Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Pronouncements (Policies)	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2017
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Pronouncements	Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Pronouncements In July 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2015-11, Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory, which modifies existing requirements regarding measuring inventory at the lower of cost or market. Under existing standards, the market amount requires consideration of replacement cost, net realizable value (“NRV”), and NRV less an approximately normal profit margin. The new ASU replaces market with NRV, defined as estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal and transportation. This eliminates the need to determine and consider replacement cost or NRV less an approximately normal profit margin when measuring inventory. For GlassBridge, this standard was effective prospectively beginning January 1, 2017, with early adoption permitted. This standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net), which amends ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, to clarify principal versus agent guidance in situations in which a revenue transaction involves a third party in providing goods or services to a customer. In such circumstances, an entity must determine whether the nature of its promise to the customer is to provide the underlying goods or services (i.e., the entity is the principal in the transaction) or to arrange for the third party to provide the underlying goods or services (i.e., the entity is the agent in the transaction). To determine the nature of its promise to the customer, the entity must first identify each specified good or service to be provided to the customer and then (before transferring it) assess whether it controls each specified good or service. The new ASU clarifies how an entity should identify the unit of accounting (the specified good or service) for the principal versus agent evaluation, and how it should apply the control principle to certain types of arrangements, such as service transactions, by explaining what a principal controls before the specified good or service is transferred to the customer. ASU No. 2016-08 will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year, concurrent with ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). The Company is evaluating the impact this standard will have on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718), which simplified certain aspects of the accounting for share-based payment transactions, including income taxes, classification of awards and classification in the statement of cash flows. ASU No. 2016-09 was effective for the Company beginning in its first quarter of 2017. This standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10, Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing, which amends ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. In terms of identifying performance obligations in a revenue arrangement, the amendments clarify how entities would determine whether promised goods or services are separately identifiable from other promises in a contract and, therefore, would be accounted for separately. The guidance would also allow entities to disregard goods or services that are immaterial in the context of a contract and provides an accounting policy election to account for shipping and handling activities as fulfillment costs rather than as additional promised services. With regard to the licensing, the amendments clarify how an entity would evaluate the nature of its promise in granting a license of intellectual property, which determines whether the entity recognizes revenue over time or at a point in time. The standard also clarifies certain other aspects relative to licensing. ASU No. 2016-10 will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year, concurrent with ASU No. 2014-09. The Company is evaluating the impact this standard will have on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-17, Interests Held through Related Parties That Are under Common Control, which modifies existing guidance with respect to how a decision maker that holds an indirect interest in a VIE through a common control party determines whether it is the primary beneficiary of the VIE as part of the analysis of whether the VIE would need to be consolidated. Under the ASU, a decision maker would need to consider only its proportionate indirect interest in the VIE held through a common control party. Previous guidance had required the decision maker to treat the common control party’s interest in the VIE as if the decision maker held the interest itself. As a result of the ASU, in certain cases, previous consolidation conclusions may change. The standard was effective January 1, 2017 with retrospective application to January 1, 2016. This standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition. In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-06, Employee Benefit Plan Master Trust Reporting. This ASU provides guidance for reporting by an employee benefit plan for its interest in a master trust. The amendment is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. The amendment should be applied retrospectively with earlier adoption permitted. The Company is in the process of determining the effect of adopting this standard on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition. In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-07, Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost, which amends the requirements related to the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost for an entity’s sponsored defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans. This ASU requires entities to (1) disaggregate the current-service-cost component from the other components of net benefit cost (the “other components”) and present it with other current compensation costs for related employees in the income statement and (2) present the other components elsewhere in the income statement and outside of income from operations if such a subtotal is presented. In addition, only service costs are eligible for capitalization. The standard will be effective in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this standard on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition. In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, Scope of Modification Accounting. This ASU provides clarification on when modification accounting should be used for changes to the terms and conditions of a share-based payment award. This ASU does not change the accounting for modifications but clarifies that modification accounting guidance should only be applied if there is a change to the value, vesting conditions, or award classification and would not be required if the changes are considered non-substantive. The standard will be effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods. The amendment should be applied prospectively to an award modified on or after the adoption date. The Company is currently assessing the impact of adopting this standard on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

