Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2023

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

14. Commitments and Contingencies

Warranty Liabilities

The Company provides a limited warranty on most of the products it sells. The estimated warranty costs, which are expensed at the time of sale and included in cost of revenues, are based on the results of product testing, industry and historical trends and warranty claim rates incurred, and are adjusted for any current or expected trends as appropriate. Actual warranty claim costs could differ from these estimates. The Company regularly assesses and adjusts the estimate of accrued warranty claims by updating claims rates for actual trends and projected claim costs.  The Company classifies estimated warranty costs expected to be paid beyond a year as a long-term liability.

The Company had the following activity for warranty liabilities (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2023			2022
Balance at beginning of period	$	20,744		$	15,013
Additions charged to expense for current period sales		696			2,163
Deduction from reserves for current period claims		(1,443	)		(808	)
Balance at end of period	$	19,997		$	16,368

Required Member Distributions

Prior to the Business Combination and pursuant to the then applicable First Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement (the “First Purple LLC Agreement”), Purple LLC was required to distribute to its members an amount equal to 45 percent of Purple LLC’s net taxable income following the end of each fiscal year. The First Purple LLC Agreement was amended and replaced by the Second Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement (the “Second Purple LLC Agreement”) on February 2, 2018 as part of the Business Combination. The Second Purple LLC Agreement was amended and replaced by the Third Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement (the “Third Purple LLC Agreement”) on September 3, 2020. The Second Purple LLC Agreement and the Third Purple LLC Agreement do not include any mandatory distributions, other than tax distributions. There were no tax distributions paid during the three months ended March 31, 2023 and 2022. At March 31, 2023, the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheet had $0.1 million of accrued tax distributions included in other current liabilities.

Subscription Agreement and Preemptive Rights

In February 2018, in connection with the Business Combination, the Company entered into a subscription agreement with Coliseum Capital Partners (“CCP”) and Blackwell Partners LLC – Series A (“Blackwell”), pursuant to which CCP and Blackwell agreed to purchase from the Company an aggregate of 4.0 million shares of Class A Stock at a purchase price of $10.00 per share (the “Coliseum Private Placement”). In connection with the Coliseum Private Placement, the Sponsor assigned (i) an aggregate of 1.3 million additional shares of Class A common stock to CCP and Blackwell and (ii) an aggregate of 3.3 million warrants to purchase 1.6 million shares of Class A common stock to CCP, Blackwell, and Coliseum Co-Invest Debt Fund, L.P. (“CDF”). The subscription agreement provides CCP and Blackwell with preemptive rights with respect to future sales of the Company’s securities. It also provides them with a right of first refusal with respect to certain debt and preferred equity financings by the Company. The Company also entered into a registration rights agreement with CCP, Blackwell, and CDF, providing for the registration of the shares of Class A common stock issued and assigned to CCP and Blackwell in the Coliseum Private Placement, as well as the shares of Class A common stock underlying the warrants received by CCP, Blackwell and CDF. The Company has filed a registration statement with respect to such securities.

Rights of Securities Holders

The holders of certain warrants exercisable into Class A common stock, including CCP, Blackwell and CDF, were entitled to registration rights pursuant to certain registration rights agreements of the Company as of the Business Combination date. In March 2018, the Company filed a registration statement registering these warrants (and any shares of Class A common stock issuable upon the exercise of the warrants), and certain unregistered shares of Class A common stock. The registration statement was declared effective on April 3, 2018. Under the Registration Rights Agreement dated February 2, 2018 between the Company and CCP, Blackwell, and CDF (the “Coliseum Investors”), the Coliseum Investors have the right to make written demands for up to three registrations of certain warrants and shares of Class A common stock held by them, including in underwritten offerings. In an underwritten offering of such warrants and shares of Class A common stock by the Coliseum Investors, the Company will pay underwriting discounts and commissions and certain expenses incurred by the Coliseum Investors. In May, 2021, the Coliseum Investors exercised the first of their three written demands for registration in an underwritten offering.

