• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

GT Advanced Techonlogies Stock plummets 92.7% in one day

Status
Not open for further replies.

ronito

Member
http://www.forbes.com/sites/carlodo...ipples-gt-advanced-technologies-analysts-say/
The unanticipated bankruptcy of GT Advanced Technologies , whose stock price dropped by more than 90%, signals a sudden breakdown in the company’s relationship with Apple AAPL 0%, to which the supplier was heavily indebted and depended on for more than 80% of its anticipated 2014 revenues, according to analyst reports released Monday.

A break off in business relations would be ruinous for GT Advanced Technologies, which manufactures the sapphire glass used in certain Apple products. The company owes $350 million to Apple for a loan it received to build a sapphire manufacturing facility in Arizona, according to a report from Raymond James. Its second largest source of revenue – materials used in the production of solar panels – only generated $31 million in the first half of 2014, a tiny fraction of the up to $700 million it had expected from Apple by year end, said Pavel Molchanov, an energy analyst at Raymond James.

“This would be a major liability and GT is in no position to write a $350 million check,” Molchanov said.
English: Apple's headquarters at Infinite Loop...

English: Apple’s headquarters at Infinite Loop in Cupertino, California, USA. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Apple may have even forced the company into early payments of its loans, according to a report by Gilford Securities. The report cited a rapid decline in the company’s cash reserves during the Q3 2014, from $333 million to $85 million, as evidence of increased loan repayments.

It’s unclear what caused the breakdown between the companies, analysts say. It could stem from a failure of GT Advanced Technologies to meet contractual obligations with Apple, or from a choice by Apple to switch to a different supplier, the Raymond James report said. There are many other manufacturers of sapphire, so Apple would have little difficulty finding another company to supply the material, Molchanov said.

“This calls into question who will supply the sapphire for Apple Watches,” which are due out in 2015, Molchanov said.

The company signed an agreement to manufacture sapphire for Apple on Nov. 4, 2013. Ever since then, investors have complained about a lack of transparency regarding Apple’s intentions, said Nimal Vallipuram, an analyst at Gilford Securities. The company’s management forecasted $600 to $700 million in revenue during 2014, mostly during the second half, but would not offer specifics as to which Apple products the sapphire would be used for, Molchanov said.

The company’s stock dropped 35% in September when Apple revealed it would not be using sapphire in the iPhone 6. Apple still plans to use sapphire in the Apple Watch, and investors assumed that GT Advanced Technologies would be the supplier, said Nimal Vallipuram, an analyst at Gilford Securities.

Some corners of the marketplace are already holding a quiet funeral for GT Advanced Technologies’ stock, GTAT. Goldman Sachs announced that it is no longer covering the company, and S&P Dow Jones Indices has removed GTAT from the S&P SmallCap 600 index, replacing it with Rex Energy REXX -1.32% (REXX).

“What we are comfortable predicting is that the equity is almost certainly worthless, and will likely end up being delisted,” said the Raymond James report.
So let me get this straight.
You have 80% of your business coming from ONE customer, then you proceed to take a $350 Million dollar loan from this single customer. THEN you somehow manage to piss this customer off? Who the hell is running this company?

The stock started at $11 this morning. Now it's at 82 cents.
 
Feel bad for the employees working at that company who will likely be out of a job in the next 6 months because of executive missteps
 

terrisus

Member
3 out of the 3 replies above me are 100% horrible advice.

Guys, why would you buy a worthless stock? I don't think you understand how this works.

STAzqEA.jpg
 

dluu13

Member
The craziest thing is before it dropped, somebody just bought 20something thousand shares, so they could have just bought it, refreshed it, and lost ALL that money.
 

Eiolon

Member
Since I work next to the plant I normally see tons of people from there during lunch in their neon yellow shirts. I was wondering why I havent seen as many of them swarming the restaraunts this past week. Hope they all didnt get laid off. A coworker of mine got many of them there jobs.
 
This is why you want to be very careful owning companies with customer concentration issues. If one customer can cut off 95% of your revenue, that is a pretty big problem.
 
Sucks for the company.

Is this a normal arrangement and terms, though?

Contract with a company. Then get a loan from said company to manufacture the component contracted. Pay the company loan payments while charging them for the component. Loan company having a potential option then to switch suppliers nullifying the point of your company and also leaving you with no revenue for this specialized component and therefore no way to pay off the original loan.

Am I off base there with my post? Why wouldn't the glass company include a non compete clause or require some other assurance that the other company won't bail at least during the loan period?
 

numble

Member
Well, Foxconn.

Here is Horace Dediu's analysis of Apple's PPE, spending ramps up before every iPhone release, suggesting that they own the machines that make their stuff:
http://www.asymco.com/2011/10/16/how-much-do-apples-factories-cost/

But this analysis shows that Apple has gone much further toward integrating its value chain. It suggests that a large part of the tooling in its supply chain is owned by Apple. It suggests that those tools are put out of reach of its competitors.

http://www.asymco.com/2012/10/31/hey-big-spender/

The level of spending and growth from a far lower level implies to me that Apple is spending primarily on process equipment (aka tooling) rather than servers. Data centers are expensive at $1 billion for a large one, but they are not being built fast enough to account for $3.5 billion in one quarter.

