GT Advanced supplier agreement reveals $50 million penalty for Apple product leaks

[Shawn Knight]

Modern-day Apple has a reputation as one of the most secretive technology companies on the planet. The Cupertino-based company goes to great lengths to keep the competition guessing and now thanks to court filings from GT Advanced, we have an idea of just how serious they are.

Court filings from Apple’s former sapphire supplier detail a $50 million penalty per occurrence for any leaked information regarding any upcoming, unannounced product. It’s unclear if this is the standard penalty clause fee or if it varies depending on the size of the supplier but either way, that’s a lot of money.

When you factor in the number of leaks that we saw leading up to the unveiling of the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus, suppliers could have been on the hook for hundreds of millions in penalties – assuming of course that the leaks could be tracked back to them.

Lawyers for GT Advanced are arguing that even more information about the company’s relationship with Apple be brought to light ahead of a Wednesday court hearing. Their stance is that the supplier agreement they signed with Apple was “oppressive and burdensome” and suggests shareholders might want to seek compensation from Apple due to the bankruptcy of GT Advanced.

If you recall, Apple and GT Advanced entered into a five-year agreement with Tim Cook and company lending GT more than half a billion dollars to build a sapphire manufacturing plant in Arizona. Most expected that at least the new high-end iPhone 6 (the Plus, as we know it now) would ship with a sapphire display.

It is now believed that Apple fully intended to use sapphire in the new phones but GT simply wasn’t able to keep up with demand which led to their falling out and GT’s bankruptcy filing.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/58410-gt-advanced-supplier-agreement-reveals-50-million-penalty.html

 

[SNGX1275]

Their stance is that the supplier agreement they signed with Apple was “oppressive and burdensome” and suggests shareholders might want to seek compensation from Apple due to the bankruptcy of GT Advanced.

Then why did they sign an agreement if it was "oppressive and burdensome".

There has to be some missing components to this scenario, because what has been reported on various sites isn't really making a lot of sense. A month or so ago there were reports that GT Advanced was doing well on sapphire production, but over in China they were having difficulties with the yields cutting it into shape.

 

[JohnCB]

Their stance is that the supplier agreement they signed with Apple was “oppressive and burdensome”

It doesn't matter what you say after the fact, they signed it and agreed to it. If they thought it was so terrible, then they should never of signed it. The most common response here is that they'd of never gotten the business if they didn't agree to it. Doesn't matter, you made your bed, lay in it.

No one forced you to sign anything, thus it wasn't under duress, therefore you owe Apple a ton of money. Sucks to be you.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Their stance is that the supplier agreement they signed with Apple was “oppressive and burdensome”

It doesn't matter what you say after the fact, they signed it and agreed to it. If they thought it was so terrible, then they should never of signed it. The most common response here is that they'd of never gotten the business if they didn't agree to it. Doesn't matter, you made your bed, lay in it.

No one forced you to sign anything, thus it wasn't under duress, therefore you owe Apple a ton of money. Sucks to be you.

Who is 'you' exactly? someone working there? 50m is the entire worth of their company. thats' a bit steep.

 

[JohnCB]

It may be a bit steep but they already agreed to it. You can't just agree to a contract, then when a clause works against you suddenly stand up and say "but that's not fair!"

The time to negotiate and adjust was before signing the agreement. They signed it and they broke the contract. Therefore they have to pay whatever the agreed upon penalty is. It's pretty black and white.

 

[SNGX1275]

Who is 'you' exactly? someone working there? 50m is the entire worth of their company. thats' a bit steep.

No its not, its a substantial portion, but they are a $150M company afaik.

Edit: I'm not well versed in corporate financials. However, from what I gather from these 2 documents:
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...39-8804-C7A675E30FC5/GT-2013-Annual-Final.pdf
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...porate Overview_2014_August_final to post.pdf
They certainly weren't in terrible financial shape before the agreement with Apple. So now, if they suddenly are, there may have been some serious mis-management of the funds.

 

[mctommy]

Who is 'you' exactly? someone working there? 50m is the entire worth of their company. thats' a bit steep.

No its not, its a substantial portion, but they are a $150M company afaik.

Edit: I'm not well versed in corporate financials. However, from what I gather from these 2 documents:
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...39-8804-C7A675E30FC5/GT-2013-Annual-Final.pdf
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...porate Overview_2014_August_final to post.pdf
They certainly weren't in terrible financial shape before the agreement with Apple. So now, if they suddenly are, there may have been some serious mis-management of the funds.

They got $500 million dollars in funding from Apple... probably mis-managed that and then some.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

No its not, its a substantial portion, but they are a $150M company afaik.

When I wrote that, I just checked yahoo finance for their market cap, which after yesterday was $53.64 million dollars. that's just investors think their company is worth and it's just the easiest and fastest way to check a company's value. It's not what you could sell their assets for, or even buy the company for. Their stock price is $.39.

I still think a 50m penalty is really harsh. I really doubt some employee cares if it's 5m or 50m, to them it's their job either way.

 

[SNGX1275]

Well $50M doesn't sound harsh to me, Apple is incredibly secretive about their products, if information gets leaked early it could easily end up costing Apple well more than that in sales revenue if a competitor steals the idea/design.

Also, comparing market cap after the total crash of their stock to a potential $50M fine that never happened is missing the point. This is just a new article to provide some insight into the NDAs Apple has their suppliers sign, it just happens to involve GTAT.