Stockholder Rights Agreement

On September 25, 2022, with the authorization of the Board, a special committee of independent and disinterested directors of the Company (the “Special Committee”) approved the adoption of a limited-duration stockholder rights agreement (the “Rights Agreement”) with an expiration date of September 25, 2023. The Special Committee adopted the Rights Agreement in response to Coliseum’s substantial increase in ownership of the Company’s shares over the last year and the Special Committee’s desire to have the time and flexibility necessary to evaluate an unsolicited and non-binding proposal from Coliseum to acquire the outstanding common stock of the Company not already beneficially owned by Coliseum (See Note 15—Related Party Transactions— Coliseum Capital Management, LLC). The Rights Agreement was intended to enable the Company’s shareholders to realize the full value of their investment and to guard against any attempts to gain control of the Company without paying all shareholders an appropriate control premium. The Rights Agreement applied equally to all current and future shareholders and did not deter any offer or preclude the Special Committee from considering an offer that was fair and otherwise in the best interest of the Company’s shareholders.

Upon adopting the Rights Agreement, 300,000 shares of the Company’s authorized shares of preferred stock, par value $0.0001 per share, were designated as Series A Junior Participating Preferred Shares (the “Preferred Shares”). In accordance with the Rights Agreement, on September 25, 2022, the Special Committee authorized and declared a dividend of one preferred share purchase right (a “Right”) for each outstanding share of the Company’s Class A common stock and Class B common stock to stockholders of record at the close of business on October 6, 2022.

The initial issuance of the Rights as a dividend had no financial accounting or reporting impact. The fair value of the Rights was nominal since the Rights were not exercisable when issued and no value was attributable to them. Additionally, the Rights did not meet the definition of a liability under GAAP and was therefore not accounted for as a long-term obligation.  Accordingly, the Rights Agreement had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. See Note 21—Subsequent Events for information regarding dissolution of the Rights Agreement.

Purple LLC Class B Unit Exchange Right

On February 2, 2018, in connection with the closing of the Business Combination, the Company entered into an exchange agreement with Purple LLC and InnoHold and Class B Unit holders who become a party thereto (the “Exchange Agreement”), which provides for the exchange of Purple LLC Class B units and shares of Class B common stock (together with an equal number of Class B units, the “Paired Securities”) for, at the Company’s option, either (A) shares of Class A common stock at an initial exchange ratio equal to one Paired Security for one share of Class A common stock or (B) a cash payment equal to the product of the average of the volume-weighted closing price of one share of Class A common stock for the ten trading days immediately prior to the date InnoHold or other Class B unit holders deliver a notice of exchange multiplied by the number of Paired Securities being exchanged. In December 2018, InnoHold distributed Paired Securities to Terry Pearce and Tony Pearce who agreed to become parties to the Exchange Agreement. In June 2019, InnoHold distributed Paired Securities to certain current and former employees who also agreed to become parties to the exchange agreement. Holders of Class B units may elect to exchange all or any portion of their Paired Securities as described above by delivering a notice to Purple LLC.

In certain cases, adjustments to the exchange ratio will occur in case of a split, reclassification, recapitalization, subdivision or similar transaction of or relating to the Class B units or the shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock or a transaction in which the Class A common stock is exchanged or converted into other securities or property. The exchange ratio will also adjust in certain circumstances when the Company acquires Class B units other than through an exchange for its shares of Class A common stock.

The right of a holder of Paired Securities to exchange may be limited by the Company if it reasonably determines in good faith that such restrictions are required by applicable law (including securities laws), such exchange would not be permitted under other agreements of such holder with the Company or its subsidiaries, including the Third Purple LLC Agreement, or if such exchange would cause Purple LLC to be treated as a “publicly traded partnership” under applicable tax laws.

The Company and each holder of Paired Securities shall bear its own expense regarding the exchange except that the Company shall be responsible for transfer taxes, stamp taxes and similar duties.

There were no Paired Securities exchanged for Class A common stock during the three months ended March 31, 2023 and 2022.

