Court unseals documents in GT Advanced case, Apple says it 'bent over backwards' to help sapphire su

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 62
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    sog35 wrote: »

    I appreciate you posting that but it backs up what I've been saying. That's not proof. That's merely your hypothesis stated as proof.
  • Reply 22 of 62
    wovelwovel Posts: 956member
    sog35 wrote: »

    Well you got him there. I remember reading your post and looking up the insider sales. I thought it was odd the CEO would have scheduled sales when the company should be on the cusp of a big upswing. In hindsight, the fact that his sale marks the all time peak for the stock should be a bit troubling to everyone.
  • Reply 23 of 62
    wovelwovel Posts: 956member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I appreciate you posting that but it backs up what I've been saying. That's not proof. That's merely your hypothesis stated as proof.

    He was asked for proof showing he believed that weeks ago and he provided it from over three weeks ago. You are just being silly now. It is clear he believed the same thing three weeks ago that he believes today. He was asked to prove he thought it 6 weeks ago. He missed that but a couple weeks, but proving it 3.5 weeks ago ought to be close enough.
  • Reply 24 of 62
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    wovel wrote: »
    He was asked for proof showing he believed that weeks ago and he provided it from over three weeks ago. You are just being silly now. It is clear he believed the same thing three weeks ago that he believes today. He was asked to prove he thought it 6 weeks ago. He missed that but a couple weeks, but proving it 3.5 weeks ago ought to be close enough.

    1) Where is the proof in that post?

    2) Stating what he believes is proof enough of his belief, but his belief system is not proof.

    3) Thank you for proving my point.
  • Reply 25 of 62
    plovellplovell Posts: 825member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

    I have a sneaking suspicion that if GTA is investigated for stock fraud or some such charge, their assets will be tied up for years.




    Possible but not probable. The investigation is related to the CEO and COO and not the company and its overall operation (at least, as far as I've heard). So the bankruptcy process will probably continue without any major interruption.

  • Reply 26 of 62
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    sog35 wrote: »
    No its not dumb.  Its called common sense.

    When a CEO is willing to FLAT OUT LIE and DECEIVE tens of thousands of investors he's a CRIMINAL.  Go check the SEC filings.  Go check the business update the CEO gave just SIX WEEKS BEFORE filing BANKRUPTCY.  Again you need to STFU because you are not an investors and never listened to the CEO's conference calls each quarter.

    I'm sorry you don't have the business acumen to know when a CEO is a CROOK but I do.  Again let the professionals take care of this.  You need to just STFU and let the big boys discuss this.  You obviously know NOTHING about SEC reporting requirements.

    I said they were CROOKS weeks ago and each day its proving more and more true.

    You are one those clowns who think Barry Bonds never took steroids or that Alex Rod never took steroids.  You just ignore all common sense.  Use your brain.  I don't need to wait 3 years for a court to find these GTAT frauds guilty. 

    Can you kindly STFU with the STFUs? It's juvenile, counter productive, and I have yet to see someone STFU after being told to STFU. Grow up already.
  • Reply 27 of 62
    From this article, as has been mentioned previously:

    "GTAT was unable to create sapphire at the 262-kilogram boule size that it had originally agreed to produce."

    Sorry if this has been discussed before, I must have missed it. What would the dimensions be of such a boule? Can't help wondering how big a sheet of sapphire might be produced from one of these...
  • Reply 28 of 62
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    Are you really that DUMB?  GTAT files quarterly Financial Statements with the SEC each quarter.  Again just STFU and leave this discussion to people who know what they are talking about.

     

    No.  I'm saying the CEO said in the business update that everything is going GREAT!  Then 6 weeks latter without ANY warning they are BANKRUPT.  That is NOT something that happens without FRAUD.  And I never called anyone a FOOL for not investing in GTAT, stop LYING.  Maybe you are a FRAUD too since you now are using an alternate account.

     

    Again you just need to STFU because you are uninformed.  You did not read any of the SEC quarterly filings.  You did not listen to all the conference calls by the CEO or business updates.  Your source of information is this site. 


     

    Stop being an ass. And stop capitalizing every second word in your posts. Believe it or not, it doesn't enhance your arguments. Just makes you look childish, impetuous, and lacking rationality and reason. 

  • Reply 29 of 62
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post





    I gave you proof the CEO lied 6 weeks before they went bankrupt. You dont go from strong balance sheet to bankrupt in 6 weeks.

     

    6 Weeks is more than enough time to go from a strong outlook to bankruptcy, if the biggest contract in your company's history suddenly fell through, on which you were depending for cash flow and for continued funding of operations and expenses. A shitload of things can happen in 6 whole weeks. You're flinging words around and making conclusive comments when specific facts are simply not available yet to prove those assertions. 

  • Reply 30 of 62
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    sog35 wrote: »
    I gave you proof the CEO lied 6 weeks before they went bankrupt. You dont go from strong balance sheet to bankrupt in 6 weeks.

