GT Advanced says 'oppressive and burdensome' sapphire contracts with Apple led to bankruptcy

1235789

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 167
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    ash471 wrote: »
    Maybe, but the problem may also be debtors for operating capital or supply contracts. Or the bankruptcy may affect IP rights, etc.
    This is why you have contracts. When sh$t hits the fan, you revert back to the contract to see how what's left will get divided up. Everyone, including Apple is going to lose some money. It just won't be material to their financials. GTAT and many of its other creditors are in trouble.

    You're right. I read further into the 10-Q and they issued two bonds in 2013 due in 2017 and 2020 with a 3% coupon. However both are unsecured.

    On December 10, 2013, the Company issued $214,000 aggregate principal amount of 3.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2020 (the “2020 Notes”). The net proceeds from the issuance of the 2020 Notes were approximately $206,530 , after deducting fees paid to the initial purchasers and other offering costs. The 2020 Notes are senior unsecured obligations of the Company, which pay interest in cash semi-annually (on June 15 and December 15 of each year) at a rate of 3.00% per annum beginning on June 15, 2014. The 2020 Notes are governed by an Indenture dated December 10, 2013 with U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (the “2013 Indenture”). The 2020 Notes are not redeemable by the Company..

    There's a similar note issued called the 2017 notes earlier that year. In total they received 400M and Apple paid 400M this year. How on earth they could have cash flow issues boggles the mind.
  • Reply 82 of 167
    pfisherpfisher Posts: 758member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

     

    Then why sign on the dotted line. GT Adv wants to keep the money without following through on the contract. The CEO needs to be run out. Don't blame Apple because GT Adv couldn't hold up their end of a contract. This is why Apple does manufacturing in China and other countries and not the US. American companies do dirty things like this forcing Apple into the arms of communist business environments because they do have their merits.


    Large corporations really put the screws to suppliers. If people do a little reading around, they will see the oppressive contracts.

     

    It's not different from employers taking advantage of employees because of a scarcity of jobs.

     

    It seems when corporations get really big, they seem set out to screw others. Comcast and Chase are an example.

  • Reply 83 of 167
    ash471ash471 Posts: 705member
    asdasd wrote: »
    You must be right. It's a legal duty to produce accurate results and forecasts. Which they manifestly did not do. Both the CEO and the CFO should be investigated by the SEC and Justice.
    It depends on when they knew they were getting shit canned by Apple. Most likely scenario is Apple said we aren't going to make this year's device, let's shoot for next year. That would explain the August earnings call. I very much doubt the CEO would be so stupid to lie about the 4th quarter knowing that the deal with Apple is over. Even if he were a crook, it would serve no material purpose. Certainly the $160k wouldn't justify that. He had already cashed out 10 million. Why go to jail over $160k?
  • Reply 84 of 167
    Scary to think $139 is all it took for this company to go bankrupt. :P
  • Reply 85 of 167
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

    Edit: I notice that you have made two posts in six years. Quality, not quantity; nothing wrong with that.


     

    LOL - I noticed that after I posted, and it caught me by surprise. (Not "omg-really-surprise," but real surprise-surprise.)

     

    The only thing I can surmise is that I was posting under a different nom de post. Thanks for not assuming I was just a crank or a troll. :-)

     

    And in response to iBeam, I'm with you too; I have no idea if a sapphire glass iPhone would be more (or less) bendable, but I think it probably would be, if only due to the hardness of the material. I just think it's plausible, worth the speculation and an experiment or two. I admit I didn't fabricate a piece of sapphire glass, put it in an iPhone, and see if it was less bendable before posting.

     

    The picture you posted shows a bent phone with an unflexed screen, which doesn't relate to whether that screen flexed at the time of the bending, or how much stiffness it provided before the case separated from the glass.

     

    I seem to remember a number of videos stress-testing the production glass (which turned out to not be sapphire), that showed they could flex and return to their original state. Aluminum, on the other hand, like most metals, doesn't automatically return to its original state after bending. If it had that property, how could we crush aluminum cans on our foreheads without them springing back into shape, and what new term would we need to use for "fender benders?" ;-)

  • Reply 86 of 167
    ash471ash471 Posts: 705member
    sog35 wrote: »
    The CEO is a fraud and broke SEC laws.

    On August 26th he said everything was going great at GTAT and they were going to have $330M in the bank by year end.
    6 weeks latter they are BANKRUPT.

    That there is FRAUD.  It was the CEO's responsibility to report any events that would cause GTAT to become insolvent.  He did nothing.  He flat out LIED that the company was healthy (Strong Balance sheet : his words) and then 6 weeks later go bankrupt.

    The CEO literally stole hundreds of millions of dollars from investors and pocketed $100,000,000 from stock sales this year.

    if that is not a FRAUD and CROOK I don't know what is
    You keep saying this over and over and I don't think the facts support you. The most likely scenario is that Apple told GTAT they were moving the sapphire screen to next year's iPhone and the first product would be the watch. On the August earnings call the CEO didn't know Apple was going to shit can them. Occam's Razor. Look it up.
  • Reply 87 of 167
    Funny, "oppressive and burdensome."
    It is thanks to Apple they have all that hardware and the tax break in Arizona. Now they want to keep the furnaces and last production to the highest bidder?
    I think Apple got outsmarted here. The CEO of GT sold his stake of shares well ahead. So it was planned from long time ago.
    It will get ugly down the road. So much for creating jobs in USA...
  • Reply 88 of 167
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    ash471 wrote: »
    You keep saying this over and over and I don't think the facts support you. The most likely scenario is that Apple told GTAT they were moving the sapphire screen to next year's iPhone and the first product would be the watch. On the August earnings call the CEO didn't know Apple was going to shit can them. Occam's Razor. Look it up.