Maintenance of One-to-One Ratios

The Third Purple LLC Agreement includes provisions intended to ensure that the Company at all times maintains a one-to-one ratio between (a) (i) the number of outstanding shares of Class A common stock and (ii) the number of Class A units owned by the Company (subject to certain exceptions for certain rights to purchase equity securities of the Company under a “poison pill” or similar stockholder rights plan, if any, certain convertible or exchangeable securities issued under the Company’s equity compensation plan and certain equity securities issued pursuant to the Company’s equity compensation plan (other than a stock option plan) that are restricted or have not vested thereunder) and (b) (i) the number of other outstanding equity securities of the Company (including the warrants exercisable for shares of Class A common stock) and (ii) the number of corresponding outstanding equity securities of Purple LLC. These provisions are intended to result in non-controlling interest holders having a voting interest in the Company that is identical to their economic interest in Purple LLC.

Non-Income Related Taxes

The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., No.17-494, reversed a longstanding precedent that remote sellers are not required to collect state and local sales taxes. The Company cannot predict the effect of these and other attempts to impose sales, income or other taxes on e-commerce. The Company currently collects and reports on sales tax in all states in which it does business. However, the application of existing, new or revised taxes on the Company’s business, in particular, sales taxes, VAT and similar taxes would likely increase the cost of doing business online and decrease the attractiveness of selling products over the internet. The application of these taxes on the Company’s business could also create significant increases in internal costs necessary to capture data and collect and remit taxes. There have been, and will continue to be, substantial ongoing costs associated with complying with the various indirect tax requirements in the numerous markets in which the Company conducts or will conduct business.

Legal Proceedings

On September 20, 2020, Purple LLC filed a complaint in the U.S. Court of International Trade seeking to recover approximately $7.0 million of Section 301 duties paid at the time of importation on certain Chinese-origin goods. More than 4,000 other complaints have been filed by other companies seeking similar refunds. On March 12, 2021 the United States filed a master answer that applies to all the Section 301 cases, including Purple LLC’s. On July 6, 2021, the court granted a preliminary injunction against liquidation of any unliquidated entries. On April 1, 2022, the court issued an opinion that remanded the case back to the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) to address certain procedural flaws in USTR’s process for determining whether certain products were subject to the Section 301 duties. On August 1, 2022, USTR issued its remand results. On September 14, 2022, the plaintiffs submitted comments on the remand results. USTR filed their response to these comments on November 4, 2022. The plaintiffs filed a reply on December 5, 2022 and the court held a hearing on February 7, 2023. On March 17, 2023, the court issued a final opinion and order upholding the remand results. As a result, the duties will stay in place and no refunds will be issued. The court’s order could be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

On October 13, 2020, Purple LLC filed a lawsuit against Responsive Surface Technology, LLC and its parent company, PatienTech, LLC (collectively referred to as “ReST”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah. The lawsuit arises from ReST’s multiple breaches of its obligations to Purple LLC, including infringing upon Purple LLC’s trademarks, patents, and trade dress, among other claims. Purple seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief, and declaratory judgment based on certain conduct by ReST (“Case I”). On October 21, 2020, shortly after the complaint was filed in Case I, ReST filed a retaliatory lawsuit against Purple LLC, and some of the Company’s board members, Gary DiCamillo, Adam Gray, Joseph Megibow, Terry Pearce, and Tony Pearce, also in the United States District Court for the District of Utah (“Case II”). Subsequently, the two cases were consolidated into one. Case II (now combined with Case I) involves many of the same facts and transactions as Case I. ReST subsequently filed a motion to compel arbitration of the claims in Case I. Purple LLC opposed the motion to compel arbitration, arguing that ReST waived any rights to arbitration and that all the claims in both cases should stay in the courts. However, the Court granted ReST’s motion to compel arbitration, and stayed the proceedings in the United States District Court for the District of Utah. Additionally, the Court ruled that ReST’s claims against the Company’s board members were not subject to arbitration, and the Court stayed ReST’s claims against those individuals.  Pursuant to the Court’s order, Purple LLC filed a demand for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association (the “AAA”) on September 1, 2021.  ReST filed its counterclaim with the AAA on September 21, 2021.  Currently, the parties are nearing the end of the fact discovery phase of the arbitration.  The parties have taken several depositions and engaged in written discovery.  The arbitration hearing is scheduled to begin on July 31, 2023.  Purple LLC seeks over $4 million in damages from ReST, whereas ReST claims that Purple LLC is liable to it for tens of millions of dollars. The outcome of this litigation cannot be predicted at this stage. However, Purple LLC intends to vigorously pursue its claims and defend against the claims made by ReST.

