Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

GT Advanced COO: Apple Told Us 'Put On Your Big Boy Pants and Accept the Agreement'

fredaroony said:
You provided no information and your only point was to bring in a completely different company that wasn't even being discussed.
Click to expand...

You say something never works, I provide an example of it working and you continue to change the subject to validate your own disillusion.

Good luck with that.
 
So basically we're getting a one sided story here. Apple had said basically nothing.
 
odditie said:
You say something never works, I provide an example of it working and you continue to change the subject to validate your own disillusion.

Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

You are the one changing the subject of this thread and I never said it never works.
 
This is only GTAT's side of the story. Remember, they were sued for selling faulty Sapphire furnaces:

GTAT lost an American Arbitration Association (AAA) lawsuit against Taiwanese sapphire manufacturer Tera Xtal Technology in August. AAA ruled GTAT should return payment totaling $ 24 million for faulty sapphire crystal growth furnaces, which greatly strained the firm’s finances.
Click to expand...

So we know they manufactured faulty Sapphire furnaces, which explains why they couldn't meet Apple's quality standards better than any of the nonsense in this lawsuit.

"Put on your big boy pants". So that's all it took to get GTAT to enter into a bad agreement? And these same executives get millions per year to run the company into the ground? And they get to keep all that money no matter what happens to the company?

I hope the SEC comes down like a ton of bricks on these mothers. They're not "made men" like Goldman Sachs, so they could very well end up in prison.
 
AdonisSMU said:
No it's the case of a company accepting a deal that they couldn't deliver on and they knew it. However, if they would've been able to make the deal work, they would've looked like geniuses. The CEO and friends took out lots of money to live a high flying lifestyle. The company GTA could've easily worked with Apple on this. However, they are content to smear Apple into the mud simply to protect themselves yet Apple has said nothing even renegotiating the deal after the fact for more favorable terms for GTA.

It just sounds like these guys are smearing Apple to avoid jail time and not anything else. Expect people not to defend obvious fraud on the part of the GTA Management.
Click to expand...

Riiiight... that's exactly what's happening here... :rolleyes:
 
cocky jeremy said:
Apple is evil because some stupid company signed a contract to do things they didn't have the ability to do? Ok then. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You mean like the millions of people who signed contracts on mortgage payments they can't mark but the lender persuaded them that it can be done. :eek:

Manipulation by means of coercion is alive and well.
 
Hennesie2000 said:
strong′-arm` (adj.)
1. using, involving, or threatening the use of physical force or violence.
2. to use violent methods upon; assault.
3. to rob by force.

Nope it wasn't strong arm force at all. It was pure greed on the behalf of GT. If they felt the deal was too in favor of Apple then don't sign the deal, it is as simple as that.
Click to expand...

It's a figure of speech. Sort of like when a sports team gets "slaughtered", it does not actually mean the field is filled with dismembered limbs and blood.
 
bawbac said:
You mean like the millions of people who signed contracts on mortgage payments they can't mark but the lender persuaded them that it can be done. :eek:
Click to expand...

Don't worry, most of his comments are just like that and very simple i.e. they suck or that is crap
 
rGiskard said:
It's a figure of speech. Sort of like when a sports team gets "slaughtered", it does not actually mean the field is filled with dismembered limbs and blood.
Click to expand...


Yes but in this situation the figure of speech is implying that GT was forced to sign. I know Apple wasn't doing anything violent but they weren't forcing GT to do anything.
 
And in a parallel universe...

An interview with GT Advanced COO if they had succeeded...

"We knew having Apple as our sole customer was a big risk to take, but the potential payoff was over a billion dollars! Meeting the quantity and quality requirements of sapphire for Apple was difficult. We were on the bleeding edge of this technology and any major setbacks would have meant disaster. We had some production issues here and there that sometimes kept our engineers up for 48 hours in a row. Our first shipment to Apple was two days late and slightly less than what they had demanded. We almost lost the contract. Then there was a breakthrough in yield that really made the difference. Looking back, we were quite lucky to have everything fall into place like it did. Now we're planning a second manufacturing plant. Our yield continues to improve and costs are going down."
 
When a company like Apple comes to you and says we want to make a contract with you, you don't refuse that.

If GTAT did not sign the contract with Apple, the company would have been screwed anyway. How would the headlines look? "GTAT refuses deal with Apple on sapphire production." Shareholders would have lost all faith with executives, even if it was a completely one sided deal.

