Skip to main content

KGI: GTAT bankruptcy unlikely to have impact on Apple Watch, future of sapphire iPhones uncertain

KGI has published a new report clarifying that the recent announcement that Apple’s sapphire supplier had filed for bankruptcy will likely have no impact on the production of the comapny’s sapphire display-equipped wearable. According to KGI, GT was mainly contracted to create the sapphire crystal displays for the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus.

The reason Apple partnered with GT Advanced on the iPhone displays was related to the size of the screens. Because GT was the best equipped to manufacture a display the size of the new iPhone models. However, because the Apple Watch uses a smaller display, other companies are able to produce the covers as easily as GT. This is also why the Touch ID sensor and iPhone cameras, which both use a sapphire lens, will also be unaffected.

KGI does raise the concern that future iPhone and iPod touch models may not be equipped with sapphire displays either, due to GT’s bankruptcy. The report notes that Apple is still interested in using the material for future devices, though now it may be far more difficult to get the results they’re after. Because other suppliers can’t acheive the same drop test durability as GT, Apple may be hesitant to partner with another company.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. robertsm76 - 9 years ago

    So why doesn’t Apple buy GT?

    • @robertsm76 you’re missing why Apple does these huge CapEx investments within other companies in the first place (which will provide you the answer why Apple won’t buy GTAT or their equipment). Apple has made a decision years ago that it will provide huge investments in other companies to manufacture parts for a variety of reasons, not limited to reduced liabilities/risk, allowing them to remain nimble as needed supplies change, resulting retooling costs, manufacturing carries a smaller gross margin, etc. Buying GTAT would provide a solution short term but create many down the road.

      • leifashley - 9 years ago

        Then why doesn’t Apple invest in it like Microsoft did to them?

    • taoprophet420 - 9 years ago

      ple doesn’t have to buy KGI. If KGI doesn’t pay Apple back for its loan, then Apple owns the furnaces and other equipment KGI bought with Apple’s loan. Apple could move the furnaces to another facility or most likely buy the plant cheaply if KGI fails to exit bankruptcy or repay Apple’s loan.

      Laminating sapphire to glass is the only way we will sapphire for iPhone or iPad anytime soon. It’s simpky to fragile and expensive for standalone cover glass at this time.

  2. Tim Jr. - 9 years ago

    GT had a new tech that supposedly allowed them to laminate very thin layers of Sapphire to other materials .. Which is why I think they really were going to do iPhone 6.. we will speculate for years and likely never truly know…

    • standardpull - 9 years ago

      GT isn’t going away. It is just reorganizing. I’m Sure the materials industry will be just fine.

  3. taoprophet420 - 9 years ago

    Apple doesn’t have to buy KGI. If KGI doesn’t pay Apple back for its loan, then Apple owns the furnaces and other equipment KGI bought with Apple’s loan. Apple could move the furnaces to another facility or most likely buy the plant cheaply if KGI fails to exit bankruptcy or repay Apple’s loan.

    Laminating sapphire to glass is the only way we will sapphire for iPhone or iPad anytime soon. It’s simpky to fragile and expensive for standalone cover glass at this time.

  4. fredhstein - 9 years ago

    Hey, let’s celebrate GTAT and Apple for taking a big risk to do something great. GTAT’s business revenue was tanking and losses were mounting when Apple came in with the loans.

  5. drtyrell969 - 9 years ago

    Does Apple own this patent?

  6. varera (@real_varera) - 9 years ago

    wow, the guy is an asshole. even if apple screwed him, inside trade is a punishable offence.

  7. Nick Salter - 9 years ago

    Is this bankruptcy not evidence of Apple’s policy to charge customers as much as possible and pay workers and suppliers as little as possible. How can the supplier of quality glass for screens for the best selling ‘phone’ of the biggest/most profitable (whatever) company be bankrupt otherwise? Join OurVote campaign!

    • barcamatic - 9 years ago

      Businesses are rated by profits. fact. How else would you recognize a company’s performance then?

      • Nick Salter - 9 years ago

        Agreed: Profit is the measure of company performance. I would make tax and other legislative changes to ensure wealth is created, sustainability and equity. Amazon, Apple etc should continue to act in what I call an ‘institutionally amoral’ way. Better question is whether it is in Apples interests to bankrupt this company. If there is a one to one relationship then it seems Apple is cutting off nose despite face, but if they asset strip they will have the tools and exclusive use of this glass tech.

        Please have a look at ourvote.org and get back to me with your thoughts

        nick salter founder rational group

    • marsontherocks - 9 years ago

      “…How can the supplier of quality glass for screens for the best selling ‘phone’ of the biggest/most profitable (whatever) company be bankrupt otherwise?…” You do understand that for GTAT to qualify as a supplier, they need to supply whatever product they offer correct? They didn’t, and then Apple has every right to withdraw from the agreement. As of right no GTAT isn’t supplying anything other than a lot of space and furnaces.

  8. chrisl84 - 9 years ago

    So if the S in 6S and 6S Plus was going to stand for Sapphire then Apple is scrambling for new S words that could be featured.