Apple sapphire partner GT Advanced Technologies files for bankruptcy

1246711

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 220
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,228member

    bought 1000 shares at $1.25 as a high risk trade. This could be very profitable if the problems get solved.

  • Reply 62 of 220
    brlawyer wrote: »
    Are their dreams shattered, or have we only scratched the surface on this story?


    /sorry


    Just another "great" managerial decision by Mr Cook, the world's best COO and nothing else.

    Once more:

    1 - Pathetic dividends decision;
    2 - Useless Beats purchase;
    3 - Failed GT investment;
    4 - DOA Apple Watch.

    More to come?


    SOT:

    Social site Pinterest has a new collection featuring the most unpopular members of the web community ...

    It's called: Pin-Pricks ...

    Let me be the first to nominate @brlawyer for charter membership -- for his specious remarks!
  • Reply 63 of 220
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post





    SOT:



    Social site Pinterest has a new collection featuring the most unpopular members of the web community ...



    It's called: Pin-Pricks ...



    Let me be the first to nominate @brlawyer for charter membership -- for his specious remarks!

    Seconded!

  • Reply 64 of 220
    Is this company continuing to produce its product right now? If not, how long until Apple can get control of it and produce more sapphire screens? This huge delay could be very disruptive to production. How much value has Apple received from this company after they gave them the money?

    If Apple has been ripped off then Tim Cook's job should be on the line. You just don't lose over a half billion dollars and remain in your position unless you're a banker on Wall Street.

    Or GoogaLarry and The Moto deal ...
  • Reply 65 of 220
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by netrox View Post

     

    Let me get this right - GTAT is in financial trouble because of wall street speculation that GTAT will provide sapphire display for iPhones even though it is not economically or physically practical? Do you honestly think Apple wants the iPhone to get heavier and lose a large profit margin as a result of higher cost of sapphire? 

     

    Sapphire is for watches and lens - it is not well optimized for mobile displays. Never have. 


    No wall street has nothing to do with this, as much as I hate wall street, but they company spent more money they have have to cover their bills. They did this all on their own, they also did not do it because wall street was looking for higher returns, the stock went up since people assumed if apple is in to the company that company will grow faster than apple since they are small, bigger returns. The strategy is call falling the apple supply chain, usually can make more on its supply chain than you can on apple itself.

     

    I personally believe this company got apple bought in think they could in fact make a sapphire phone display and somewhere between the first investment and now Apple figure out it is not going to work and pulled the plug and cut their losses. Notice on this news Apple shares were not adversely effect even thought Apple may had lost $580M because of this.

  • Reply 66 of 220
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    Isn't GT Advanced Technologies Inc. also heavily into solar panels? This might be linked to that side of the business.

  • Reply 67 of 220
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    Nope.  Its all Sapphire.

     

    without the last loan payment from Apple they are not solvent.

     

    GTAT put all there eggs in the Apple basket and lost. 


     

    They have been researching in that area.

     

    http://www.gtat.com/Solar-Module-Metallization-and-Interconnect.htm

  • Reply 68 of 220
    ralphmouth wrote: »
    wizard69 wrote: »
    That might be bad advice. More details are needed but often companies come out of Chapter 11 fairly strong. It is a gamble but with such gambles the payoff can be rather large.

    Yup. As always, don't invest money you can't afford to lose. 

    But if you can afford to lose it, take a chance. I have a friend who hemmed and hawed for days and finally decided not to buy Braniff at 1/8. It finally went back up to about 6 1/2 before tanking altogether. I've had to listen to him bitching about that for 30 years now....
  • Reply 69 of 220
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    delete
  • Reply 70 of 220
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

     
    Now, is LiquidMetal also a public company?


    Yes, it trades under the ticker LQMT. While LQMT has no debt, it does, worryingly, have liabilities > assets, and therefore, negative equity.

     

    Unless Apple does something with them soon, who knows...... (although, I am guessing that'll only happen the day after I sell my holdings of LQMT:\)

  • Reply 71 of 220
    maestro64 wrote: »
     
    yeah some people use Bankruptcy is a business strategy. But I am beginning to suspect they are not that smart.

    It appears they over extended themselves and maybe they sold Apple one being able to do a iphone size display and it all fell apart and we now know what direction Apple went in. They have money in the bank, but their debt out weights what they have in the bank as well as future AR and sales forecast and their creditors were coming after them.


    And/or they sold Apple on being able to deliver for the AppleWatch, and they have no hope of meeting the delivery schedule.

    I don't think that the Apple Watch isn't ready for delivery because of lack of sapphire -- they could easily use other glass for less money.

    Rather, I think that the Apple Watch software (OS, Apps, SDK) is not ready ...

    I think that the OS running on the S1 chip, will be so different from iOS that it will be provided as a totally separate OS and SDK.

    ... and that the S1 chip, OS and SDK will be used for other products in addition to the Apple Watch.
  • Reply 72 of 220
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    sog35 wrote: »
    IMO the GTAT CEO should go to jail

    Near the end of August he confirmed GTAT's profit forecast.  He must have know by the end of August the company was insolvent without the final payment from Apple and no way would they make forecast for 2014 and 2015.

    Then he promply sold millions of shares at $18.  The shares are $1 now.

