InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
5,621.52
(
0.46%
)
US TECH 100
18,980.00
(
0.27%
)
Dow Jones
41,373.27
(
0.67%
)
Brent Oil
71.60
(
-0.52%
)
Bitcoin
59,367.58
(
2.12%
)
Post# of 41703
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next

mds3579

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 10
Posts 395
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/16/2014

mds3579

Re: samplescave post# 16833

Monday, 12/15/2014 6:21:04 AM

Monday, December 15, 2014 6:21:04 AM

Post# of 41703
I do not agree with you on this. If you have time then read the contract between apple and GTAT. It clearly shows that Apple wrote one sided contract and they covered their side and left GTAT to pay for every damage even it caused by Apple's team. I do not call this a partnership. Apple had done this with other suppliers in the past and suppliers produced at loss for apple. The most recent example is INVN. Apple's Mesa project started with bad power supply system which is Apple team's part. GTAT was taking losses due to bad power supply system and apple's involvement in its day to day operations. GTAT decided not to produce at loss for apple and save company from going to chapter 11. IMHO
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up