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.
Apple showed if off now to destroy the sales of every other smart watch over Christmas.
Most people here have no idea what "opportunity cost" means; so good luck trying to convince them.
Everyone knows what opportunity cost is. The problem is that he attributed half a billion dollars to opportunity cost, which is a random figure he pulled straight from his butt.
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.
Apple showed if off now to destroy the sales of every other smart watch over Christmas.
It's called marketing ...
Except Apple showed actual devices -- rather than just announcing them!
Good points above; but the interesting irony is that, after hearing the rumor about Beats' streaming service shutdown, virtually EVERYONE here then proceeded to say that Apple's core reason for this investment was in their headphones...so which one is it?
Er … no. Everyone here said the headphones were crap, so it must be about the streaming service or getting Iovine on board.
Isn't it rather risky for Apple simply to refer to their Watch? Anyone, like Samsung, could bring out a Watch or a Samsung Watch; no-one will get any protection on the name watch or Watch.
I know you like the idea of moving away from i-products, but I think Apple would have used iWatch but for the fact that they couldn't.
I think the problem is that the 'i' implies 'internet', which the watch doesn't do on its own.
This is the first major blunder Mr Cook has done with Apple.
How is that? Do you really know what caused GRAT to file? Since they did file what does Cook have to do with their failure.
I am really dissappointed in him.
After reading a small portion of this thread I'm really disappointed with YOU. You seem to be ranting like a mad man and for what reason I don't know.
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.
What loss. Apple now has a huge Sapphire production plant. That doesn't go anywhere with Chapter 11.
Hard to believe a company like GTAT could trick Apple out of $500M
Are you really that dense? It is very common in business for initiatives not to pan out. I've seen far smaller companies spend up wards of a quarter million on production lines that never produced a product for sale.
I hold GTAT shares and the #1 reason was because I trusted Tim Cooks judgement on the company.
Why a would anybody as an investor trust one persons opinion. Beyond that you still don't know the details related to this filing.
Why would Cook invest $500M in a crap company?
Because it isn't a crap company. They have been very successful in the business they focus on.
Looks like he got duped just like me. But unlike me Mr Cook had all the inside information.
I doubt that very much, you are pissed off at everybody over a bad investment when the only person to blame is the one you see in the mirror. You can't make assumptions about this filing, Apples role in it or the possibility for recovery. Some details will certainly become public at which time an intelligent conversation can be had.
Agreed, as an apple shareholder, i want to know WHERE THE HALF BILLION WENT?! Did apple just lose a chunk of that that the put down as a "down payment?"
That money went into the plant that they now have in Arizona. The furnaces and other production hardware in that plant doesn't go away with Chapter 11.
No ceo can know everything about everything... So how culpable is cook in this I really dont know...
I really don't understand this nonsense about Cook. Apple has lost nothing here. As for the chapter 11 that might be the result of Apples contract with GTAT or it might not. We don't know but likely will shortly once all the filing material is reviewed. The other way to figure out what might be happening is to look at the plant in Arizona and see if there has been a recent layoff of employees.
But it really is a lot of money on the hook.
Again what has Apple lost here. They have a plant. A rather advance plant really. This plant will likely be producing materials for Apple as the need for Sapphire is still there.
$570M may not seem much for a company with $150B in cash but they can't just throw money away.
Please can we have a little rational thought here. This is peanuts, I've seen far smaller companies burn proportionately more money on projects that never yielded anything. Apparently you have never ran a business or been materially involved in one.
Did Apple force GTAT into bankruptcy?
Will they get their $570M back?
Why would they get their money back, they got what they paid for. The plant GTAT built for Apple didn't evaproate as a result of a Chpater 11 filing.
As an Apple shareholder I deserve answers.
To put it bluntly a mad man deserves nothing.
Some of you are acting like $570M is nothing. So if Apple gave $570M to Tim Cooks brother you would be okay with that? ITs not just the amount it the principle.
Apple didn't give anybody anything here, they paid for a plant that they still have. Your irrational behavior here really needs to be addressed.
so you would be okay if Apple paid Tim Cooks brother $570M for doing nothing?
You are displaying some rather disturbing ignorance here. GTAT built a massive plant for Apple on a very tight schedule. To imply they did nothing is the height of stupidity.
Because that's exactly what GTAT did for Apple.
Not at all.
Its a small amount relative to Apple but as an Apple investor i want answers.
To be perfectly honest you are the type of investor most companies wish would die off and never raise their heads again. You have over run this thread with more nonsense and unjustified statements than I've seen in years. Simply put you don't deserve answers and frankly the lack of intelligence that you have displayed here implies that your wouldn't be able to digest the answers you would get anyways.
Honestly I've never seen such a pathetic series of posts.