    Scoreboard:

    GTAT shareholders - lose 99% of their investment
    Apple - lose 99% of their investment
    GTAT CEO - pockets tens of millions of dollars from stock options

    Out of curiosity shouldn't this have been a material disclosure from Apple to the SEC if they were aware of the financial issue? You know much more about that subject than I would. If Apple did NOT know until the news officially broke then it would seem someone at Apple was derelict in their fiduciary duties? Just curious how that works.
  • Reply 73 of 220
    chris_ca wrote: »
    =blink=  Sapphire is already hard.  Not in the way "math is hard", but sapphire is a hard material.
    And the sapphire made by them is made "harder", using a technique patented by Apple.
    http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles/14/09/04/apple-invents-method-of-hardening-sapphire-screens-to-reduce-cracking-

    "Hardening" is the wrong word for that—what you want is "toughening": "Making less brittle". That could very well be at the expense of hardness.
  • Reply 74 of 220
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post



    And the sapphire made by them is made "harder", using a technique patented by Apple.

    http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles/14/09/04/apple-invents-method-of-hardening-sapphire-screens-to-reduce-cracking-

     

    Excellent, Chris_CA, thank you very much for the link. I was unaware, and now have been edumacated!  And thanks to Mac-sochist for the follow-up, too.  :)

  • Reply 75 of 220
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    This is the first major blunder Mr Cook has done with Apple.

     

    I am really dissappointed in him.  To give a company a zero interest $500M loan and then that said company goes bankrupt.  Really bad.  Hopefully Apple can minimize the loss from this horrible alliance.

     

    Hard to believe a company like GTAT could trick Apple out of $500M

     

    I hold GTAT shares and the #1 reason was because I trusted Tim Cooks judgement on the company.  Why would Cook invest $500M in a crap company?  Looks like he got duped just like me.  But unlike me Mr Cook had all the inside information.


    This is nonsense. You have absolutely no clue what Apple already got (and the potential IP it has, or things it has learnt about sapphire) for its investment. Moreover, even if it's completely down the toilet, it's the equivalent of about ¢9 per Apple share.

     

    If you think that businesses invest only in things that are ex-post successful you must live in lala-land.

  • Reply 76 of 220
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    I don't think that the Apple Watch isn't ready for delivery because of lack of sapphire -- they could easily use other glass for less money.

    Rather, I think that the Apple Watch software (OS, Apps, SDK) is not ready ...

    I think that the OS running on the S1 chip, will be so different from iOS that it will be provided as a totally separate OS and SDK.

    ... and that the S1 chip, OS and SDK will be used for other products in addition to the Apple Watch.
    Exactly. Software/battery life isn't ready for prime time. Apple showed it off now because they wanted to be the one to leak the design not internet rumor sites.
  • Reply 77 of 220
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    Out of curiosity shouldn't this have been a material disclosure from Apple to the SEC if they were aware of the financial issue? You know much more about that subject than I would. If Apple did NOT know until the news officially broke then it would seem someone at Apple was derelict in their fiduciary duties? Just curious how that works.

    If Apple was aware, perhaps. And if Apple was not aware, so what.

     

    These sorts of outcomes happen in business all the time, and even in the worst case, this is a trivial one for Apple. You cannot (and US corporate governance and laws do not) hold managers responsible for things that go wrong ex-post. Under the 'business judgment' rule, if it is shown that Apple's managers exercised the appropriate duty of loyalty, duty of care, diligence, etc., there is absolutely no dereliction of fiduciary duties.

     

    I'll bet we learn much more about the story -- including all the benefits that Apple has already got out of this -- in the next few days.

  • Reply 78 of 220
    ipenipen Posts: 410member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post



    Bankruptcy is not necessarily the end of the world. It simply provides a "breather" for getting one's affairs in order.



    I would expect that Apple won't let this be a major issue for anyone concerned.

    yeah, sure.  it's the end of the world for the stock holders.  The "breather" just cost them everything.

  • Reply 79 of 220
    malax wrote: »
     


    your dremel cutting discs could scratch it.  That's something other than Diamonds (silicon carbide), which makes it _resistant_ to scratches from things other than diamonds, not impervious.  

    Scientists and Engineers _Never_ speak in absolutes. (yes, that's an oxymoronic sentence, as I am an engineer;-).

    The 'hardened material' has been explained already.
    But only because Dremel cutting disc contain either diamond or silicone carbide, right?  You can never scratch something of hardness X with something with a lower hardness, isn't that true?  So if sapphire is #3 on the list, then it's can't be scratched by anything that isn't diamond or SC.  Or it more complicated than that?

    I probably sound like a broken record, but every time this "sapphire" business comes up, I'm forced to point out that sharp, jagged pieces of one material will handily scratch smooth, flat surfaces of the same material, or even one somewhat harder.
  • Reply 80 of 220
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    This is nonsense. You have absolutely no clue what Apple already got (and the potential IP it has, or things it has learnt about sapphire) for its investment. Moreover, even if it's completely down the toilet, it's the equivalent of about ¢9 per Apple share.

    If you think that businesses invest only in things that are ex-post successful you must live in lala-land.
    Exactly. There's so much none of us know. To speculate is pointless.
Sign In or Register to comment.