GT Advanced reaches bankruptcy deal with Apple, will sell off more than 2,000 sapphire furnaces to p

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 61
    Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post

    2,000 furnances? How big are they?

     

    Most are only large enough for a single TouchID Home Button to fit inside at a time.

     

    The rest are only large enough for the screen of the Apple Watch.

  • Reply 42 of 61
    Curious: what happened... and when did sog35 get banned?
  • Reply 43 of 61
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by justp1ayin View Post



    It also seems like Apple keeps turning the other cheek. They keep getting trash talked by this CEO and in return, they let him use the locale rent free...

     

    If you have a CEO trash talking -- you give him all the rope you can feed him.

  • Reply 44 of 61
    lilgto64lilgto64 Posts: 1,147member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

     



    I think you might be too charitable. The timing of stock sales from senior execs at GTA are very suspicious. This could be a situation where Apple got scammed. If so, that's pretty embarrassing for Apple. As a stockholder, I'd almost prefer that the story was Apple being a big meanie, rather than Apple being scammed... 




    If this ends up being the only case where Apple was swindled and for such a relatively small amount compared to this zero debt and cash stockpile amidst dozens of acquisitions and partnerships and contracts I would say that's a pretty good track record.

    It would be more concerning if someone (or group) at Apple had all the info and was not conned but just made a (or series of) immensely poor decisions or utterly lacked any ability to be sufficiently critical of claims made by the other company. 

  • Reply 45 of 61
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    Most are only large enough for a single TouchID Home Button to fit inside at a time.

     

    The rest are only large enough for the screen of the Apple Watch.




    Thanks for the perspective. I'm guessing these are super high pressure kilns. People learn that we have a "sapphire screen" and don't seem to remember that only about ten years ago an these artificial gems being massed produced seemed like a pipe dream. I figure however, that there is going to one day be a laser/gas (with interferometry) process that allows creation of a high pressure crystal on a surface, one molecular layer at a time.

  • Reply 46 of 61
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    Curious: what happened... and when did sog35 get banned?

    Again? He was banned like a month ago.
  • Reply 47 of 61
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

    Again? He was banned like a month ago.

     

    Again I must point out that Huddler does not distinguish to the user whether the ban is temporary (nor its length) or permanent.

     

    It doesn't matter to other users, though vBulletin will say "Kicked" instead of "Banned" for temporary bans.

  • Reply 48 of 61
    sflocal wrote: »

    I agree... with the case being sealed (for now), we may never really know what went on.  I thought that Apple essentially owned the furnaces and just "contracted" GT to run them.


    GT is really coming across as the Solyndra of the industry.

    In a manner, yes. Apple attempted to subsidize something that would never have survived on its own in the business world, because they were the only customer for the product and by throwing around tons of cash and involving unknown "actors", they attracted an apparently unsavory business partner. At least this time Apple walks away with most of their investment.
  • Reply 49 of 61
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    Again I must point out that Huddler does not distinguish to the user whether the ban is temporary (nor its length) or permanent.

    It doesn't matter to other users, though vBulletin will say "Kicked" instead of "Banned" for temporary bans.

    Just checked. He's not currently banned.
  • Reply 50 of 61
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Just checked. He's not currently banned.

    Oy.
  • Reply 51 of 61
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Again? He was banned like a month ago.

    I think it was meant as a joke since he hadn't made any comment yet in this thread. ;)
  • Reply 52 of 61
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    Just checked. He's not currently banned.

     

    It was subtle, but the point being... sog35 has not yet commented in this thread... one of his favorite subjects... hence ThePixelDoc's comment.

  • Reply 53 of 61
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    I think it was meant as a joke since he hadn't made any comment yet in this thread. ;)

    It was subtle, but the point being... sog35 has not yet commented in this thread... one of his favorite subjects... hence ThePixelDoc's comment.

    Thanks for the clarification.
  • Reply 54 of 61
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Nobodyy View Post

     

    Wow.

     

    It really looks like Apple will get the short end of the stick here. And it seems likely they're ready to cut their losses now and move on, potentially to a better partner. 


    Actually maybe no, from they I read and doing a little reading between the lines, The equipment will be sold to someone, who, most like a company capable of running the equipment, like Corning. The price most likely will be set at cost, GTAT can them pay off it vendors and get out from those obligations and they can movie forward with their other business. Apple will out some money, but apple may be the one who buys the equipment since they could then control the selling price to someone else. If that is the case then they could get back some of their investment. The only thing important to apple is to get the equipment out of the hands of the court and get it to someone who can make sapphire for them. 

     

    They will also do some lease deal on the facility unless they can get someone to buy everything. The purchasing company will obvious get all the IP Apple now owns as well a guaranty orders from Apple they will have built in customer with the deal.

     

    In the end, GTAT will survive, but a lessor company, and Apple will get what they need for future products and do not have to deal with a company which lack the experience needed. 

  • Reply 55 of 61
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Just checked. He's not currently banned.

    Bad assumption on my part, since he was missing from this thread completely.

    This was his pet theme for the last couple of weeks.... so... well... I ASSumed... and now I'm the "donkey".
  • Reply 56 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post





    Bad assumption on my part, since he was missing from this thread completely.



    This was his pet theme for the last couple of weeks.... so... well... I ASSumed... and now I'm the "donkey".

     

    Shouldn't have said anything... I thought your post was brilliant (still do, actually).  lol

  • Reply 57 of 61
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    Bad assumption on my part, since he was missing from this thread completely.

    This was his pet theme for the last couple of weeks.... so... well... I ASSumed... and now I'm the "donkey".


    Maybe he went insognito. :lol:
  • Reply 58 of 61
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Russell View Post

     

    If it was that simple, GTAT would have to cough up $439 million asap.

     


     

    And how, exactly, would you expect the court to facilitate that, given that they don't have anywhere near that much money?

     

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by Russell View Post

    Instead,

    1) Apple doesn't get their money back until the ovens get sold

    2) Apple is allowing GTAT to stay in the building rent free for a year

    3) Apple will help GTAT obtain $150 million in financing

    4) GT gets to retain intellectual property rights



     

     

    Because agreeing to these things is the only way GTAT can conceivably raise the cash. You don't kill a chicken if you want her eggs.

  • Reply 59 of 61
    russellrussell Posts: 296member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by zigzaglens View Post

     

     

    And how, exactly, would you expect the court to facilitate that, given that they don't have anywhere near that much money?

     

     

    Because agreeing to these things is the only way GTAT can conceivably raise the cash. You don't kill a chicken if you want her eggs.


     

     

    "Apple will have a $439 million claim against the furnaces and will be paid solely through the furnace sales, Despins said. No other claims will be made by Apple."

     

    Even if GTAT closes shop tomorrow, or becomes wildly successful a year from now, the only money Apple will get is from the sales of the furnaces.

  • Reply 60 of 61
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,897member

    I saw some speculation that the reason only 1,000 furnaces were operating at the time of default was that the Arizona PUC could not supply enough power to operate all 2000.  In the unlikely event that is true, somebody made a big, big boo boo.

Sign In or Register to comment.