    Again, you're belief system and wishful thinking is not proof. You can't simply say "I told you so" or "because Jesus said so." This may work with superstitious, troglodytic Epsilons, but not when you're trying to convince people who ask you for empirical evidence to back up your claims. I would have been satisfied with any statement that eluded to your comments being solely your beliefs, or even an attempt at deductive, abductive, or inductive reasoning.
  • Reply 31 of 62
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    sog35 wrote: »

    You did jump to conclusion. You didn't show proof. You had an emotional reaction and decided that was better than being rational, logical, or showing any facts. Potentially being right is just dumb luck… and I do mean dumb,

    No, I can’t agree that Sog is almost certainly correct just out of sheer dumb luck. Given the facts that we have been aware of, I find it overwhelmingly unlikely that the senior management of GTAT have not behaved unethically and probably illegally. In case that’s a double-negative too far, let me be clear that I think that it is very, very likely that the behaviour of GTAT senior management was unethical and probably illegal too.

    Having said that, I would agree that it would be nice if Sog didn’t caps-lock every other word in his posts.

    Disclaimer: I have and had no financial or other interest in GTAT.
    slurpy wrote: »
    sog35 wrote: »
    I gave you proof the CEO lied 6 weeks before they went bankrupt. You dont go from strong balance sheet to bankrupt in 6 weeks.

    6 Weeks is more than enough time to go from a strong outlook to bankruptcy, if the biggest contract in your company's history suddenly fell through, on which you were depending for cash flow and for continued funding of operations and expenses. A shitload of things can happen in 6 whole weeks. You're flinging words around and making conclusive comments when specific facts are simply not available yet to prove those assertions. 

    Surely that being the case, senior management should be at the very least aware of this significant risk, and it is unethical to lead their investors to believe that everything is fine and dandy whilst this significant risk exists.
  • Reply 32 of 62
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    [quote name="Mr. H" url="/t/183306/court-unseals-documents-in-gt-advanced-case-apple-says-it-bent-over-backwards-to-help-sapphire-supplier#post_2636709"]Given the facts that we have been aware of, I find it overwhelmingly unlikely that the senior management of GTAT have not behaved unethically and probably illegally. In case that’s a double-negative too far, let me be clear that I think that it is very, very likely that the behaviour of GTAT senior management was unethical and probably illegal too.[/QUOTE]

    I said the same thing a month ago based on the circumstantial evidence that was piling up, but it's my opinion on the matter, not proof. Apple, another customer, an investor, a GTAT employee or someone else associated with them should make the complaint to the SEC and the SEC should look into it, but calling for heads on a spike without due process is juvenile and obscene.
  • Reply 33 of 62
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    mr. h wrote: »
    Given the facts that we have been aware of, I find it overwhelmingly unlikely that the senior management of GTAT have not behaved unethically and probably illegally. In case that’s a double-negative too far, let me be clear that I think that it is very, very likely that the behaviour of GTAT senior management was unethical and probably illegal too.

    I said the same thing a month ago based on the circumstantial evidence that was piling up, but it's my opinion on the matter, not proof. Apple, another customer, an investor, a GTAT employee or someone else associated with them should make the complaint to the SEC and the SEC should look into it, but calling for heads on a spike without due process is juvenile and obscene.

    I don’t see why anyone should have to complain to the SEC. Shouldn’t it be their responsibility to investigate this sort of thing as a matter of course?
  • Reply 34 of 62
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    mr. h wrote: »
    I don’t see why anyone should have to complain to the SEC. Shouldn’t it be their responsibility to investigate this sort of thing as a matter of course?

    Once it all hit the fan, sure, but before that I'd hope ethical people who had dealing with the company that were noticing something shady would have suggested an inquiry.
  • Reply 35 of 62
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    Two separate issues here; The CEO is inept, a civil issue -- and the CEO is a crook, a criminal matter.
  • Reply 36 of 62
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    mj web wrote: »
    Two separate issues here; The CEO is inept, a civil issue -- and the CEO is a crook, a criminal matter.

    Inept CEOs are quite common, criminal ones not so much. ;)
  • Reply 37 of 62
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    Just spoke with my daughter who is a legal for a group of tourism companies and she thinks the fact that Apple does not state in its filing, anything about receiving reassurance(s) from GTAT regarding performance and progress - is telling. Also that Apple comes across as being just a tad 'too' helpful. :rolleyes:
    Then again we haven't read everything yet.
    Just sayin'.
  • Reply 38 of 62
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    frac wrote: »
    Just spoke with my daughter who is a legal for a group of tourism companies and she thinks the fact that Apple does not state in its filing, anything about receiving reassurance(s) from GTAT regarding performance and progress - is telling. Also that Apple comes across as being just a tad 'too' helpful. :rolleyes:
    Then again we haven't read everything yet.
    Just sayin'.

    We're not allowed to differing points of view on this topic¡
  • Reply 39 of 62
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    frac wrote: »
    Just spoke with my daughter who is a legal for a group of tourism companies and she thinks the fact that Apple does not state in its filing, anything about receiving reassurance(s) from GTAT regarding performance and progress - is telling. Also that Apple comes across as being just a tad 'too' helpful. :rolleyes:
    Then again we haven't read everything yet.
    Just sayin'.

    Did you pay her 5¢? :lol:400
  • Reply 40 of 62
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Such a blatantly bad deal? Don't. Sign. The. Contract.
Sign In or Register to comment.