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 Seeks to Void 'Oppressive and Burdensome' Agreements With Apple, Outlines Sapphire Wind Down Process
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What a ridiculous statement.
Not only does it ascribe a puerile emotional reaction to a business deal, it make some serious assumptions about how this all has shaken down.
I suspect those contract terms only became "oppressive and burdensome" when they couldn't meet the quantity and quality requirements for Apple, and Apple decided not to use their sapphire product.
Reminds me of that line from Ghostbusters, "You've never worked in the private sector. They expect results!"
Reminds me of that line from Ghostbusters, "You've never worked in the private sector. They expect results!"
LOL.
This is like someone with a credit card debt… they go on a shopping binge, buy a new car, some nice bling for mistress, and buy tons of nice things. Then credit card company sends a bill for $21,000. Card holder says "Whoa! I can't afford to pay that crap back! What do you mean I have to pay 20% interest on top of that?! Those are oppressive terms! I'm suing you! I'm gonna ask a judge to help bail me out! I'm gonna file bankruptcy! Did I already say I'm suing you? I gotta do anything to get me out of this oppressive contract agreement!"
A contractual agreement is a contractual agreement.
This is like someone with a credit card debt… they go on a shopping binge, buy a new car, some nice bling for mistress, and buy tons of nice things. Then credit card company sends a bill for $21,000. Card holder says "Whoa! I can't afford to pay that crap back! What do you mean I have to pay 20% interest on top of that?! Those are oppressive terms! I'm suing you! I'm gonna ask a judge to help bail me out! I'm gonna file bankruptcy! Did I already say I'm suing you? I gotta do anything to get me out of this oppressive contract agreement!"
A contractual agreement is a contractual agreement.
You must have very little experience in business and sales for a comment like that.
When any company awards contracts and business theoretically there is profit to be made.
While I am sure Apple are tough negotiators about price, they will at the same time make sure that everything is done within their specs and guidelines.
Anytime one cannot make money or has doubts that one can fulfill a contract one should not sign it.
I am also sure that Apple will act as a responsible partner as they do not want bad press AND they did want sapphire, hence the big financing help.
Tell me if this doesn't sound fishy
http://www.businessinsider.com/ceo-...-thomas-gutierrez-sold-a-ton-of-stock-2014-10
http://www.businessinsider.com/ceo-...-thomas-gutierrez-sold-a-ton-of-stock-2014-10
We have almost no facts to judge anyone or anything by... but I have to wonder. Did they agree to this "burdensome" Apple partnership by accident? Was hypnosis involved?
And what makes the agreements "burdensome"? Were they unable to deliver what they predicted they could deliver? Or unable to deliver at the costs they predicted?
As a freelancer, if I agree to do a certain job at a certain price, I can't decide later it's "burdensome" and expect to walk away with money, unless the client changes the job making it different from what was agreed (in which case the agreement doesn't apply and isn't a burden on either party, but I would still get paid for whatever had been delivered so far).
And what makes the agreements "burdensome"? Were they unable to deliver what they predicted they could deliver? Or unable to deliver at the costs they predicted?
As a freelancer, if I agree to do a certain job at a certain price, I can't decide later it's "burdensome" and expect to walk away with money, unless the client changes the job making it different from what was agreed (in which case the agreement doesn't apply and isn't a burden on either party, but I would still get paid for whatever had been delivered so far).
Exactly what I was thinking. While the others on this forum believe GTAT messed up by not honoring the contract, what if Apple's standard was beyond what they agreed upon (or contract was vague on what's quality and Apple had free reign to reject them)? If that was the scenario then GTAT might have a case
Relocation to China?
either the company or the assets methinks would move to China for more affordable/(profitable) production.
this would be a problem for Apple's commitment to Made in USA, but if the company went bankrupt then the criticism would be more manageable.