Note that Apple’s CapEx is above that of Intel whose fab-based semiconductor production method is known as particularly capital intensive. And Intel’s Capital Expenditures have been increasing to all-time highs.

If Apple spent at Google levels on server infrastructure it would only be spending a quarter of what it’s actually spending.
 

RevoDS

Junior Member
Sucks for the company.

Is this a normal arrangement and terms, though?

Contract with a company. Then get a loan from said company to manufacture the component contracted. Pay the company loan payments while charging them for the component. Loan company having a potential option then to switch suppliers nullifying the point of your company and also leaving you with no revenue for this specialized component and therefore no way to pay off the original loan.

Am I off base there with my post? Why wouldn't the glass company include a non compete clause or require some other assurance that the other company won't bail at least during the loan period?

They probably did, but they likely violated the contract first by not delivering on their promises, which gave Apple an out and they took it.

And besides, a small company negotiating with a giant like Apple. Who do you think has leverage in those talks? Apple can walk out and dozens of other manufacturers will bend over backwards to get their business. It's probably more dictation than negotiation. Especially a company that's as utterly dependent on their money.
 

-Horizon-

Member
I think one of my classes went over this a couple days ago, how a good supplier should never have more than 30% (I think it was 30) of their business with just one company.
 
They probably did, but they likely violated the contract first by not delivering on their promises, which gave Apple an out and they took it.

And besides, a small company negotiating with a giant like Apple. Who do you think has leverage in those talks? Apple can walk out and dozens of other manufacturers will bend over backwards to get their business. It's probably more dictation than negotiation. Especially a company that's as utterly dependent on their money.
True. I forgot to account for potential contract breach scenarios on part of this company.
 

toxicgonzo

Taxes?! Isn't this the line for Metallica?
And now its up +70% today compared to yesterday's close.

Want to play a dangerous game?
 

Funky Papa

FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Who the hell is running this company?

Let me answer that for you: CEO of Sapphire Supplier GT Advanced Sold Shares Before Apple Announcement

One day before Apple AAPL -0.03% announced that its new iPhones would not use sapphire screens made by GT Advanced Technologies GTAT +71.75%, the supplier’s chief executive sold more than 9,000 shares of GT stock, for $160,000.

GT CEO Thomas Gutierrez sold the shares Sept. 8 at an average price of $17.38. The next day, after Apple’s announcement, GT shares fell 13% to $14.94.

Monday, GT filed for bankruptcy protection, sending its shares down 93% to 80 cents.

Prior to Apple’s iPhone announcement, GT shares had more than doubled over the previous 12 months, fueled by optimism that a partnership with Apple could deliver big rewards for the company.

In a filing, GT said Gutierrez’s share sale was part of a pre-arranged plan put in place on March 14, 2014. But there was no obvious pattern to his sales.
 

IISANDERII

Member
So let me get this straight.
You have 80% of your business coming from ONE customer, then you proceed to take a $350 Million dollar loan from this single customer. THEN you somehow manage to piss this customer off? Who the hell is running this company?
Seems like a sneaky way of ensuring they keep doing business with you.
 

CrankyJay

Banned
I wish I had known about this company and its story. I would've shorted the hell out of it in a second (and I hate playing the market).

I doubt that...the CEO basically gave bogus guidance in August. You wouldn't have had enough inside info to know for sure you would have shorted it.

BTW, Apple is sort of an asshole how they dangled the carrot like this in front of a company that was already struggling before this.
 

ronito

Member
I doubt that...the CEO basically gave bogus guidance in August. You wouldn't have had enough inside info to know for sure you would have shorted it.

BTW, Apple is sort of an asshole how they dangled the carrot like this in front of a company that was already struggling before this.

The more I read about this yeah, this whole thing is really sorta shady.
 

CrankyJay

Banned
The more I read about this yeah, this whole thing is really sorta shady.

Yeah, I've been following GTAT for almost 2 years now, back when they were still trying their hand in the solar business. Saw the stock go from $7 to $2-3ish...almost bought then. I could have ridden this from $3-19. Kind of glad I missed it though.
 

CrankyJay

Banned
Crazy movement right now, up 145% from yesterday's close.

i wonder if anyone who shorted this cashed out and re-rolled long for the bounce
 

CrankyJay

Banned
I told you guys... >.>

Down to .41 cents now...lol

Phone Leaks Cost $50M. Sapphire Maker Reveals Contract With 'Oppressive and Burdensome' Apple

Last week the tech sector was stunned by the news that Apple AAPL +0.59% partner and sapphire specialist GT Advanced Technologies had filed for bankruptcy. It came less than a month after the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus were unveiled without their expected sapphire screens and now court proceedings will begin which out details of Apple’s most secret contractual agreements.

Significant details are already emerging. Having waded through the GT Advanced Technology court filings the Financial Times (subscription required) has found that “each breach of the confidentiality obligations will require GTAT Corp to pay liquidated damages to Apple in an amount of $50m per occurrence”.

GT also describes its supplier agreement with Apple as “oppressive and burdensome” and blames Apple for withholding a $139M payment as a key factor in it filing for bankruptcy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom