Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	NOTE 8: COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Chapter 11 Reorganization— On December 8, 2008 (the “Petition Date”), Tribune Company and 110 of its direct and indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, the “Debtors” or “Predecessor”) filed voluntary petitions for relief (collectively, the “Chapter 11 Petitions”) under chapter 11 (“Chapter 11”) of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”). The Fourth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization for Tribune Company and its Subsidiaries (as subsequently modified, the “Plan”) became effective and the Debtors emerged from Chapter 11 on December 31, 2012 (the “Effective Date”). The Bankruptcy Court entered final decrees collectively closing 106 of the Debtors’ Chapter 11 cases. The remaining Debtors’ Chapter 11 proceedings continue to be jointly administered under the caption In re Tribune Media Company, et al., Case No. 08-13141. See Note 3 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 for additional information regarding the Debtors’ Chapter 11 cases and for a description of the terms and conditions of the Plan. Confirmation Order Appeals—Notices of appeal of the Bankruptcy Court’s order confirming the Plan (the “Confirmation Order”) were filed by (i) Aurelius Capital Management, LP, on behalf of its managed entities that were holders of the Predecessor’s senior notes and Exchangeable Subordinated Debentures due 2029 (“PHONES”); (ii) Law Debenture Trust Company of New York (“Law Debenture”) and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (“Deutsche Bank”), each successor trustees under the respective indentures for the Predecessor’s senior notes; (iii) Wilmington Trust Company, as successor indenture trustee for the PHONES, and (iv) EGI-TRB, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company wholly-owned by Sam Investment Trust (a trust established for the benefit of Samuel Zell and his family) (the “Zell Entity”). The appellants sought, among other relief, to overturn the Confirmation Order and certain prior orders of the Bankruptcy Court embodied in the Plan, including the settlement of certain claims and causes of action related to the series of transactions (collectively, the “Leveraged ESOP Transactions”) consummated by the Predecessor, the Tribune Company employee stock ownership plan, the Zell Entity and Samuel Zell in 2007. As of March 31, 2018, each of the Confirmation Order appeals have been dismissed or otherwise resolved by a final order, with the exception of the appeals of Law Debenture and Deutsche Bank, which remain pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. See Note 3 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 for a further description of the Leveraged ESOP Transactions and the Confirmation Order appeals. If the remaining appellants succeed on their appeal, the Company’s financial condition may be adversely affected. Resolution of Outstanding Prepetition Claims—As of the Effective Date, approximately 7,400 proofs of claim had been filed against the Debtors. Amounts and payment terms for these claims, if applicable, were established in the Plan. The Plan requires the Company to reserve cash in amounts sufficient to make certain additional payments that may become due and owing pursuant to the Plan subsequent to the Effective Date. As of March 31, 2018, restricted cash held by the Company to satisfy the remaining claim obligations was $17 million and is estimated to be sufficient to satisfy such obligations. As of March 31, 2018, all but 403 proofs of claim against the Debtors had been withdrawn, expunged, settled or otherwise satisfied. The majority of the remaining proofs of claim were filed by certain of the Company’s former directors and officers, asserting indemnity and other related claims against the Company for claims brought against them in lawsuits arising from the Leveraged ESOP Transactions. Those lawsuits are pending in multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “NY District Court”) in proceedings captioned In re Tribune Co. Fraudulent Conveyance Litigation. See “Certain Causes of Action Arising from the Leveraged ESOP Transactions” in Note 3 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 for a description of the MDL proceedings. Under the Plan, the indemnity claims of the Company’s former directors and officers must be set off against any recovery by the litigation trust formed pursuant to the Plan (the “Litigation Trust”) against any of those directors and officers, and the Litigation Trust is authorized to object to the allowance of any such indemnity-type claims. The ultimate amounts to be paid in resolutions of the remaining proofs of claim, including indemnity claims, will continue to be subject to uncertainty for a period of time after the Effective Date. If the aggregate allowed amount of the remaining claims exceeds the restricted cash held for satisfying such claims, the Company would be required to satisfy the allowed claims from its cash on hand from operations. Reorganization Items, Net—ASC Topic 852, “Reorganizations,” requires that the financial statements for periods subsequent to the filing of the Chapter 11 Petitions distinguish transactions and events that are directly associated with the reorganization from the operations of the business. Reorganization items, net included in the Company’s unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations primarily include professional advisory fees and other costs related to the resolution of unresolved claims and totaled less than $1 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2018 and March 31, 2017. The Company expects to continue to incur certain expenses pertaining to the Chapter 11 proceedings throughout 2018 and potentially in future periods. FCC Regulation—Various aspects of the Company’s operations are subject to regulation by governmental authorities in the United States. The Company’s television and radio broadcasting operations are subject to FCC jurisdiction under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. FCC rules, among other things, govern the term, renewal and transfer of radio and television broadcasting licenses, and limit the number of media interests in a local market that a single entity can own. Federal law also regulates the rates charged for political advertising and the quantity of advertising within children’s programs. As of May 10, 2018, the Company had FCC authorization to operate 39 television stations and one AM radio station. The Company is subject to the FCC’s “Local Television Multiple Ownership Rule,” the “Newspaper Broadcast Cross Ownership Rule” and the “National Television Multiple Ownership Rule,” among others, as further described in Note 12 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017. The FCC’s “National Television Multiple Ownership Rule” prohibits the Company from owning television stations that, in the aggregate, reach more than 39% of total U.S. television households, subject to a 50% discount of the number of television households attributable to UHF stations (the “UHF Discount”). In a Report and Order issued on September 7, 2016, the FCC repealed the UHF Discount but grandfathered existing station combinations, like ours, that exceeded the 39% national reach cap as a result of the elimination of the UHF Discount, subject to compliance in the event of a future change of control or assignment of license. The FCC reinstated the UHF Discount in an Order on Reconsideration adopted on April 20, 2017 (the “UHF Discount Reconsideration Order”). Both the September 7, 2016 order repealing the UHF Discount and the April 20, 2017 order reinstating it are subject to pending petitions for judicial