On May 3, 2022, Purple LLC filed a complaint against Photon Interactive UK Limited (“Photon”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware regarding a Master Professional Services Agreement with Photon dated on or around November 1, 2019. Pursuant to the agreement, Photon was required to rebuild Purple LLC’s website architecture and checkout process. Purple LLC paid Photon $0.9 million under the Agreement. However, Photon failed to deliver any of the required deliverables as specified in the agreement. Purple LLC withheld payment of the final $0.1 million due pursuant to Photon’s invoices pending a resolution with Photon. Since resolution discussions with Photon failed, Purple LLC filed its complaint for breach of contract against Photon seeking, among other damages, reimbursement for all amounts paid to Photon under the agreement. Photon counter-sued, seeking payment for the $0.1 million withheld by Purple LLC, and also advancing a vague claim for tortious interference. On August 31, 2022, Purple LLC filed an amended complaint adding additional claims pertaining to Photon’s failure to deliver a point-of-sale system pursuant to the Master Professional Services Agreement. Purple LLC is seeking judgment against Photon in the amount of $4 million. The litigation is presently in its discovery phase. The Company intends to vigorously litigate its claims to resolution. 

On August 5, 2022, Purple LLC filed a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) against numerous entities and individuals from the People’s Republic of China and South Korea (“Respondents”) that have been violating Purple LLC’s intellectual property rights related to pillow and seat cushion products.  The complaint alleged that the Respondents have been violating 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (“Section 337”) by importing into the United States, selling for importation into the United States, and/or selling in the United States after importation pillow and seat cushion products that infringe Purple LLC’s trade dress rights or otherwise constitute unfair competition, infringe a certain Purple LLC’s design patent, infringe Purple LLC’s trademarks, and/or infringe Purple LLC’s utility patents.  The complaint requested at least the following relief:  (i) a General Exclusion Order excluding from entry into the United States all pillow and seat cushion products that infringe any asserted intellectual property right; (ii) Limited Exclusion Orders excluding from entry into the United States all pillow and cushion products of the Respondents named in the complaint that infringe any asserted intellectual property right; and (iii) Cease and Desist Orders against the Respondents named in the complaint barring them from marketing, selling, advertising, or distributing infringing products in the United States, including via on-line retailers.  On September 6, 2022, the ITC instituted Investigation No. 337-TA-1328 in response to Purple LLC’s complaint.  Fact and expert discovery have been completed.  Purple LLC has entered into settlement agreements with a number of Respondents.  Purple LLC also has voluntarily terminated the Investigation as to a number of Respondents.  No actively litigating Respondents remain in the case.  Purple LLC also has filed a Motion for Summary Determination seeking, among other things, the imposition of a General Exclusion Order with respect to pillows that infringe an asserted utility patent.  Under the current Procedural Schedule for the Investigation, the deadline for the Administrative Law Judge to issue an Initial Determination concerning Purple LLC’s Motion for Summary Determination is June 12, 2023, and the Commission’s Target Date for completion of the Investigation has been set for October 12, 2023.

On September 22, 2022, Purple LLC filed an action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah styled Purple Innovation, LLC v. Bedmate-U Co., Ltd., against numerous entities and individuals from the People’s Republic of China and South Korea (“Respondents”).  The complaint alleges that the Respondents have (a) violated Lanham Act § 43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) by committing acts of trade dress infringement; (b) infringed U.S. Trademark Registration No. 5,661,556; (c) infringed U.S. Trademark Registration No. 6,551,053; (d) violated Lanham Act § 43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) by committing acts of trademark infringement; I infringed U.S. Patent No. D909,092; (f) infringed U.S. Patent No. 10,772,445; (g) infringed U.S. Patent No. 10,863,837; (h) violated Utah Unfair Competition Act, Utah Code § 13-5a-101 et seq.; and/or (i) committed common law unfair competition.  The complaint seeks injunctive relief, compensatory damages, disgorgement of profits, punitive and exemplary damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs.  This action is in its initial stages. Purple LLC intends to vigorously litigate its claims to resolution.

