Please add sources to your claims. I don't know what this is, maybe others on the board don't know either. Just add a source so we can continue this convo.

Naw I assure you that ship has sailed. The game has changed. This is not about apple anymore. At the time it was the best thing the company could get for all stakeholders, but unfortunately it was not enough to save us outright. The BK started off as an Apple and ended in 2 months. ASF demand was low throughout the rest of the BK and now here we are. Apple is a non-factor now.

As for a shareholders meeting, that would be interesting..

Yeah yeah, makes total sense now. scary stuff. We need an EC more then ever. Thanks for the reply sir

Details on that despins quote? What context was it said in ? As stated in earlier PM's, it is very contradictory.

Maybe he said it in order to argue that shareholders were adequately represented because management would like to see shareholder value returned? If so, then nothing new here. Essentially what I think he has been arguing against an EC is that "Management wants shareholder value returned, but there will be no shareholder value returned."

Hold up, we don't know if this was said early in the BK or essentially now. Xena pulled that quote up without sourcing it.

I have never even seen that quote by him.

Date and source of this comment? If it was said early on in the BK then it makes sense, I doubt that was said recently.

Thanks for this lengthy reply, brought light to a lot of issues. Although you and a few other Ad Hoc members have said these things a few times scattered around across the board / PM's, its nice to see it consolidated as well for others.

Thanks again for you and the other Ad Hoc members continued work on the appointment of an official equity holders committee, its much appreciated.

I mean I didn't know that, wasn't public info till now...Awesome though!

Here is his statement of support for the appointment of an offical equity committee..

https://www.kccllc.net/gtat/document/1411916150817000000000001

Debtors' Motion Under Bankruptcy Code Section 1121(d) for Order Further Extending Exclusive Periods to File Chapter 11 Plan and Solicit Acceptances Thereof

Important quotes, Not necessarily in order:

Is there any reason to believe that this draft plan includes any recovery for shareholders based on GTAT lawyers statements last week?



Are they going to keep rubbing in the fact that the Ad Hoc holds .1682%??







Read the whole thing though!

He is probably speaking about fidelity's screenwall motion early 2015

These posts about the Ad Hoc Equity Cmmittee and the events surrounding it and its background are very relevant to our situation as GTAT shareholders.

Yes ok, it is the original motion. I believe they have redeemed themselves though.

Was it a mistake? yes, did it look bad, yes. Times have most definitely changed.

This is brought up once a day almost, its gotten old. They have explained themselves many times, and this time around their EC motion and intentions have been shown to be positive for equity.

At this point its just beating a dead horse. Not to mention that this time it was brought up in extremely different context by bunny.



Yes.

Agreed, I was talking about peoples fixation on RG's EC motion though. But yes the expo could set up stuff for our future.

The fact that 2 members of the equity committee shared what happened with the court and all stories lined up, I think it's extremely safe to assume we are getting real time information. They are keeping us informed. Especially anotheronedown, who gave us a report of the hearing before any news article picked up on it. and when NHBR wrote about it, it matched his story.

You should appreciate this...

No buddy! Send in your support if you own at least 1 share :) If you are a pre-bk holder make sure you say that as well

Ding Ding Ding! Anotheronedown (member of the AD HOC) also shared the news on this board literally 5 minutes or so after the equity committee order was posted. Or about 4-5 hours before NHBR submitted their "second hand journalism"

This is exactly what I have been saying for a long time. The noteholders, gtat, and the creditors will undervalue the estates because it is in the creditors best interests. They are above us in the pecking order so they have more power. As seen with the fact that a creditors committee has been active this whole case, and the note holders have also been drastically involved. DIP Financing anybody? certain noteholders are now literally at the top of the pecking order, they also dictated how this case will play out now with specific loan terms. GTAT lawyers essentially work for the noteholders now HAH. The noteholders/creditors/ and GTAT are all buddy buddy now, as seen with their objection to the equity committee.

They are running rampant and on course in their eyes, and an equity committee will straight up sway them off course.

Not to mention the fact that an official equity committee can (AND WILL) raise real legal questions as to the value of our company once given more information, and this is a substantial risk to the creditors/noteholders agenda, who expect 100% of the company at POR time.

