【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 ers the most and to buy the mobile phone at a higher rate (Chen, 2006). Various external influences affect performance in the industry and carry weight and sway in impending consumers’ minds when purchasing cell phones. One of the major issues is dealing with health and safety and the risk of using the device. In recent studies concern has been raised about cell phones leading to possible cancer risk. This is due to several reasons。 one being that cell phones emit radiofrequency energy which is a form of radiation that has been understudied for its effects on the human body (National Cancer Institute, 2010). Another external influence is federal government agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the United States. The FCC regulates all interstate and international munications by radio, television, air, wire, satellite, and cable (Federal Communications Commission, 2010).Porter’s Five Forces Analysis:Figure 4:Potential Entrants: Industry is highly concentrated 5 firms take up 76% of market Start up costs are high Threat of new entrant is lowSupplier Power: Rise of open source software Many hardware manufacturers No threat of forward or backward integration Supplier power is moderate/lowBuyer Power: 2 Categories (Carriers and 3rd party retailers) Buyer has superior knowledge Early termination fees Buyer Power is moderate/lowRivalry: Market dominated by top 3 Niche markets Everchanging market Rivalry is moderate/highSubstitutes: Seen as a plementary product Brings all technologies into one device, unlike nothing else High research and development to continually evolve as a product Threat of substitutes is weak The overall threat of new entrants in global mobile phone industry as a whole is low. The Capital requirements for a startup pany are high as a large sum of money must be heavily invested to be able to attain economies of scale that leading panies thrive on dominating over 76% of the market (Chen, 2006). Much capital needs to be invested into research and development, technology, and production facilities which in turn would be costly (Marketline, 2009) The easiest way for a pany to enter the market would be if the pany was involved in similar operations and diversify into mobile production. This would reduce the impact of spreading the pany’s assets too thin and keeping its structure stable. Also, most raw materials used in production are the same (Marketline, 2009). This strategy has best been demonstrated by Apple in 2007 with addition of the iPhone into the marketplace, targeting the smart phone segment.Economies of scale play an important role in the top performing panies in the industry. Market leader Nokia is able to leverage its economies of scale to pull in a greater share of industry profits. However, even Nokia has seen its market share and profits decrease as customer’s expectations are constantly changing in the industry. This is largely due for the want of more sophisticated smart phone models from smaller petitors in the market as that segment continues to increase rapidly (SILVER, 2009). Potential strategic alliances with producers allows major cell phone providers to share in these economies of scale, lowering costs for both panies while minimizing even more the threat of new entrants (Marketline, 2009).One major absolute cost advantage in the industry is a patent. Patents are abundant in the mobile phone industry. All top petitors hold various patents, and continue to invest in intellectual property to stay petitive. Apple’s iPhone is a recent and a prime example of cost advantages through patent holding with recent lawsuits against HTC for infringing on 20 different Apple patents related to the iPhone’s user interface, underlying architecture and hardware. “We think petition is healthy, but petitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours,” said Steve Jobs CEO of Apple (Dowling, 2010). This is nothing new to the industry as in 2008 RIM and Motorola had similar disputes over patents. Patents add to the high barrier of entry for the industry, are the core technology around mobile phones, and make the industry appear attractive (Foxtrot, 2009).Hardware differentiation has played a decreasing role in the value of mobile phones and towards the development trends of smart phones. The major emphasis has recently been put on differentiation in operating systems, applications, and content services. Major manufacturers have shifted their focus from hardware to software. HP’s recent acquisition of Palm’s mobile operating system, Web OS, was in fact that reason and to jumpstart their entry into the mobile device markets. Application stores have also bee popular with Apple’s ‘App Store’ leading the way. The application store business strategy is to pete for developers by making them money off your popularity and high user base and to obtain petitive advantages in content and services (My News Desk, 2010). Manufacturers have the ability to use their own proprietary software packages and software platforms also adding to the high barrier of entry (Foxtrot, 2009). Industry distribution access is not a deterrent to the mobile phone industry. The channels of distribution include primarily shipping straight from the manufacturer to the mobile phone network provider (ATamp。T, Verizon), as well with some specific retail outlets (Best Buy, Radio Shack) (Foxtrot, 2009). In Europe, network providers pete for spectrum licenses which are auctioned off as a government regulation. This allows government to control the entry into the industry and government deregulation would cause a serious threat to existing network providers, but this problem does not seem to be in the immediate future (Byles, 2006).Chipsets for mobile phones are developed and processed by multiple panies which normally do not exclusively manu