At the end of the day though, it seems like the executives and representation of GTAT for this contract were way in over their heads.
 
Really tired at companies that get greedy, sign contracts that don't benefit them then make of their demise a big circus stunt because poor bad Apple, made them sign it.

Steven P. Jobs...

Give me a break.

GT: Stop whining. You got greedy, all those times you saw the contract was tough all you could think were the MILLIONS if not BILLIONS you would have raked in if Apple had shipped their newer phones with Sapphire glass.

But they didn't, because you delivered a ****** crappy product that Apple didn't hold to their standards and they didn't allow you to reproduce the product in a "cheaper" way.

Now you got what you got coming...

The sad thing of all these is that these are decisions the Upper Management makes, and who is paying the price? All those south americans and mexicans and blue collar workers who are getting laid off.
 
It always amazes me how much people will defend a companies unethical practices just because they like their products.

Fun fact, Apple is not your friend, they make great products that you enjoy but would not think twice about putting you and your whole family into the ground to add .0001% to their profit margin.
 
bawbac said:
You mean like the millions of people who signed contracts on mortgage payments they can't mark but the lender persuaded them that it can be done. :eek:

Manipulation by means of coercion is alive and well.
Click to expand...

So, if I talk you into jumping off a bridge and you're dumb enough to believe it'll turn out ok, that's my fault? :eek:

----------
faustfire said:
It always amazes me how much people will defend a companies unethical practices just because they like their products.

Fun fact, Apple is not your friend, they make great products that you enjoy but would not think twice about putting you and your whole family into the ground to add .0001% to their profit margin.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending Apple because I like their products. I'm defending them because it's only GT's fault for signing the contract they couldn't hold their end of. No one else's.
 
AdonisSMU said:
Basically. Apple could've made those people a ton of money if in the off chancethey were able to deliver on the product. Apple is trying to experiment with new stuff from smaller vendors. It's not anything other companies don't do. However, they need to protect themselves. Apple has more to lose if production deadlines aren't met.
Click to expand...

You actually believe that Apple thought that there was just an "off chance" that GT could deliver, and that Apple was merely "trying to experiment" with sapphire? :D
 
Reallllly!

Okay, let me get this right.. GT was provided capital, equipment (specified by GT) and the location (rent free).... GT and Apple also agreed to the engineering specifications, schedules, quality specifications and other engineering docs as well a slew of other documents stating clearly what Apple (the customer) expected from GT (the source) to provide. and in the end GT found this to be to large of a deal. It is a old story, GT's management and engineering staff overstated its capabilities and agreed to a big money ticket that they couldn't provide. When Apple wanted deliveries that GT promised, GT couldn't deliver and Apple not wanting to waste money stepped in to help correct the errors. Then it would seem that GT needed "Modifications to the equipment" that they (GT) sourced and Apple said no. Seems like business to me. Quit your bitching and move along. Your company may have been able to supple small amounts of this glass but in reality there was no way you could have ever produced the quality and quantity of glass that was needed in the time that it agreed to. This is just my humble opinion (with 25 years in the Aerospace field in Logistics working with sub-contractors and suppliers).
 
I am a project manager and is easy for em to read between lines because "been there, done that" and " I know how it starts and I know how it ends".

"There is a difference between to be involved and to be committed" and "do not trust in smiles, remember Lucifer was an angel and he knows how to smile too".

But my favorite from the movie Devils Advocated... "Vanity, my favorite sin".

Then, Donald Trump say it: do not be naive in business!

The people from GT Advanced trusted too much and had too many red lights telling them. It was a bet and they lost.
 
cocky jeremy said:
I'm not defending Apple because I like their products. I'm defending them because it's only GT's fault for signing the contract they couldn't hold their end of. No one else's.
Click to expand...

So the fact that Apple changed the agreement means nothing to you?

He says that Apple initially drew GT in with the promise of a huge deal, originally agreeing to purchase sapphire furnaces and let GT operate them, but eventually demanding a "fundamentally different deal" requiring GT to purchase the furnaces itself.

GT gave into Apple's new terms because it had "invested months negotiating a sale contract with Apple while being effectively locked out of pursuing other opportunities with Apple's competitors." During "extensive and all-consuming" negotiations with Apple, GT ceased speaking to other companies about its furnaces due to the lure of Apple's large offer.
Click to expand...

And you're still defending Apple like they didn't do anything wrong?

Holy cow. Makes me wonder what Apple has to do before you think they're in the wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back