Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2019
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies On February 7, 2007, in an action styled White Plains Plaza Realty, LLC v. TSI LLC et al., the landlord of one of TSI LLC’s former health and fitness clubs filed a lawsuit in the Appellate Division, Second Department of the Supreme Court of the State of New York against it and two of its health club subsidiaries alleging, among other things, breach of lease in connection with the decision to close the club located in a building owned by the plaintiff and leased to a subsidiary of TSI LLC, the tenant, and take additional space in a nearby facility leased by another subsidiary of TSI LLC. Following a determination of an initial award, which TSI LLC and the tenant have paid in full, the landlord appealed the trial court’s award of damages, and on August 29, 2011, an additional award (amounting to approximately $900) (the “Additional Award”), was entered against the tenant, which has recorded a liability. Separately, TSI LLC is party to an agreement with a third-party developer, which by its terms provides indemnification for the full amount of any liability of any nature arising out of the lease described above, including attorneys’ fees incurred to enforce the indemnity. As a result, the developer reimbursed TSI LLC and the tenant the amount of the initial award in installments over time and also agreed to be responsible for the payment of the Additional Award, and the tenant has recorded a receivable related to the indemnification for the Additional Award. The developer and the landlord are currently litigating the payment of the Additional Award and judgment was entered against the developer on June 5, 2013, in the amount of approximately $1,000, plus interest, which judgment was upheld by the appellate court on April 29, 2015. TSI LLC does not believe it is probable that TSI LLC will be required to pay for any amount of the Additional Award. In June 2019 a consultant of the company commenced an arbitration seeking to recover, inter alia, consulting fees due to him under his Consulting Agreement which expires in October 2020. This case is in its infancy stages, without the Company having had the benefit of discovery, as such the outcome is uncertain. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter and believes it has meritorious defenses to the claims asserted. In addition to the litigations discussed above, the Company is involved in various other lawsuits, claims and proceedings incidental to the ordinary course of business, including personal injury, landlord tenant disputes, construction matters, employee and member relations, and Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims (a number of which purport to represent a class and one of which was brought by the Washington, D.C. Attorney General’s Office). The results of litigation are inherently unpredictable. Any claims against the Company, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming, result in costly litigation, require significant amounts of management time and result in diversion of significant resources. The results of these other lawsuits, claims and proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. The Company establishes accruals for loss contingencies when it has determined that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss, or range of loss, can be reasonably estimated. Any such accruals are adjusted thereafter as appropriate to reflect changes in circumstances. The Company concluded that an accrual for any such matters is not required as of June 30, 2019. The Company assigned its interest, and is contingently liable, under a real estate lease. This lease expires in 2020. As of June 30, 2019, the undiscounted payments the Company could be required to make in the event of non-payment by the primary lessee was approximately $631. The Company has not recorded a liability with respect to this guarantee obligation as of June 30, 2019 as it concluded that payment under this lease guarantee was not probable.

Commitments and Contingencies

On February 7, 2007, in an action styled White Plains Plaza Realty, LLC v. TSI LLC et al., the landlord of one of TSI LLC’s former health and fitness clubs filed a lawsuit in the Appellate Division, Second Department of the Supreme Court of the State of New York against it and two of its health club subsidiaries alleging, among other things, breach of lease in connection with the decision to close the club located in a building owned by the plaintiff and leased to a subsidiary of TSI LLC, the tenant, and take additional space in a nearby facility leased by another subsidiary of TSI LLC. Following a determination of an initial award, which TSI LLC and the tenant have paid in full, the landlord appealed the trial court’s award of damages, and on August 29, 2011, an additional award (amounting to approximately $900) (the “Additional Award”), was entered against the tenant, which has recorded a liability. Separately, TSI LLC is party to an agreement with a third-party developer, which by its terms provides indemnification for the full amount of any liability of any nature arising out of the lease described above, including attorneys’ fees incurred to enforce the indemnity. As a result, the developer reimbursed TSI LLC and the tenant the amount of the initial award in installments over time and also agreed to be responsible for the payment of the Additional Award, and the tenant has recorded a receivable related to the indemnification for the Additional Award. The developer and the landlord are currently litigating the payment of the Additional Award and judgment was entered against the developer on June 5, 2013, in the amount of approximately $1,000, plus interest, which judgment was upheld by the appellate court on April 29, 2015. TSI LLC does not believe it is probable that TSI LLC will be required to pay for any amount of the Additional Award.

In June 2019 a consultant of the company commenced an arbitration seeking to recover, inter alia, consulting fees due to him under his Consulting Agreement which expires in October 2020. This case is in its infancy stages, without the Company having had the benefit of discovery, as such the outcome is uncertain. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter and believes it has meritorious defenses to the claims asserted.

In addition to the litigations discussed above, the Company is involved in various other lawsuits, claims and proceedings incidental to the ordinary course of business, including personal injury, landlord tenant disputes, construction matters, employee and member relations, and Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims (a number of which purport to represent a class and one of which was brought by the Washington, D.C. Attorney General’s Office). The results of litigation are inherently unpredictable. Any claims against the Company, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming, result in costly litigation, require significant amounts of management time and result in diversion of significant resources. The results of these other lawsuits, claims and proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. The Company establishes accruals for loss contingencies when it has determined that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss, or range of loss, can be reasonably estimated. Any such accruals are adjusted thereafter as appropriate to reflect changes in circumstances. The Company concluded that an accrual for any such matters is not required as of June 30, 2019.

The Company assigned its interest, and is contingently liable, under a real estate lease. This lease expires in 2020. As of June 30, 2019, the undiscounted payments the Company could be required to make in the event of non-payment by the primary lessee was approximately $631. The Company has not recorded a liability with respect to this guarantee obligation as of June 30, 2019 as it concluded that payment under this lease guarantee was not probable.