You didn't get it. The key is ensure you have more than Apple as your customer. Business common sense. The rule: A big customer contracting with the smaller supplier will often require the business make substantial capital investments in order to accommodate them. That will be a large debt load. If you allow it, the big guy will control your business, and if the big guy leaves, your business is stuck with an infrastructure and debt it cannot afford. That is likely the GTAT/Apple scenario.
Putting this into the context of a girl and a married man, this is a one-night stand with a promise of marriage. The ride might be great, your now living in luxury, and you've given up your lifestyle for his, if he leaves you with offspring, you merely got f*ked.
The GT people seem like total amateurs totally out of their league. They didn't even know how to manage their workforce. Articles talking about no one knew who they were reporting too and didn't have work to do, but sweep.
Sounds like the people running the company were more focused on short term (selling stock) than running a tight ship.
They didn't have their act together.
Shame on Apple for not keeping an eye on such an important component for phones? Who knows. Maybe, maybe not.
Sounds like a total screw up then mouthing off about Apple.
Big companies can put all of the responsibility on small companies. Not sure about trust (due diligence).
If a supplier fails by causing the big company' product to fail, the big company can point at supplier. Put the responsibility on the supplier to perform.
Apple didn't fail and they did not put all the responsibility for the iPhone on GTAT. Apple had plan B to launch iPhone 6 with Gorillla Glass. Similarly, GTAT still has a responsibility to keep itself solvent, and if that means not entering into "oppressive and burdensome contracts" then that's what they should have avoided. GTAT was still unable to produce unbroken sapphire boules days before the agreement was signed. A "red flag" in hindsight that they were taking an awful risk.
Apple didn't fail and they did not put all the responsibility for the iPhone on GTAT. Apple had plan B to launch iPhone 6 with Gorillla Glass. Similarly, GTAT still has a responsibility to keep itself solvent, and if that means not entering into "oppressive and burdensome contracts" then that's what they should have avoided. GTAT was still unable to produce unbroken sapphire boules days before the agreement was signed. A "red flag" in hindsight that they were taking an awful risk.
If that's the case, then they decided to not have people on site to monitor through the process? Maybe they did and had seen ahead of time that the plant was not going to produce.
In reality, the entire sapphire fiasco with GTAT was a Pentagon "black project" to produce sapphire boules for military purposes. Once produced, no need for the sapphire facility. Great cover-up job, with the help of Apple Inc. I'm sure everyone profited.
Comments
You didn't get it. The key is ensure you have more than Apple as your customer. Business common sense. The rule: A big customer contracting with the smaller supplier will often require the business make substantial capital investments in order to accommodate them. That will be a large debt load. If you allow it, the big guy will control your business, and if the big guy leaves, your business is stuck with an infrastructure and debt it cannot afford. That is likely the GTAT/Apple scenario.
Putting this into the context of a girl and a married man, this is a one-night stand with a promise of marriage. The ride might be great, your now living in luxury, and you've given up your lifestyle for his, if he leaves you with offspring, you merely got f*ked.
The GT people seem like total amateurs totally out of their league. They didn't even know how to manage their workforce. Articles talking about no one knew who they were reporting too and didn't have work to do, but sweep.
Sounds like the people running the company were more focused on short term (selling stock) than running a tight ship.
They didn't have their act together.
Shame on Apple for not keeping an eye on such an important component for phones? Who knows. Maybe, maybe not.
Sounds like a total screw up then mouthing off about Apple.
Amateurs.
Apple didn't fail and they did not put all the responsibility for the iPhone on GTAT. Apple had plan B to launch iPhone 6 with Gorillla Glass. Similarly, GTAT still has a responsibility to keep itself solvent, and if that means not entering into "oppressive and burdensome contracts" then that's what they should have avoided. GTAT was still unable to produce unbroken sapphire boules days before the agreement was signed. A "red flag" in hindsight that they were taking an awful risk.
I see what they did there.
Apple didn't fail and they did not put all the responsibility for the iPhone on GTAT. Apple had plan B to launch iPhone 6 with Gorillla Glass. Similarly, GTAT still has a responsibility to keep itself solvent, and if that means not entering into "oppressive and burdensome contracts" then that's what they should have avoided. GTAT was still unable to produce unbroken sapphire boules days before the agreement was signed. A "red flag" in hindsight that they were taking an awful risk.
If that's the case, then they decided to not have people on site to monitor through the process? Maybe they did and had seen ahead of time that the plant was not going to produce.
In reality, the entire sapphire fiasco with GTAT was a Pentagon "black project" to produce sapphire boules for military purposes. Once produced, no need for the sapphire facility. Great cover-up job, with the help of Apple Inc. I'm sure everyone profited.