"Without significant sapphire revenue from Apple, we would still be required to repay in cash (on a quarterly basis) significant amounts of the Prepayment Amount beginning in 2015, which would limit our ability to invest in or operate other portions of our business, including our equipment operations, or to repay indebtedness at the time of maturity of such indebtedness. In addition, these repayments may exhaust all of our cash and, if we are unable to make a payment when due (or fail to meet our supply obligations), we will be in default and Apple will have the right to acquire control and possession of the ASF systems and/or our subsidiary (GT Advanced Equipment Holding LLC) that owns these systems (and to be paid in cash for any deficiency). The prepayment installments from Apple may also be cancelled prior to payment, or repayment accelerated, under certain circumstances, including if the ASF systems do not generate sapphire material to specification prior to an agreed upon date or we are unable to comply with certain financial requirements." From below listed link.
Recommend opening their 10-K filing in iBooks, then do a search for apple, then jump to each new page entry and read. Everything seems like a very good deal for apple, and potential for gtat if things worked out. Link is below.
Seems Apple could soon own the equipment and some IP.
Thanks for posting that. I haven't read the whole 10-K but my initial assessment is that GT has great potential with its IP and technology, and maybe tried to push too fast into sapphire production (with Apple's financial support). If my recollection is correct, GT purchased the Hyperion technology for producing thin sheets, but at the time, there was only one R&D machine (sounds surprising like Liquid Metal). Perhaps the problem is that GT can crank out the boules of silicon, sapphire and silicon carbide, but can't produce the sheets of material in volumes to be useful to customers like Apple, yet anyway.
At any rate, keeping their gains while controlling their cash flow through Chapter 11, would seem to be the solution that GT needs for long term viability, and I wouldn't expect Apple to argue too much otherwise, unless Apple really wants to own the production. The risk vs reward is certainly in Apple's favor if GT can survive intact and produce whatever Apple wanted.
I think the problem is that the 'i' implies 'internet', which the watch doesn't do on its own.
My guess is Apple wants to move away from iDevices, especially for new products/services that Steve had no involvement with. Plus a name like iWatch just seems a bit creepy. To me ?Watch Is much classier.
I think the problem is that the 'i' implies 'internet', which the watch doesn't do on its own.
My guess is Apple wants to move away from iDevices, especially for new products/services that Steve had no involvement with. Plus a name like iWatch just seems a bit creepy. To me ?Watch Is much classier.
Then, there's the story about the kid who told his parents that he wann'ada watch for Christmas ... So, they let him ...
Let's be honest, Apple will have known about this for a long time. There is something going on between the 2 companies. Sapphire is the next thing for Apple, they wouldn't let the company go under, not when they could buy the company 100 times over.
Maybe it's just stock manipulation to bring the price down so they can buy a bigger share, build the company up and sell the shares on for a massive profit.
Let's be honest, Apple will have known about this for a long time. There is something going on between the 2 companies. Sapphire is the next thing for Apple, they wouldn't let the company go under, not when they could buy the company 100 times over.
Maybe it's just stock manipulation to bring the price down so they can buy a bigger share, build the company up and sell the shares on for a massive profit.
A 90% drop would do that, but I suspect that whatever deal they had with GTAT nearly equates to the extra machinery they bought which would probably go to Apple. I seem to remember that Apple has invented in production machinery in the past for companies to build their components.
I think the problem is that the 'i' implies 'internet', which the watch doesn't do on its own.
My guess is Apple wants to move away from iDevices, especially for new products/services that Steve had no involvement with. Plus a name like iWatch just seems a bit creepy. To me ?Watch Is much classier.
Good explanation.
It may be that the UK website has always said 2015 rather than early 2015, but I thought initially it said early 2015.
At any rate, if the only market available initially is the US, that's going to limit sales substantially. It's unusual for Apple to launch there only. The original iPhone and iPad launched in the UK with the U.S.
Comments
Apple showed if off now to destroy the sales of every other smart watch over Christmas.
I agree with you, but it's a little more than that. It's a plea to a judge to let them pay their creditors less than they are owed.
To be correct, it’s a plea to stop the creditors from going after them while they come up with a plan to repay/recover the company.
Part of the plan may be to pay less but that doesn’t mean the company will request it or the judge will grant if asked.
Everyone knows what opportunity cost is. The problem is that he attributed half a billion dollars to opportunity cost, which is a random figure he pulled straight from his butt.
It's called marketing ...
Except Apple showed actual devices -- rather than just announcing them!
Er … no. Everyone here said the headphones were crap, so it must be about the streaming service or getting Iovine on board.
To be correct, it’s a plea to stop the creditors from going after them while they come up with a plan to repay/recover the company.
Part of the plan may be to pay less but that doesn’t mean the company will request it or the judge will grant if asked.
Thanks for the clarification/correction.