review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. On December 18, 2017, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment generally, on the continuing propriety of a national cap and the Commission’s jurisdiction with respect to the cap. The Company cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings, or their effect on its business. Federal legislation enacted in February 2012 authorized the FCC to conduct a voluntary “incentive auction” in order to reallocate certain spectrum currently occupied by television broadcast stations to mobile wireless broadband services, to “repack” television stations into a smaller portion of the existing television spectrum band and to require television stations that do not participate in the auction to modify their transmission facilities, subject to reimbursement for reasonable relocation costs up to an industry-wide total of $1.750 billion, which amount was increased by $1 billion pursuant to the adoption of an amended version of the Repack Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services (RAY BAUM’S) Act of 2018 by the U.S. Congress on March 23, 2018. On April 13, 2017, the FCC announced the conclusion of the incentive auction, the results of the reverse and forward auction and the repacking of the broadcast television spectrum. The Company participated in the auction and has received approximately $191 million in pretax proceeds (including $26 million of proceeds received by a Dreamcatcher station) as of December 31, 2017. The Company used $102 million of after-tax proceeds to prepay a portion of the Term Loan Facility. After-tax proceeds of $12.6 million received by a Dreamcatcher station were used to prepay a substantial portion of the Dreamcatcher Credit Facility. The Company received gross pretax proceeds of $172 million from licenses sold by the Company in the FCC spectrum auction in 2017 and recognized a net pretax gain of $133 million in the first quarter of 2018 related to the surrender of the spectrum of these television stations in January 2018. In 2017, the Company also received $84 million of pretax proceeds for sharing arrangements whereby the Company will provide hosting services to the counterparties. Additionally, the Company paid $66 million of proceeds in 2017 to counterparties who will host certain of the Company’s television stations under sharing arrangements. The proceeds received by the Company for hosting the counterparties have been recorded in deferred revenue and other long-term liabilities and is being amortized to other revenue over a period of 30 years starting with the commencement of each arrangement. The proceeds paid to the counterparties have been recorded in prepaid and other-long term assets and will be amortized to direct operating expense over a period of 30 years starting with the commencement of each arrangement. Twenty-two of the Company’s television stations (including WTTK, which operates as a satellite station of WTTV) will be required to change frequencies or otherwise modify their operations as a result of the repacking. In doing so, the stations could incur substantial conversion costs, reduction or loss of over-the-air signal coverage or an inability to provide high definition programming and additional program streams. The Company expects that the reimbursements from the FCC’s special fund will cover the majority of the Company’s costs and expenses related to the repacking. However, the Company cannot currently predict the effect of the repacking, whether the special fund will be sufficient to reimburse all of the Company’s costs and expenses related to the repacking, the timing of reimbursements or any spectrum-related FCC regulatory action. As described in Note 1 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, the Company completed the Local TV Acquisition on December 27, 2013 pursuant to FCC staff approval granted on December 20, 2013 in the Local TV Transfer Order. On January 22, 2014, Free Press filed an Application for Review seeking review by the full Commission of the Local TV Transfer Order. The Company filed an Opposition to the Application for Review on February 21, 2014. Free Press filed a reply on March 6, 2014. The matter is pending. From time to time, the FCC revises existing regulations and policies in ways that could affect the Company’s broadcasting operations. In addition, Congress from time to time considers and adopts substantive amendments to the governing communications legislation. The Company cannot predict such actions or their resulting effect upon the Company’s business and financial position. Other Contingencies—The Company and its subsidiaries are defendants from time to time in actions for matters arising out of their business operations. In addition, the Company and its subsidiaries are involved from time to time as parties in various regulatory, environmental and other proceedings with governmental authorities and administrative agencies. See Note 9 for a discussion of potential income tax liabilities. In July 2017, following the initial filing of the proxy statement/prospectus (the “Proxy Statement/Prospectus”) by each of Sinclair and the Company with the SEC relating to the Merger, four purported Tribune Media Company shareholders (the “Plaintiffs”) filed putative class action lawsuits against the Company, members of the Company’s Board of Directors, and, in certain instances, Sinclair and Samson Merger Sub, Inc. (collectively, the “Parties”) in the United States District Courts for the Districts of Delaware and Illinois. The actions are captioned McEntire v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-05179 (N.D. Ill.), Duffy v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-00919 (D. Del.), Berg v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-00938 (D. Del.), and Pill v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-00961 (D. Del.) (collectively, the “Actions”). These lawsuits allege that the Proxy Statement/Prospectus omitted material information and was materially misleading in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and SEC Rule 14a-9 and generally seek, as relief, class certification, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, rescission or rescissory damages, and unspecified damages. On September 15, 2017, the Parties entered into a memorandum of understanding (the “MOU”) to resolve the individual claims asserted by the Plaintiffs. The MOU acknowledges that the Company, in part in response to the claims asserted in the Actions, filed certain supplemental disclosures with the SEC on August 16, 2017 and that the Company, solely in response to the Actions, communicated to four third parties that participated in the sale process and twenty-three third parties that have signed confidentiality agreements in connection with potential divestitures that the “standstill” obligations of such third parties were waived. The Parties further agreed that the Company would make the additional supplemental disclosures, which are set forth in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on September 15, 2017. Further, the MOU specifies that within five business days of the closing of the Merger, the Parties will file stipulations of dismissal for the Actions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), which will dismiss Plaintiffs’ individual claims with prejudice, and dismiss the claims asserted on behalf of a purported class of the Company’s shareholders without prejudice. The MOU will not affect the timing of the Merger or the amount or form of consideration to be paid in the Merger. The Company does not believe that any other matters or proceedings presently pending will have a material adverse effect, individually or in the aggregate, on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

