Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies	Note 11 — Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies Plaintiff Cypress Holdings, III L.P. (“Cypress”) filed an action against GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc. in New York Supreme Court, which was removed to the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, on February 14, 2022, captioned Cypress Holdings, III L.P. v. Sport-BLX, Inc. et al., 1:22-cv-01243-LGS (S.D.N.Y.). In its Second Amended Complaint, Cypress purports to assert claims against SportBLX, Mr. Hall, and Mr. De Perio for securities fraud and related issues and seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees, in connection with solicitations of investments in SportBLX. Cypress also purports to allege that GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc. is liable for unjust enrichment, tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty and minority shareholder oppression. Cypress also purports to assert claims against Messrs. Strauss and Ruchalski for breach of fiduciary duty and corporate waste, as well as additional claims against Clinton Group Inc., Cesar Baez, Christopher Johnson, and Sport-BLX Securities, Inc. arising from solicitations of investments in SportBLX. The matter is presently in the discovery phase and GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc., and Messrs. Strauss and Ruchalski, intend to defend themselves vigorously. As of December 31, 2021, GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc. sold all of its interest in SportBLX and SportBLX ceased to be a subsidiary. As of March 31, 2023, the Company believes that an outcome resulting in a loss is remote and does not have any accruals related to the matter. *Indemnification Obligations* In the normal course of business, we periodically enter into agreements that incorporate general indemnification language. Performance under these indemnities would generally be triggered by a breach of terms of the contract or by a supportable third-party claim. There has historically been no material losses related to such indemnifications. As of March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022, estimated liability amounts associated with such indemnifications were not material.

Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2023

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies

Note 11 — Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies

Plaintiff Cypress Holdings, III L.P. (“Cypress”) filed an action against GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc. in New York Supreme Court, which was removed to the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, on February 14, 2022, captioned Cypress Holdings, III L.P. v. Sport-BLX, Inc. et al., 1:22-cv-01243-LGS (S.D.N.Y.). In its Second Amended Complaint, Cypress purports to assert claims against SportBLX, Mr. Hall, and Mr. De Perio for securities fraud and related issues and seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees, in connection with solicitations of investments in SportBLX. Cypress also purports to allege that GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc. is liable for unjust enrichment, tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty and minority shareholder oppression. Cypress also purports to assert claims against Messrs. Strauss and Ruchalski for breach of fiduciary duty and corporate waste, as well as additional claims against Clinton Group Inc., Cesar Baez, Christopher Johnson, and Sport-BLX Securities, Inc. arising from solicitations of investments in SportBLX.

The matter is presently in the discovery phase and GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc., and Messrs. Strauss and Ruchalski, intend to defend themselves vigorously. As of December 31, 2021, GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc. sold all of its interest in SportBLX and SportBLX ceased to be a subsidiary.

As of March 31, 2023, the Company believes that an outcome resulting in a loss is remote and does not have any accruals related to the matter.

Indemnification Obligations

In the normal course of business, we periodically enter into agreements that incorporate general indemnification language. Performance under these indemnities would generally be triggered by a breach of terms of the contract or by a supportable third-party claim. There has historically been no material losses related to such indemnifications. As of March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022, estimated liability amounts associated with such indemnifications were not material.