IMO the problem stems from the note holders and creditors fixating on the fact that shareholders won't receive anything based on their "valuation" of course the creditors as a whole want everything to themselves. Despins has a duty to maximize the estates for the creditors and believes an equity committee will be costly and time wasting when everything so far is going to plan for GTAT lawyers and creditor lawyers. "Why add a third party and mix everything up and make my job harder!?!"

The creditors:
"We gave value to the GTAT estates, and they put us in bankruptcy, we are first in line according to the absolute rule, why should shareholders get anything???"

They have the law on their side (absolute rule) and the precedence. Why should shareholders receive anything when that never happens in bankruptcy cases? (Rarely happens)

just check out the boilerplate language coming from the objections to the equity committees. "The debtors are hopelessly insolvent" "shareholders are adequately represented" "there is not even a scintilla of hope shareholders will receive anything" oh and don't forget what despins said today "shareholders will not receive anything" and "we sold the table" they say these things without proof, aka boilerplate language.

Well this time boroff said "just because you are losing cash does not mean you are hopelessly insolvent" and ordered equity to be involved in some discussion prior to the possible formation for an official committee.

Conclusion:

GTAT lawyers are just doing their jobs how they have essentially always done it. (Or, what they are used to, or what precedence has always shown) Represent debtors, maximize returns for creditors, wipe out shareholders in a POR, and get a hefty paycheck. An Equity committee will only complicate that for lawyers like despins. He hides behind the veil of "it will burden the estates when there is nothing left for shareholders!"

What more would suffice?? I understand what you are saying, but given what GTAT said in their objection to the equity committee, and given what we know from the equity committee members, and given what NHBR said about despins, I think it's SAFE to assume GTAT is not going to add equity in a POR based on GTATs "valuation"

We got this exact news from anotheronedown (a member of the equity committee) HOURS before "second hand journalism" wrote about it......

Great post! It's true that GTAT is done with equity holders, and unjustly so. It gives me great happiness and relief that the judge is ready to grant the motion based on the hopelessly insolvent test.

Even though many do not believe in the equity committee members, they have shown time and time again that they are on he side of US, while GTAT has shown time and time again, that they are NOT with US.

Send in your support if you have not already if you believe an equity committee will bolster our chances to be apart of a POR. We have 2 weeks or so still and I bet everyone who sent something in really did make a difference. Look at the judge, he said "just because GTAT is losing money does not mean GTAT is hopelessly insolvent" (not an exact quote, see southbirds post for the exact quote)

Boroff ordered GTAT to include equity in some talks? GOOD

Although in dire circumstances, today was one of the best news equity holders have had in this case rivaling the first furnace sale and Merlin agreement with WAAREE. Not as good as the apple settlement (Given the circumstances at the time...) until we have an official committee IMO. Both have / will bring value back to equity at a time when odds are against us.

Not over yet! Looks like it isn't the time for sapphire demand, but that can change in the future(2016/2017)

It's up 2 the equity committee to prove GTATs real value and potential and that we are not hopes least insolvent.

Any hope for shareholders without an equity committee on our side is surely dead after reading this. (Well right after GTAT objected to the EC a few weeks back with their "scintilla" line)

But of course, as always, I invite the nay-sayers to point me in the opposite direction with speculation and or evidence if you so wish. Again, i'de love to have a discussion on ways out of this without an equity committee given the recent circumstances.


My favorite excerpt from that article.

This is in regards to GTAT criticizing the equity valuation by S/G

Beautiful!

You are wrong about Merlin's origins..

Xena is just speculating, however of course anything can happen/change in 2-3 weeks. We shall see.

This is one of the job requirements of the UST anyways. The UST is there to make it fair for the debtors if an EC is applicable.

If true, this is good news. I was pretty sure it would be denied flat out to be honest!

Just because i'm used to not good news with GTAT. hah

Crazy thing is I have asked this board multiple times to show me evidence pointing in the OTHER direction, but have only been met with "IP!" replies.

Cause YEAH, the bondholders are REALLY going to negotiate high value just so shareholders can see recovery? Yeah right.

Don't get me wrong, IP obviously has value, but I promise creditors want to value GTATs assets low.

Nice post, this BK was "tactical" but its intentions stemmed from possible litigation with Apple (in which GTAT hoped to be victorious) and a hope for heightened demand of Sapphire (in the mobile screens department) once the Apple contracts were ultimately rejected.