On December 16, 2022, Terry and Tony Pearce, Purple’s founders, filed a complaint against Purple Inc. in the Fourth Judicial District Court in the State of Utah. The Pearces allege that they each entered into employment agreements with Purple LLC in February 2018. The Pearces contend that certain corporate transactions between May 2019 and June 2020 reduced their “ownership interest and voting power in Purple” and that, as a result, they should have continued to be paid a salary between August 2020, when they retired from Purple LLC, and December 2021. The Pearces calculate that they are each owed “no less than $500,000” in unpaid salary. In February 2023, Purple Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the Pearces’ claims in full. The Pearces amended their complaint a month later. Purple Inc. has now moved to dismiss that amended complaint, as well, arguing that the Pearces’ amendment did not address the flaws in their legal theory and that the Pearces’ failed amendment reflects an inability to rehabilitate their claims. The Company maintains insurance to defend against claims of this nature and intends to continue to do so vigorously.

On February 21, 2023, Coliseum filed a complaint against Purple Inc. and several members of the Board in the Delaware Court of Chancery, captioned Coliseum Capital Management, LLC v. Anthos, Case No. 2023-0220-PAF (Del. Ch. Feb. 21, 2023).  The complaint alleged that the Company and the named directors authorized an improper dividend of preferred stock in bad faith to impede stockholder voting rights and interfere with Coliseum’s nomination of a competing slate of director candidates ahead of the Company’s 2023 annual meeting of stockholders.  Coliseum was seeking: (1) declarations that the authorization of Proportional Representation Preferred Linked Stock violated the Company’s charter and amounted to a breach of the named directors’ fiduciary duties; (2) a declaration that the Proportional Representation Preferred Linked Stock is invalid, unenforceable, and void; (3) unspecified damages resulting from the alleged breach of duties; and (4) an award of costs and expenses incurred in pursuing the action.  The parties agreed to hold an expedited trial on Coliseum’s claims that would have resulted in a resolution of the dispute before the Company’s 2023 annual meeting of stockholders. On April 11, 2023, Coliseum and the Company resolved the litigation by entering into a binding memorandum of understanding in which the parties agreed to work together to prepare and enter into a formalized cooperation agreement. The Cooperation Agreement that embodied those material terms was signed by both parties on April 19, 2023 and became effective on April 27, 2023. See Note 21—Subsequent Events—Coliseum Cooperation Agreement for further discussion of the provisions of the cooperation agreement.

On April 3, 2023, InnoHold, LLC, Terry Pearce, and Tony Pearce (collectively, the “InnoHold Parties”) filed a complaint against Purple LLC in the Delaware Court of Chancery, captioned InnoHold, LLC et al. v. Purple Innovation, LLC, Case No. 2023-0393-PAF (Del. Ch. Apr. 3, 2023).  The complaint alleges that Purple LLC breached the Second Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Purple Innovation, LLC, dated as of February 2, 2018 (the “LLC Agreement”), and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing contained therein by failing to pay the full amount of tax distributions owed under the LLC Agreement.  The complaint also asserts a claim for indemnification under the LLC Agreement.  The InnoHold Parties seek damages of approximately $3.0 million in allegedly unpaid tax distributions as well as its legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with the litigation. Purple LLC has not yet formally responded to the allegations in the complaint, and the outcome of the litigation cannot be predicted at this early stage.

The Company is from time to time involved in various other claims, legal proceedings and complaints arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company does not believe that adverse decisions in any such pending or threatened proceedings, or any amount that the Company might be required to pay by reason thereof, would have a material adverse effect on the financial condition or future results of the Company.