Why the Maker of iPhones Must Not Be Named.

It is the dominant American maker of smartphones, a household name to billions and for many makers of high-tech parts their most important customer ever. Just don't ask who it is. WSJ: In Asia, it's surreptitiously referred to as "the fruit company" or sometimes "Fuji," referring to the variety of the specific fruit in question that's cultivated in Japan. Other descriptors include "the three-trillion-dollar company" -- which slightly overstates its market value -- "the honored North American customer" and simply "the big A." In a January securities filing, O-Film Group, a Chinese maker of smartphone camera modules said it estimated a loss of up to $426 million in 2021. One reason was lost business with "a certain customer beyond these borders." Which customer? An O-Film spokesperson didn't respond to the question. In contrast to Lord Voldemort of the Harry Potter series, the Client Who Must Not Be Named doesn't cast deadly spells or converse with serpents. Its powers, nonetheless, are fearsome. It can award -- or take away -- contracts for electronic parts and services worth hundreds of millions of dollars. That is why suppliers' public presentations and even private conversations hardly ever include the name of the company they're discussing, for fear of offending someone or accidentally revealing competitive information. The reluctance to spell out the remaining four letters beyond "A" is more than just custom. A 2014 court filing related to a former supplier's bankruptcy gave details about its confidentiality agreement with the customer. The supplier, GT Advanced Technologies, promised to pay $50 million for each breach of secrecy, according to the filing. The agreement defined breaches to include not just the usual trade secrets but also the very existence of the relationship. At an earnings call in June 2020 by chip maker Broadcom, an analyst mentioned, without naming names, that "growth in Q3 from a seasonal perspective" might be lacking. He asked for "some more color around how we should think about the wireless expected recovery into Q4." Broadcom Chief Executive Hock E. Tan immediately knew what was up. He said he understood what the analyst was implying: Broadcom was indeed designing chips for "those big flagship phones" made by "our large North American OEM phone maker." He confirmed the delay in the OEM's products.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.