Google, on the other hand, has apps out on most platforms for most of their web services: Be it Gmail (great Blackberry app!), Maps, or – all in one – their iPhone Google app, it comes as an app. And why?
Because it would otherwise be unusable! OK, let me rephrase that: the delivery of browser-based applications through mobile phones suffers some very severe setbacks today, amongst which usability on a small screen, constant connectivity and bandwidth. Whilst the latter two are arguably solvable some time soon, the former is a little trickier: when delivering to a mobile device, you not only have to download all underlying data (graphical assets, etc) but also an interface that works on that device. And because of the small form factor of mobile phones (even in the case of large-screen touchscreen phones like the iPhone), this is likely that your user experience will be significantly worse than on a large screen equipped with mouse, touchpad, etc. Apps can bridge this usability gap, and I would argue that this is precisely why Google is producing them. The underlying content can often (not always) well be delivered from the cloud but the UI of small devices is crucial to their sensibility.
With both (mobile) browser technology and handsets improving, the space available for services that can sensibly (and with superior costs) be delivered from the cloud (i.e. through the web) will increase, and steeply. However, there will always be applications that will either be impossible to deliver via the web (name a high-end 3D racing game on the web) or where a specific mobile UI would greatly improve the usability of any service.
It is another question if these will be delivered via flexible widgets or larger, more comprehensive apps (functionally, a lot of apps effectively are covert widgets); this will simply be (and remain) a question on the complexity of any given task and the ease and superior (or not) delivery an app would provide over a browser-based service. There will be an equilibrium between the two but I posit that there will remain large areas where browser-based delivery will not be able to compete with specific applications (that will draw on data from the cloud as well). Incidentally, 58% of Wired readers agree with me (and another 17% don’t care; check the bottom of the article)
This can be seen on the (“normal”) web, too: Google Docs (Google’s online suite of office applications) is, despite a lot of effort and being free to use, an utter underdog to MS Office or Open Office (the only numbers I could find give Google Docs a market share of between 1% and 5%). It is, I think, because downloadable office “apps” are so much more usable (and react instantaneously irrespective of my ISP’s moods) than online services. The complexity of the computing (and – more importantly – the bandwidth necessary to deliver it) is just too overwhelming (see here for a previous post on this).
More evolved mobile apps often are (and/or will be) a hybrid: they offer a front-end that optimizes the data drawn from an online environment for use on a specific mobile device. It will not be an “either/or” but an “and”. Anything else would anyway be so last century!
In Conclusio:
Whenever possible, services will move online because it is cheaper to produce. Whenever necessary, they will be delivered through dedicated apps because it is required to use them!
Not all is in recession it seems. The handset vendor world #3, LG predicts to ship 110m phones this year, which would represent a 9% increase in volumes on a year-on-year basis (see the market shares for 2008 and Q1/2009 below; courtesy of Strategy Analytics) in the face of what it believes will be an overall flat market this year.
So whilst everyone is shrinking, LG is growing. Everyone? Ah, now, Samsung is growing, too. The victims? Seemingly Motorola and Sony Ericsson with Nokia also suffering. No news then? Well, by 2012 LG wants to be #2 and ship around 200m devices (which would be 100% more than in 2008). So 9% growth wouldn’t get them there, would it?
Joking aside. Is this surprising? I think not. LG had had a couple of very “pretty” devices out. Starting with the LG Prada, they came out with the “Shine” and had a great success with the Viewty. They have been upping their game at a time where in particular Sony Ericsson and Motorola had been struggling to compose a coherent product strategy, and this will have enhanced the overall effect.
Everyone is jumping on the app store bandwagon and, so far, Sony Ericsson had been a little behind. Some thought this might be related to its PlayNow Arena offering, which is already an app – or rather media - store of sorts. But it turns out that the handset maker was plotting a different strategy and one with an interesting result indeed.
It was reported today that Sony Ericsson will partner with GetJar on the creation of an app store. GetJar (the guys with the ugly logo) is a giant in the distribution of mobile content who had gone to clock up 200m downloads in only 2 years by last year (and now recording 6.5m+ downloads per week and more than 300m since launch)), which was, prior to the Apple App Store a very respectable number indeed. Now, GetJar has now something like 45,000 apps on their store. However, these are for free. The company appears to making their money with ad injection…
Sony Ericsson will apparently provide a mix of GetJar’s free applications and premium content. The solution will be using GetJar’s platform and will roll out in the 13 countries that currently support PlayNow Arena first. Compatibility is currently ensured with 38 of Sony Ericsson’s handsets but they intend to roll out to further markets and models over the year. It supports J2ME and Symbian on the outset but they plan to support other platforms in the course of the year. Android probably…
The deal allows Sony Ericsson to jump start its store though and that might be the most important piece of it: it can combine its own catalogue (through its current offerings) with GetJar’s huge catalogue of free apps, thus avoiding the fairly empty places that some of the other guys put together (Palm announced it will launch its Web Catalogue with “a dozen or so” apps, even Nokia’s Ovi Store had “only” 20,000 “items” in at start). GetJar’s platform is arguably fairly powerful since this is the only thing they do, so a quite smart move.
On GetJar’s side, I wonder if this is the one of the first steps into a new direction (Sony Ericsson was not the first app store deal they signed; 3 UK and Portuguese carrier Optimus apparently signed up with them, too, which I had overlooked; apologies). The company’s business model is/was based around ad infusion, it seems (see their CEO blog about it here). So this might be the next wave to monetizing platform and content on it…
Here’s one that nearly slipped through the (well, at least my) net: according to a recent press release, the Eclipse Foundation is set to unveil a unified development platform. It is said that some major players, including Nokia, RIM, Sony Ericsson, IBM and Motorola have joined this initiative already though Android and – predictably – Microsoft and Apple are notable in their absence.
