vernment in the late 1980s and 1990s. The availability of well-trained highly competent hardware and software engineers was an essential ingredient in Nokia's transition from small niche player to global market leader in mobile phones, a position now increasingly under threat. Apple as an Example of Technology-Led Market Innovation Some of the ebb and flow of competitive advantage and opportunity can be directly ascribed to technology innovation. The Apple I Pod proposition is built on the availability of low-cost solid-state memory, the Apple I Phone and I Pad proposition is based on capacitive touch-screen interactive display technology. Both are examples of component-level innovation transforming user behaviour, a technology opportunity that Nokia failed to capitalise on early enough. Apple also successfully managed to add content value and software value to the hardware proposition. Quite who has done what when and who owns what is, however, always subject to legal interpretation. Nokia sued Apple for patent infringement and won a royalty agreement in June 2011 worth just under 5% of the value of each iPhone sold plus a one-off payment of 800 million euros. This corroborates our thesis that a technology and engineering opportunity analysis and ownership analysis should be the starting point not the end point of the strategic planning process. And fortuitously, the methodology is beguilingly simple. To forecast three to five months ahead look three to five months behind, to forecast three to five years ahead look three to five years behind, to forecast thirty to fifty years ahead look thirty to fifty years behind. It might seem absurd to contemplate a thirty- to fifty-year planning cycle, but in reality many technology cycles in telecommunications are of this order of magnitude. This is why standards or regulatory policy if determined by short-term three- to five-year political interest can destroy shareholder, stakeholder and social value. This is why short-term return on investment expectations, three- to fi