Just read the squiller declaration. no way that wasn't drafted up without the intentions to fight Apple in court. I wish we could have continued with litigation but that would have chapter 7'd GTAT before anything meaningful would come out of it. The settlement was the best case scenario AT THE TIME.

The apple settlement was as close to victorious GTAT would get in their goal for this BK. Yes it was a "tactical" bk but it doesn't really matter now, does it? Only 2 furnaces have been sold (the 98 others should be going through in increments of 25 in the next few months apparently)

still. 100 furnaces? thats not "substantial" no where even CLOSE. we would need 1000+ furnaces selling at around 460k+ to see 300 mil or so in gross revenue (after apple repayment and before expenses related to the sale). In this case maybe the bondholders and creditors would be more willing to negotiate with equity. And maybe they would not go out of their way to chime in on GTATs objection that there will be no recovery for shareholders.

An EC will prove that there is value in GTATs assets. No more delusion that we will be "fine" without an EC. It makes no sense now. GTAT + creditors have stated that there is no recovery for shareholders.

In this scenario, once we leave Ch.11 furnaces will fly off the shelf for 500k plus each over 4 years and creditors will be more then happy, ey? Let's not forget about Merlin which will be reorganized GTATs substantial revenue form.

Ding Ding Ding

Are the noteholders willing to renew their bonds past bk? thats the question.

from patently apple in Jeffs comment thread. Oh man......

However, that comment today from a GTAT employee really shows that they have suffered through this BK also..IMO

There are MANY solar firms (NOT in bankruptcy)..a more logical reason on why CITI is involved in GT HK debt is because GT HK has assets that almost doubles its debt.

CITI expects to be made whole and profit from buying GT HK debt at a discount.

A more logical reason why CITI would be mixed up with a bankrupt solar / tech firm..

In a way, YES. No one should be counting the Apple Debt when it comes to a POR. In the POR, Apples repayment will be spelled out exactly how the Settlement spells in out right now.

However, I am not sure how the court will ultimately value the furnaces (Hopefully more than what GT and the creditors are saying...AKA furnace + other assets < Debt) and if the Apple loan will be counted against the furnaces. My guess is yes, but not sure.

However there IS a penalty if furnaces are not sold before the last day to sell them. (based on the apple settlements term) but that will be a problem the Reorganized Debtors will face.

I think that was very smart to do jack!

we need to focus on exactly that, VALUE DILLIGENCE!

Great post again, hoping for sales is not the way to go anymore, and in hindsight should have NEVER been the way to go unfortunately. GTAT wants to file a plan backed by creditors and without shareholders VERY SOON.

We now need to fight to protect our positions.

And again, rightfully so! GTAT is balance sheet solvent.

Haha wow. So in your opinion if we don't receive recovery in a plan, that shareholder interests are no longer adequately represented. BUT ITS OK if they state that in objections flat out. OK.

Btw I completely disagree that shareholder interests are not represented if we receive no recovery in a plan. There are OTHER factors that could show that the debtors are not representing us anymore.

Ding ding ding.

I think the focus is to harshly on the Ad Hoc members when it should be on the case itself and what is transpiring with GTAT.

Literally in the same time frame(Late July / Early August)

1) Neil Augustine of Rothschild, financial advisor of GTAT said plan negotiations are starting very soon,

2) The Creditors committee say they will not support further extensions of POR filing periods, and only supported a 3 month extension, which GTAT ACCEPTED,

3) GTAT + unsecured creditors say there will be no recovery for Shareholders based on the current financial condition. (Objection to the appointment of an Equity Committee)

Are we all ok with GT + the creditors saying there is no recovery for us at a time when they are beginning plan negotiations???????

Insanity, we have, among other IP and assets, 2000+ furnaces that have value + grow in value everytime GTAT has a breakthrough in R+D in sapphire growth.

Again though, I urge board posters here who think there is another route to recovery for shareholders besides an Equity Committee fighting for us.(because really, its going to have to be in a fight if the creditors believe we arent entitled to any recovery, when we clearly have balance sheet solvency aka Assets > Debt)

Lets open discussion for this! I am very interested to hear other opinions + facts