Here’s the list of the 10 best-selling phones (judged by accessory sales) as compiled by Krusell, our Swedish holster-maker friends. I will not comment further on the sense or nonsense of this information but reference what I said previously about it.
2. (2) HTC Touch HD
3. (5) Nokia 6300
4. (3) Nokia E51
5. (4) Blackberry Storm
6. (8) Nokia E71
7. (6) Nokia 3109
8. (-) Nokia 5800
9. (7) Sony Ericsson X1 Xperia
10. (-) Nokia 3120
I previously looked at recession-busting sectors and products, and here’s more proof that not all is bad: two reports point out that smartphones continue to outperform the market rather significantly, recording growth figures of 25.9% year-on-year in Europe; the growth for all of 2007 vs 2008 was even more impressive: they grew by 36.1%. In the US, smartphones increased their share of the overall mobile phone market from 12% in Q4/2007 to 25% a year later. Good numbers!
There is this Swedish maker of phone pouches and accessories, Krusell, and they deduce from the number of model-specific pouches (or cases) ordered from them the top-selling handsets each year. And the winner is the iPhone. Or is it only that iPhone users buy more pouches than others in order to protect their shiny toy? We don’t know.
2. (-) Nokia 3109
3. (2) Nokia 6300
4. (-) Nokia E51
5. (-) HTC Diamond
6. (-) Nokia N95 8GB
7. (-) Sony Ericsson K800i
8. (-) Sony Ericsson C702
9. (-) Sony Ericsson K850i
10. (-) Sony Ericsson K530i
() = last year’s position.
And it still goes on, it seems: Nielsen published its (digital) media top 10 lists for Q3/2008, and the once cool Motorola V3 still rules the United States – and by a HUGE margin. A whopping 9.3% of all phones in use are RAZR‘s, more than 7 points ahead of its sibling, the KRZR. Apple’s iPhone follows on #4 with 1.5% share. And Nokia‘s call to arms with a view to the US market has as yet to materialize: its best handset is the 6101 series with a meagre 1.1% (compared to a reported global market share of the Finnish giants of close to 40%). Sony Ericsson and Samsung are both notably absent from the list.
1 Motorola RAZR V3 series (V3, V3c, V3m, V3i, V3i DG, V3) 9.3%
2 Motorola MotoKRZR series (K1m, K1) 2.0%
3 LG VX8300 series 1.6%
4 Apple iPhone 1.5%
5 LG VX8500 series (Chocolate, VX8500, VX8550) 1.2%
5 RIM BlackBerry 8100 series (Pearl,8110, 8120, 8129) 1.2%
7 Nokia 6101 series (6101, 6102, 6102i) 1.1%
8 LG VX8350 1.0%
9 Motorola V325 series (V325, V323, V325i, V323i) 0.9%
9 Nokia 6010 series 0.9%
Source: The Nielsen Company, Q3 2008
Application vendor Handango published its 2008 Yardstick report, which one might slag off as some (rather shameless) PR on content consumption on “smartphones”. According to this,
[t]he Games category leaped from fourth place at year-end 2007 into the second spot behind the Entertainment category.
It also reports that
‘Ringtones’ was the most searched term in the first half of 2008, and ‘games’ was a near second, up from number three in the second half of 2007. ‘Themes,’ ‘GPS,’ ‘weather,’ and ‘music’ also make the list of the top 10 searches.”
Surprisingly then, in none of the measured platforms (RIM, Palm, WinME, Symbian) does a single game make it into the top 10… Now, does that mean that places 11-98 were all games? Hmm…
I then asked myself what the heck is a smartphone? Mobile advertising guys Admob note that
[t]here is no standard industry definition of a smartphone. We [Admob] automatically classify a device as a smartphone when it has an identifiable operating systen and continually update our list as new phones with advanced functionality enter the market.
Globally, Nokia rules the pack: the top 4 smartphones are all from the Finnish giant (Admob numbers), and all N-Series devices, namely the N70, N95, N73 and N80. In the US however, there is not a single Nokia phone (or rather, as they would put it, “multimedia device”) amongst the top 20 smartphones. According to Handango, 2 Blackberry devices (8830 and Curve) were the top 2 devices, according to Admob (not representative), it was the Blackberry 8100, the Palm Centro and the Blackberry 8300). Globally, these don’t really feature: Nokia has a market share of a whopping 62.4%!
The more interesting facts are unfortunately from confidential information from the likes of M:Metrics. Without giving too much away, the top devices for games consumption (downloaded) are the iPhone and Nokia’s N95, both with quite some margin ahead of everyone else (and the iPhone with quite some margin ahead of Nokia’s performance monster). This does indeed show that a powerful handset (or at least one with powerful UI) promotes content consumption, which is, I’m afraid to say, old news indeed.
So, no news then?
Funny. Sometimes a theme somewhat haunts you… After I have posted about the demise of Tira Wireless (and added some alternative views on the labyrinth that is platforms and handset fragmentation; also go and revisit my posts on the same topic here and here), today we can read that it will all get worse (or maybe not). I bet they read my recent post on the issue…
“Hey, we noticed you tried downloading content to your T-610. You may not have realized that this phone is utterly outdated and will give you no joy when playing games. We would like to offer you a discounted upgrade to the brand-spanking new N76/ W880i/ Pearl/ iPhone/ Viewty/… and your life would be so much cooler. We are confident that you would then also have more luck with the girls/boys… Best. Your carrier”