    The filing said they expected to make $500M in revenue.
  • Reply 89 of 167
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    Same situation in the US. Obama threw $500 million in taxpayer money right down the drain foolishly funding Solyndra.



    Governments should NEVER subsidize businesses for any reason. Corruption and fraud can be the only result.



    I do not agree on a general level. Recent example:  Lakshmi Mittal. But often, yes. It just leads to fraud.

  • Reply 90 of 167
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,233member

    As soon as the Apple contract is nullified, GTAT will be making sapphire panes for Samsung, using hundreds of millions of dollars of Apple seed money.

  • Reply 91 of 167
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,233member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bbteague View Post



    The real question is what kind of bonuses did the Senior Management give themselves after the contract signing.

    What do their golden parachute clauses look like?

  • Reply 92 of 167
    sog35 wrote: »
    I won't waste my time. 
    The SEC is a clown organization.

    Then we won't waste our time.
    Quit clowning around.
  • Reply 93 of 167
    ash471ash471 Posts: 705member
    asdasd wrote: »
    The filing said they expected to make $500M in revenue.
    So? They did $168 million in Q2. $500 is a lot, but believable even for just the watch. $500m is small cap business.
    Secondly, it is very very unlikely the CEO would lie about something like that. The CFO, board members, Apple, etc. would all known whether it was a lie or not and wouldn't want to be implicated. I give your hypothesis about 0.001% chance of being correct. The most likely explanation is that Apple had a "chat" with Mr. CEO in September or October.
  • Reply 94 of 167
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    The GTAT CEO can pay those 890 Americans with the $10,000,000 he cashed in this year for his stock option plan.




    That will be used to buy the assets in a fire sale and set up a new company doing exactly the same thing.

     

    We call them Phoenix companies.

  • Reply 95 of 167
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    ash471 wrote: »
    So? They did $168 million in Q2. $500 is a lot, but believable even for just the watch. $500m is small cap business.
    Secondly, it is very very unlikely the CEO would lie about something like that. The CFO, board members, Apple, etc. would all known whether it was a lie or not and wouldn't want to be implicated. I give your hypothesis about 0.001% chance of being correct. The most likely explanation is that Apple had a "chat" with Mr. CEO in September or October.

    They were expecting it in the 2nd H 2014.

    That said you are probably right. Apple might even have been stringing them along until their filing or otherwise they would have to have warned in the August conference call. Which would have impacted Apples share price and released confidential info. Or maybe both parties in good faith thought everything hunky dory until late in the day.

    However that doesn't excuse going to chapter 11 without a revenue warning.
  • Reply 96 of 167
    ash471ash471 Posts: 705member
    talkinman wrote: »
    LOL - I noticed that after I posted, and it caught me by surprise. (Not "omg-really-surprise," but real surprise-surprise.)

    The only thing I can surmise is that I was posting under a different nom de post. Thanks for not assuming I was just a crank or a troll. :-)

    And in response to iBeam, I'm with you too; I have no idea if a sapphire glass iPhone would be more (or less) bendable, but I think it probably would be, if only due to the hardness of the material. I just think it's plausible, worth the speculation and an experiment or two. I admit I didn't fabricate a piece of sapphire glass, put it in an iPhone, and see if it was less bendable before posting.

    The picture you posted shows a bent phone with an unflexed screen, which doesn't relate to whether that screen flexed at the time of the bending, or how much stiffness it provided before the case separated from the glass.

    I seem to remember a number of videos stress-testing the production glass (which turned out to not be sapphire), that showed they could flex and return to their original state. Aluminum, on the other hand, like most metals, doesn't automatically return to its original state after bending. If it had that property, how could we crush aluminum cans on our foreheads without them springing back into shape, and what new term would we need to use for "fender benders?" ;-)
    Just to clarify all materials will bend and return to their prior shape so long as you don't exceed the yield strength. The elastic limit is inversely proportional to length. For example, a 2 inch piece of wood doesn't appear to bend, but a 20 foot board of the same thickness is like a noodle. Sapphire can be made more flexible or less flexible than glass or aluminum depending on its thickness.
  • Reply 97 of 167

    .... oppressive and burdensome ... my A$$. :smokey:

  • Reply 98 of 167
    ash471ash471 Posts: 705member
    asdasd wrote: »
    They were expecting it in the 2nd H 2014.

    That said you are probably right. Apple might even have been stringing them along until their filing or otherwise they would have to have warned in the August conference call. Which would have impacted Apples share price and released confidential info. Or maybe both parties in good faith thought everything hunky dory until late in the day.

    However that doesn't excuse going to chapter 11 without a revenue warning.
    They may not have had a choice. Apple controlled the timing of the default by withholding payment and a company of that size would be hugely vulnerable to a cash crunch like that. They most likely needed to hit the stop button immediately on installations and they couldn't do that without leaking the fact that the Apple contract was over. If possible, they would have filed bankruptcy the same day they got the news from Apple.
    My guess is Apple knew they would file bankruptcy and didn't want the bad publicity and supply chain speculation right before they announced their product.
  • Reply 99 of 167
    Shuts a plant in Arizona for Apple and builds a plant in China for Samsung.... Is the some exclusivity or IP involved? Do Apple have alternative suppliers?
  • Reply 100 of 167
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,389member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    I won't waste my time. 

    The SEC is a clown organization.


     

    You're absolutely right, spamming this board with pretty much the exact same comment another thousand times is a much better use of your time, instead of complaining to a party that can actually do something.  Carry on. Your time is clearly extremely valuable, and you wouldn't want to waste any of it. 

Sign In or Register to comment.