NOTE 8: COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Chapter 11 Reorganization— On December 8, 2008 (the “Petition Date”), Tribune Company and 110 of its direct and indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, the “Debtors” or “Predecessor”) filed voluntary petitions for relief (collectively, the “Chapter 11 Petitions”) under chapter 11 (“Chapter 11”) of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”). The Fourth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization for Tribune Company and its Subsidiaries (as subsequently modified, the “Plan”) became effective and the Debtors emerged from Chapter 11 on December 31, 2012 (the “Effective Date”). The Bankruptcy Court entered final decrees collectively closing 106 of the Debtors’ Chapter 11 cases. The remaining Debtors’ Chapter 11 proceedings continue to be jointly administered under the caption In re Tribune Media Company, et al., Case No. 08-13141. See Note 3 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 for additional information regarding the Debtors’ Chapter 11 cases and for a description of the terms and conditions of the Plan.

Confirmation Order Appeals—Notices of appeal of the Bankruptcy Court’s order confirming the Plan (the “Confirmation Order”) were filed by (i) Aurelius Capital Management, LP, on behalf of its managed entities that were holders of the Predecessor’s senior notes and Exchangeable Subordinated Debentures due 2029 (“PHONES”); (ii) Law Debenture Trust Company of New York (“Law Debenture”) and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (“Deutsche Bank”), each successor trustees under the respective indentures for the Predecessor’s senior notes; (iii) Wilmington Trust Company, as successor indenture trustee for the PHONES, and (iv) EGI-TRB, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company wholly-owned by Sam Investment Trust (a trust established for the benefit of Samuel Zell and his family) (the “Zell Entity”). The appellants sought, among other relief, to overturn the Confirmation Order and certain prior orders of the Bankruptcy Court embodied in the Plan, including the settlement of certain claims and causes of action related to the series of transactions (collectively, the “Leveraged ESOP Transactions”) consummated by the Predecessor, the Tribune Company employee stock ownership plan, the Zell Entity and Samuel Zell in 2007. As of March 31, 2018, each of the Confirmation Order appeals have been dismissed or otherwise resolved by a final order, with the exception of the appeals of Law Debenture and Deutsche Bank, which remain pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. See Note 3 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 for a further description of the Leveraged ESOP Transactions and the Confirmation Order appeals. If the remaining appellants succeed on their appeal, the Company’s financial condition may be adversely affected.