Chapter 11 isn't 'real' bankruptcy. in other words it's not the end of the company, but an end to their obligations. a sort of get out of jail free card for them while their lenders and vendors get pick up the bill.
-my speculation-
(this is a rumor site, right?)
either the company or the assets methinks would move to China for more affordable/(profitable) production.
this would be a problem for Apple's commitment to Made in USA, but if the company went bankrupt then the criticism would be more manageable.
Chapter 11 isn't 'real' bankruptcy. in other words it's not the end of the company, but an end to their obligations. a sort of get out of jail free card for them while their lenders and vendors get pick up the bill.
-my speculation-
(this is a rumor site, right?)
Apple Deal
I think I read somewhere that if GT fails to supply Apple with the sapphire , and something like this happens to the company, that Apple will have rights to the furnaces for their investment.
I think I read somewhere that if GT fails to supply Apple with the sapphire , and something like this happens to the company, that Apple will have rights to the furnaces for their investment.
This needs to be on an episode or two of "Suits". I would love to see them play out the backend lawyer work required to navigate this debacle.
'Oppressive and Burdensome'???
'Oppressive and Burdensome' agreements WHICH THEY NEGOTIATED AND AGREED TO.
Sheesh, who would want to do business with them?
'Oppressive and Burdensome' agreements WHICH THEY NEGOTIATED AND AGREED TO.
Sheesh, who would want to do business with them?
Fixed.
This unfortunately does not bode well for American manufacturing with this outfit looking more and more like an operation run by rodeo clowns.
Your avatar had me fooled!
Dude, kudos to you! I was prodding my monitor thinking a bug had got between the LCD and the glass (once happened with my old Powerbook!), and I was about to shoot some video of it to post on Vine or something.
Very clever! I feel a right idiot. Ha ha!
Dude, kudos to you! I was prodding my monitor thinking a bug had got between the LCD and the glass (once happened with my old Powerbook!), and I was about to shoot some video of it to post on Vine or something.
Very clever! I feel a right idiot. Ha ha!
Would no one think of the camera lens and home button?!
That's what doesn't add up for me. Apple gave them capital for production, invested heavily into the company. Their first claim in court regarding NDA violations if documents were made available didn't make sense, Apple was dedicated in helping them through this process, I'm sure they would have made exceptions on some of these issues. Heck, they invested so much into the company they would be shooting themselves in the foot if they fined them $50 million for each alleged violation.
Now they claim Apple's agreements are "oppressive and burdensome"? Without Apple's investment and support, they wouldn't have the machinery to produce their product. Either they want non-exclusivity with Apple and add other companies as clients, or they slacked off and didn't do the work to meet their obligations. I read a few comments from people here that lived in the area who stated very little activity has been visible aside construction.
Exactly! And it also illustrates one the oldest tactics around..."the best defense is a good OFFENSE".
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with BS. GT's stance is pure BS.
"Oppressive and burdensome" sounds like a childish tantrum coming from the same management that actually signed these agreements and profited handsomely from the resulting share sales.
There will be a glut of sapphire furnaces coming onto the market soon. This might hit other furnace manufacturers pretty hard.
The wind down plan and the large layoff sounds like steps towards a liquidation. I don't see how they claimed otherwise with a straight face back when they initially filed for bankruptcy.
There will be a glut of sapphire furnaces coming onto the market soon. This might hit other furnace manufacturers pretty hard.
Thats actually not a lot. Sounds like he needed money to remodel the basement of his house. Its probably a small portion only, of his total stock holdings.
the contract is BS but they signed it. I wouldn't be surprised if they won though. A contract that makes you produce product at a certain rate, forces you to not sell it except to Apple, and gives Apple the ability to not buy it (and you still can't sell it to anyone else) is a recipe to bankrupt a company. Especially since Apple could call back their loans if GTs cash fell below a certain level which was certain to happen as they had to pay the bills but weren't selling their product to anyone and still had to produce it in hopes Apple would buy it