In July 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2015-11, Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory, which modifies existing requirements regarding measuring inventory at the lower of cost or market. Under existing standards, the market amount requires consideration of replacement cost, net realizable value (“NRV”), and NRV less an approximately normal profit margin. The new ASU replaces market with NRV, defined as estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal and transportation. This eliminates the need to determine and consider replacement cost or NRV less an approximately normal profit margin when measuring inventory. For GlassBridge, this standard was effective prospectively beginning January 1, 2017, with early adoption permitted. This standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net), which amends ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, to clarify principal versus agent guidance in situations in which a revenue transaction involves a third party in providing goods or services to a customer. In such circumstances, an entity must determine whether the nature of its promise to the customer is to provide the underlying goods or services (i.e., the entity is the principal in the transaction) or to arrange for the third party to provide the underlying goods or services (i.e., the entity is the agent in the transaction). To determine the nature of its promise to the customer, the entity must first identify each specified good or service to be provided to the customer and then (before transferring it) assess whether it controls each specified good or service. The new ASU clarifies how an entity should identify the unit of accounting (the specified good or service) for the principal versus agent evaluation, and how it should apply the control principle to certain types of arrangements, such as service transactions, by explaining what a principal controls before the specified good or service is transferred to the customer. ASU No. 2016-08 will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year, concurrent with ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). The Company is evaluating the impact this standard will have on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718), which simplified certain aspects of the accounting for share-based payment transactions, including income taxes, classification of awards and classification in the statement of cash flows. ASU No. 2016-09 was effective for the Company beginning in its first quarter of 2017. This standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10, Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing, which amends ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. In terms of identifying performance obligations in a revenue arrangement, the amendments clarify how entities would determine whether promised goods or services are separately identifiable from other promises in a contract and, therefore, would be accounted for separately. The guidance would also allow entities to disregard goods or services that are immaterial in the context of a contract and provides an accounting policy election to account for shipping and handling activities as fulfillment costs rather than as additional promised services. With regard to the licensing, the amendments clarify how an entity would evaluate the nature of its promise in granting a license of intellectual property, which determines whether the entity recognizes revenue over time or at a point in time. The standard also clarifies certain other aspects relative to licensing. ASU No. 2016-10 will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year, concurrent with ASU No. 2014-09. The Company is evaluating the impact this standard will have on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-17, Interests Held through Related Parties That Are under Common Control, which modifies existing guidance with respect to how a decision maker that holds an indirect interest in a VIE through a common control party determines whether it is the primary beneficiary of the VIE as part of the analysis of whether the VIE would need to be consolidated. Under the ASU, a decision maker would need to consider only its proportionate indirect interest in the VIE held through a common control party. Previous guidance had required the decision maker to treat the common control party’s interest in the VIE as if the decision maker held the interest itself. As a result of the ASU, in certain cases, previous consolidation conclusions may change. The standard was effective January 1, 2017 with retrospective application to January 1, 2016. This standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition.

In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-06, Employee Benefit Plan Master Trust Reporting. This ASU provides guidance for reporting by an employee benefit plan for its interest in a master trust. The amendment is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. The amendment should be applied retrospectively with earlier adoption permitted. The Company is in the process of determining the effect of adopting this standard on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-07, Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost, which amends the requirements related to the presentation of the components of net periodic benefit cost for an entity’s sponsored defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans. This ASU requires entities to (1) disaggregate the current-service-cost component from the other components of net benefit cost (the “other components”) and present it with other current compensation costs for related employees in the income statement and (2) present the other components elsewhere in the income statement and outside of income from operations if such a subtotal is presented. In addition, only service costs are eligible for capitalization. The standard will be effective in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this standard on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, Scope of Modification Accounting. This ASU provides clarification on when modification accounting should be used for changes to the terms and conditions of a share-based payment award. This ASU does not change the accounting for modifications but clarifies that modification accounting guidance should only be applied if there is a change to the value, vesting conditions, or award classification and would not be required if the changes are considered non-substantive. The standard will be effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those annual periods. The amendment should be applied prospectively to an award modified on or after the adoption date. The Company is currently assessing the impact of adopting this standard on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.