Apple is 0% responsible this. As soon as the signature was on the agreement, GTAT's management was responsible.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
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'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple is 0% responsible this. As soon as the signature was on the agreement, GTAT's management was responsible.
I think most people here would disagree, and anyone in big business wood laugh at what you are implying.
So what you believe is, Apple's intentions were to give $500 million to a company and purposely do everything they could to make them fail??? That's absurd!!!
Wow, that's beautiful straw man you got right there. No one said anything of the sort. Take the time to actually read the article before commenting please.
Neither do I. As both a customer and a shareholder, I'm happy to know that Apple is trying to get me the best deal possible from suppliers.
I agree, it's all about poor decisions on GTAT! But trying to blame Apple for their poor decisions to me is wrong! The COO/CEO came out with a lot of money from their poor decisions and a lot of people lost jobs
I read the article and the first couple of pages of replies.
I think both parties are to blame here.
GTAT for management incompetence, and Apple for killing their Golden Goose.
Yes, Apple shares the blame; or at least I think they should share it.
This is why I don't like exclusive supplier agreements and I don't like "one size fits all" contracts.
The NDA sounds pretty standard for any company who wants to protect their IP and properly time the release of their products. Anybody who has signed an NDA just for a simple beta testing agreement can attest to this.
But it's time now for Apple to put on their own "big boy pants" because when this crap goes to court, any "big boy" will know that everything will become public no matter what. And "Apple ain't coming out of this smelling like a rose!
I think both parties are to blame here.
GTAT for management incompetence, and Apple for killing their Golden Goose.
Yes, Apple shares the blame; or at least I think they should share it.
This is why I don't like exclusive supplier agreements and I don't like "one size fits all" contracts.
The NDA sounds pretty standard for any company who wants to protect their IP and properly time the release of their products. Anybody who has signed an NDA just for a simple beta testing agreement can attest to this.
But it's time now for Apple to put on their own "big boy pants" because when this crap goes to court, any "big boy" will know that everything will become public no matter what. And "Apple ain't coming out of this smelling like a rose!
Reading comprehension much?
Apple didn't know what the **** it was doing because it wasn't a sapphire glass manufacture and incompetently made poor business decision. It just so happens that the way the deal was laid out, GT--instead of Apple--took the fall for those mistakes.
short, they weren't trying to make anyone fail, they just didn't know what they were doing.
I think most people here would disagree, and anyone in big business wood laugh at what you are implying.
So what you believe is, Apple's intentions were to give $500 million to a company and purposely do everything they could to make them fail??? That's absurd!!!
I know right?
Funny how nearly all of Apples suppliers that are a listed stock - their profits are up..
Clearly these idiots needed a tight leash because knowing Apple - they had doubts whether they could deliver.
For those "stunned" at Apples terms... Wtf do u expect from the largest most popular brand in the world? Should they have given them a looser deal and Apple themselves suffer public crediability destruction at the hands of a small immature company??
Let's not forget that everyone and their mother *believed* Saffire would be on the iPhone 6...
As my 92 year old Aunt says ..."nobody held a gun to your temple to sign or engage in any agreement"...
For God sake people... This tiny NOTHING of a company was put on the fricking MAP by Apple...and given the CHANCE of a Lifetime...
??? GTA was not a company that was found solely to supply Apple. They were in the sapphire business before Apple came along, afaik. I don't doubt that Apple used its leverage to pressure GTA into a lopsided deal. But just as much, GTA's vision was clouded by the prospect of making $$$ with Apple and they made the choice to put all of their eggs in one basket. They either overpromised or underdelivered. Had they delivered, we wouldn't be talking about this.
Do you seriously believe Apple would have made such a big deal with GT if GT had other customers, possibly competitors like Samsung, that they were also working with?
I don't think so... Apple likes exclusivity.
Of course they didn't know. They were relying on GT to know the business. What I'm getting at is that if GT knew the hardware wasn't going to work, and they told Apple, what good would it have been at that point for Apple to say "no"? If the goods can't be produced, they can't be produced. It doesn't benefit Apple in any way to simply say no, if they don't really know the business.
There are 3 sides to this story - GT's, Apple's and the truth. Hopefully we will get the truth soon.
What are you talking about. In order to change any contract between 2 parties. Both parties must agree to the new terms - to void to old contract.
Wow, that's beautiful straw man you got right there. No one said anything of the sort. Take the time to actually read the article before commenting please.
I wasn't referring to the article, more to comments blaming Apple for GTAT's failures! We have not heard Apple's side yet, so how can we say their the bad guys?
I'm talking about before the contract was signed...
GT is a small company. They put all of their time and energy into the deal with Apple, and Apple went ahead and changed the deal before they signed it, and told GT to deal with it.
GT had no other choice to sign at this point because they had no other customers.
Put on your big boy pants and own up to the fact that you agreed to the contract (likely after claiming that you could in fact fulfill that contract).
If anybody got screwed in this it was Apple, not GT. GT's execs got to make lots of money by selling their own stock. That bit of activity may have some of them in jail soon (depending on the evidence), but that is all on them -- Apple had nothing to do with that.
If anybody got screwed in this it was Apple, not GT. GT's execs got to make lots of money by selling their own stock. That bit of activity may have some of them in jail soon (depending on the evidence), but that is all on them -- Apple had nothing to do with that.
If negotiations had been looking like they'd drag on for months and threaten to hurt profitability I'd have dropped negotiations. If someone is going to bully you that much in a pre-negotiation before anything is inked that's a fairly clear sign you should walk away from table... or just drop the "buy us out totally" card.
What we aren't seeing is if GT Advacned even had the option of being able to walk away from the table, if they had any prospects at all outside of Apple.
What we aren't seeing is if GT Advacned even had the option of being able to walk away from the table, if they had any prospects at all outside of Apple.
I agree with your assumption. But to say that they had no choice but to play ball with Apple and therefore put the blame only on Apple sounds unreasonable. It takes two parties. Apple acted in its interest (exclusivity, large scale production) and GTAT saw an opportunity for a huge contract and bent over backwards to secure it. Problem is that GTAT couldn't deliver what they had promised.
Hate Apple all you want but no rules of business has been broken. Just as much as Apple was trying to help its profit margins, GTAT was also trying to jump on the Apple gravy train.
I'm guessing if Microsoft was in the article in place of Apple, the blame would suddenly become theirs.
I agree with your summary.
I don't hate Apple. I'm just saying they're partially at fault for what occurred, just as GT shared some of the blame as well.
Nah. The blame would have still fallen on Apple. People would have found a way to tie it back to them somehow.
Still don't get why they signed the deal if it was so horrible ????
The moment Apple was moving in the negotiation in a direction they didn't like, they should have walked away and not sign it anyway. If they stopped talking to others - their fault for doing so, a deal is not a deal until signed and while it is not signed, you keep other options open (if you have any - but looks like they claim they had other options that they were not following through because they got too tempted to sign with Apple and ignored everything else)
The moment Apple was moving in the negotiation in a direction they didn't like, they should have walked away and not sign it anyway. If they stopped talking to others - their fault for doing so, a deal is not a deal until signed and while it is not signed, you keep other options open (if you have any - but looks like they claim they had other options that they were not following through because they got too tempted to sign with Apple and ignored everything else)
Sad thing is, I think you're right. Although I'm not an Apple fanboy, (or am I?) I tend to be an irrational MS hater. (although I think Surface Pro has tons of potential) I'm trying to work on it... (petting my Xbox One)