I think the problem is that the 'i' implies 'internet', which the watch doesn't do on its own.
The iPod didn't have internet until the iPod Touch.
I doubt that very much, you are pissed off at everybody over a bad investment when the only person to blame is the one you see in the mirror. You can't make assumptions about this filing, Apples role in it or the possibility for recovery. Some details will certainly become public at which time an intelligent conversation can be had.
That money went into the plant that they now have in Arizona. The furnaces and other production hardware in that plant doesn't go away with Chapter 11. I really don't understand this nonsense about Cook. Apple has lost nothing here. As for the chapter 11 that might be the result of Apples contract with GTAT or it might not. We don't know but likely will shortly once all the filing material is reviewed. The other way to figure out what might be happening is to look at the plant in Arizona and see if there has been a recent layoff of employees.
Again what has Apple lost here. They have a plant. A rather advance plant really. This plant will likely be producing materials for Apple as the need for Sapphire is still there.
Please can we have a little rational thought here. This is peanuts, I've seen far smaller companies burn proportionately more money on projects that never yielded anything. Apparently you have never ran a business or been materially involved in one. Why would they get their money back, they got what they paid for. The plant GTAT built for Apple didn't evaproate as a result of a Chpater 11 filing. To put it bluntly a mad man deserves nothing.
Apple didn't give anybody anything here, they paid for a plant that they still have. Your irrational behavior here really needs to be addressed.
To be perfectly honest you are the type of investor most companies wish would die off and never raise their heads again. You have over run this thread with more nonsense and unjustified statements than I've seen in years. Simply put you don't deserve answers and frankly the lack of intelligence that you have displayed here implies that your wouldn't be able to digest the answers you would get anyways.
Honestly I've never seen such a pathetic series of posts.
"Without significant sapphire revenue from Apple, we would still be required to repay in cash (on a quarterly basis) significant amounts of the Prepayment Amount beginning in 2015, which would limit our ability to invest in or operate other portions of our business, including our equipment operations, or to repay indebtedness at the time of maturity of such indebtedness. In addition, these repayments may exhaust all of our cash and, if we are unable to make a payment when due (or fail to meet our supply obligations), we will be in default and Apple will have the right to acquire control and possession of the ASF systems and/or our subsidiary (GT Advanced Equipment Holding LLC) that owns these systems (and to be paid in cash for any deficiency). The prepayment installments from Apple may also be cancelled prior to payment, or repayment accelerated, under certain circumstances, including if the ASF systems do not generate sapphire material to specification prior to an agreed upon date or we are unable to comply with certain financial requirements." From below listed link.
Recommend opening their 10-K filing in iBooks, then do a search for apple, then jump to each new page entry and read. Everything seems like a very good deal for apple, and potential for gtat if things worked out. Link is below.
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AMDA-1AHIQM/3525802766x0xS1047469-14-2123/1394954/filing.pdf
Seems Apple could soon own the equipment and some IP.
Thanks for posting that. I haven't read the whole 10-K but my initial assessment is that GT has great potential with its IP and technology, and maybe tried to push too fast into sapphire production (with Apple's financial support). If my recollection is correct, GT purchased the Hyperion technology for producing thin sheets, but at the time, there was only one R&D machine (sounds surprising like Liquid Metal). Perhaps the problem is that GT can crank out the boules of silicon, sapphire and silicon carbide, but can't produce the sheets of material in volumes to be useful to customers like Apple, yet anyway.
At any rate, keeping their gains while controlling their cash flow through Chapter 11, would seem to be the solution that GT needs for long term viability, and I wouldn't expect Apple to argue too much otherwise, unless Apple really wants to own the production. The risk vs reward is certainly in Apple's favor if GT can survive intact and produce whatever Apple wanted.
Then, there's the story about the kid who told his parents that he wann'ada watch for Christmas ... So, they let him ...
Let's be honest, Apple will have known about this for a long time. There is something going on between the 2 companies. Sapphire is the next thing for Apple, they wouldn't let the company go under, not when they could buy the company 100 times over.
Maybe it's just stock manipulation to bring the price down so they can buy a bigger share, build the company up and sell the shares on for a massive profit.
A 90% drop would do that, but I suspect that whatever deal they had with GTAT nearly equates to the extra machinery they bought which would probably go to Apple. I seem to remember that Apple has invented in production machinery in the past for companies to build their components.
Good explanation.
It may be that the UK website has always said 2015 rather than early 2015, but I thought initially it said early 2015.
At any rate, if the only market available initially is the US, that's going to limit sales substantially. It's unusual for Apple to launch there only. The original iPhone and iPad launched in the UK with the U.S.
How about those of us that owned GT Advanced Technologies? Is Apple going to reimburse me for the $27,000 loss I took on GTAT?
You do realise that buying and selling on the stock market is gambling don't you.