or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ash471

Interesting analysis. It's possible the sapphire was intended for a future iPhone. If they didn't have power yet, they were at least a year out from being in shipping product. That may also explain why the CEO was all thumbs up in August. He may not have gotten the notice from Apple until recently. That would only be possible if delivery was for next year.
Umm, yes it's speculation. Just like this and the WSJ articles are speculation. At least my speculation comports with the facts. Why was Apple building out 10 times the world's sapphire supply? For a watch? The math doesn't add up. And why did Apple withhold payment on the buildout? The watch is going into production. If Apple needed that factory running full tilt to supply watches, only an fuking, idiot would send them into bankruptcy. Apple doesn't even know yet what...
The massive tooling for sapphire (10x the current world supply), Apple's refusal to make its last payments, and the bankruptcy make it really obvious what happened. It was a failed experiment with sapphire displays. And you are wrong that sapphire can't be used as a display. There are apparently already covers made out of sapphire. I'm sure it was a quality control issue, not a fundamental flaw in sapphire.
No sense in trying to keep it secret.  It will eventually come out.  Pretty likely there will be an investor lawsuit over this. It doesn't seem believable that GTAT didn't know about the problem before its August earnings call. 
Seems pretty obvious what happened.  The sapphire display was suppose to free up display inventory to allow for a larger iPad. When Apple killed the GTAT contract, they shifted iPad display production to iPhone 6.  Who knows when we'll see a larger iPad now. 
It's not just labor. Those people have to have a building to work in, equipment to run, and supervisors to train and manage the people. Ask anyone that has tooled a factory and they will tell you just how amazing Apple is for doing what they do. 
What? you have it totally backwards. The sapphire project for iPhone 6 failed and Apple said, "sorry guys but we're going to F**K you."  That's the downside of being an Apple supplier.  Apple obviously got good terms in their contract. And no I don't think Apple is a crook. I'm sure they negotiated the terms that let them do what they did.  And that is why I own Apple stock and not GTAT stock.
DED, I enjoy your columns, but I think you got it totally wrong on this one. If Apple wasn't planning on using sapphire for the iPhone 6, why is GT filing bankruptcy? Seems pretty obvious what happened.  Apple experimented with sapphire and shifted the manufacturing risks to its contract manufacturer.  Unfortunately for GT, it didn't work out. 
You can change a critical component as long as you have a backup plan.  duhIt's not a reach to say they were planning on using sapphire on iPhone 6.  GT's bankruptcy filing makes it really clear that was the plan.  GT didn't meet production quotas and Apple pulled the plug.  GT has 10 times the capacity they need and owes a lot of people a lot of money for equipment they can't pay for. Apple just hosed all of GT's equipment suppliers and lenders.  This is the beauty of...
Wrong.  There is no Way Apple would have tried sapphire without a backup plan. The contract on the backup plan probably had a two month lead time and Apple pulled the trigger when GT couldn't meet quality requirements.  Seems pretty obvious what happened.
New Posts  All Forums: