Annual report pursuant to Section 13 and 15(d)

Commitments and Contingencies

v3.10.0.1
Commitments and Contingencies
12 Months Ended
Sep. 29, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
(a) Litigation
The Sports Authority Bankruptcy Litigation
Soffe is involved in several related litigation matters stemming from The Sports Authority's ("TSA") March 2, 2016, filing of a voluntary petition(s) for relief under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the "TSA Bankruptcy"). Prior to such filing, Soffe provided TSA with products to be sold on a consignment basis pursuant to a "pay by scan" agreement and the litigation matters relate to Soffe's interest in the products it provided TSA on a consignment basis (the "Products") and the proceeds derived from the sale of such products (the "Proceeds").
TSA Stores, Inc. and related entities TSA Ponce, Inc. and TSA Caribe, Inc. filed an action against Soffe on March 16, 2016, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "TSA Action") essentially seeking a declaratory judgment that: (i) Soffe does not own the Products but rather has a security interest that is not perfected or senior and is avoidable; (ii) Soffe only has an unsecured claim against TSA; (iii) TSA and TSA's secured creditors have valid, unavoidable and senior rights in the Products and the Products are the property of TSA’s estate; (iv) Soffe does not have a perfected purchase money security interest in the Products; (v) Soffe is not entitled to a return of the Products; and (vi) TSA can continue to sell the Products and Soffe is not entitled to any proceeds from such sales other than as an unsecured creditor. The TSA Action also contains claims seeking to avoid Soffe's filing of a financing statement related to the Products as a preference and recover the value of that transfer as well as to disallow Soffe's claims until it has returned preferential transfers or their associated value. TSA also brings a claim for a permanent injunction barring Soffe from taking certain actions. We believe that many of the claims in the TSA Action, including TSA’s claim for injunction, are now moot as a result of Soffe’s agreement to permit TSA to continue selling the Products in TSA’s going-out-of-business sale.
On May 16, 2016, TSA lender Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Successor Administrative and Collateral Agent ("WSFS"), intervened in the TSA Action seeking a declaratory judgment that: (i) WSFS has a perfected interest in the Products and Proceeds that is senior to Soffe's interest; and (ii) the Proceeds paid to Soffe must be disgorged pursuant to an order previously issued by the court. WSFS's intervening complaint also contains a separate claim seeking the disgorgement of all Proceeds paid to Soffe along with accrued and unpaid interest.
Soffe has asserted counterclaims against WSFS in the TSA Action essentially seeking a declaratory judgment that: (i) WSFS is not perfected in the Products; and (ii) WSFS's interest in the Products is subordinate to Soffe's interest.
On May 24, 2016, Soffe joined an appeal filed by a number of TSA consignment vendors in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware challenging an order issued in the TSA Bankruptcy that, should WSFS or TSA succeed in the TSA Action, granted TSA and/or WSFS a lien on all Proceeds received by Soffe and requiring the automatic disgorgement of such Proceeds. Soffe and another entity are the remaining consignment vendors pursuing this appeal.
Although we will continue to vigorously defend against the TSA Action and pursue the above-referenced counterclaims and appeal, should TSA and/or WSFS ultimately prevail on their claims, we could be forced to disgorge all Proceeds received and forfeit our ownership rights in any Products that remain in TSA's possession. We believe the range of possible loss in this matter is currently$0 to $3.3 million; however, it is too early to determine the probable outcome and, therefore, no amount has been accrued related to this matter.
In addition, at times we are party to various legal claims, actions and complaints. We believe that, as a result of legal defenses, insurance arrangements, and indemnification provisions with parties believed to be financially capable, such actions should not have a material effect on our operations, financial condition, or liquidity.
(b) Purchase Contracts
We have entered into agreements, and have fixed prices, to purchase yarn, finished fabric, and finished apparel and headwear products. At September 29, 2018, minimum payments under these contracts were as follows (in thousands):
Yarn
$
43,273

Finished fabric
4,577

Finished products
25,770

 
$
73,620


(c) Letters of Credit
As of September 29, 2018, we had outstanding standby letters of credit totaling $0.4 million.
(d) Derivatives and Contingent Consideration
From time to time we may use interest rate swaps or other instruments to manage our interest rate exposure and reduce the impact of future interest rate changes. These financial instruments are not used for trading or speculative purposes. The following financial instruments were outstanding as of September 29, 2018:
 
Effective Date
 
Notational
Amount
 
LIBOR Rate
 
Maturity Date
Interest Rate Swap
July 19, 2017
 
$10 million
 
1.74%
 
July 19, 2019
Interest Rate Swap
July 19, 2017
 
$10 million
 
1.99%
 
May 10, 2021
Interest Rate Swap
July 25, 2018
 
$20 million
 
3.18%
 
July 25, 2023

From time to time, we may purchase cotton option contracts to economically hedge the risk related to market fluctuations in the cost of cotton used in our operations. We do not receive hedge accounting treatment for these derivatives. As such, the realized and unrealized gains and losses associated with them are recorded within cost of goods sold on the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
FASB Codification No. 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”), defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are grouped in three levels. The levels prioritize the inputs used to measure the fair value of the assets or liabilities. These levels are:
Level 1 – Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 – Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for assets and liabilities, either directly or indirectly. These inputs include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets and quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in market that are less active.
Level 3 – Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity for assets or liabilities and includes certain pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies and similar techniques.
The following financial liabilities are measured at fair value on a recurring basis (in thousands):
 
Fair Value Measurements Using
Period Ended
Total
 
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
 
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
 
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
Interest Rate Swap
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
September 29, 2018
$
183

 

 
$
183

 

September 30, 2017
$
(56
)
 

 
$
(56
)
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cotton Options
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
September 29, 2018
$
(110
)
 
(110
)
 

 
$

September 30, 2017
$
(125
)
 
(125
)
 

 
$

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Contingent Consideration
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
September 29, 2018
$
(10,542
)
 

 

 
$
(10,542
)
September 30, 2017
$
(1,600
)
 

 

 
$
(1,600
)

The fair value of the interest rate swap agreements were derived from discounted cash flow analysis based on the terms of the contract and the forward interest rate curves adjusted for our credit risk, which fall in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. Fair values for debt are based on quoted market prices for the same or similar issues or on the current rates offered to us for debt of the same remaining maturities (a Level 2 fair value measurement).
In August 2013, we acquired Salt Life and issued contingent consideration payable in cash after the end of calendar year 2019 if financial performance targets involving the sale of Salt Life-branded products are met during the 2019 calendar year.  We used a Monte Carlo model which used the historical results and projected cash flows based on the contractually defined terms, discounted as necessary, to estimate the fair value of the contingent consideration for Salt Life at acquisition, as well as to remeasure the contingent consideration related to the acquisition of Salt Life at each reporting period.  Accordingly, the fair value measurement for contingent consideration falls in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. 
At September 29, 2018, we had $1.3 million accrued in contingent consideration related to the acquisition of Salt Life, a $0.3 million reduction from the accrual at September 30, 2017. The reduction in the fair value of contingent consideration is based on the inputs into the Monte Carlo model, including the time remaining in the measurement period. The sales expectations for calendar year 2019 have been reduced from the sales expectations used in the valuation of contingent consideration at acquisition due to overall softness in the retail environment.
The DTG2Go acquisition (See Note 3—Acquisitions for further detail) purchase price consisted of additional payments contingent on the combined business’s achievement of certain performance targets related to sales and earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization ("EBITDA") for the period from April 1, 2018, through September 29, 2018, as well as for our fiscal years 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022. The valuation of the fair value of the contingent consideration is based upon inputs into the Monte Carlo model, including projected results, which then are discounted to a present value to derive the fair value. The fair value of the contingent consideration is sensitive to changes in our projected results. At September 29, 2018, we had $9.2 million accrued as contingent consideration.
The following table summarizes the fair value and presentation in the Consolidated Balance Sheets for derivatives as of September 29, 2018, and September 30, 2017.
 
September 29, 2018
 
September 30, 2017
Other assets
$
182

 
$

Deferred tax liabilities
(46
)
 
21

Other liabilities

 
(56
)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
$
136

 
$
(35
)