Resolution of Outstanding Prepetition Claims—As of the Effective Date, approximately 7,400 proofs of claim had been filed against the Debtors. Amounts and payment terms for these claims, if applicable, were established in the Plan. The Plan requires the Company to reserve cash in amounts sufficient to make certain additional payments that may become due and owing pursuant to the Plan subsequent to the Effective Date. As of March 31, 2018, restricted cash held by the Company to satisfy the remaining claim obligations was $17 million and is estimated to be sufficient to satisfy such obligations.

As of March 31, 2018, all but 403 proofs of claim against the Debtors had been withdrawn, expunged, settled or otherwise satisfied. The majority of the remaining proofs of claim were filed by certain of the Company’s former directors and officers, asserting indemnity and other related claims against the Company for claims brought against them in lawsuits arising from the Leveraged ESOP Transactions. Those lawsuits are pending in multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “NY District Court”) in proceedings captioned In re Tribune Co. Fraudulent Conveyance Litigation. See “Certain Causes of Action Arising from the Leveraged ESOP Transactions” in Note 3 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 for a description of the MDL proceedings. Under the Plan, the indemnity claims of the Company’s former directors and officers must be set off against any recovery by the litigation trust formed pursuant to the Plan (the “Litigation Trust”) against any of those directors and officers, and the Litigation Trust is authorized to object to the allowance of any such indemnity-type claims.

The ultimate amounts to be paid in resolutions of the remaining proofs of claim, including indemnity claims, will continue to be subject to uncertainty for a period of time after the Effective Date. If the aggregate allowed amount of the remaining claims exceeds the restricted cash held for satisfying such claims, the Company would be required to satisfy the allowed claims from its cash on hand from operations.

Reorganization Items, Net—ASC Topic 852, “Reorganizations,” requires that the financial statements for periods subsequent to the filing of the Chapter 11 Petitions distinguish transactions and events that are directly associated with the reorganization from the operations of the business. Reorganization items, net included in the Company’s unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations primarily include professional advisory fees and other costs related to the resolution of unresolved claims and totaled less than $1 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2018 and March 31, 2017. The Company expects to continue to incur certain expenses pertaining to the Chapter 11 proceedings throughout 2018 and potentially in future periods.

FCC Regulation—Various aspects of the Company’s operations are subject to regulation by governmental authorities in the United States. The Company’s television and radio broadcasting operations are subject to FCC jurisdiction under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. FCC rules, among other things, govern the term, renewal and transfer of radio and television broadcasting licenses, and limit the number of media interests in a local market that a single entity can own. Federal law also regulates the rates charged for political advertising and the quantity of advertising within children’s programs. As of May 10, 2018, the Company had FCC authorization to operate 39 television stations and one AM radio station.

The Company is subject to the FCC’s “Local Television Multiple Ownership Rule,” the “Newspaper Broadcast Cross Ownership Rule” and the “National Television Multiple Ownership Rule,” among others, as further described in Note 12 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017.

The FCC’s “National Television Multiple Ownership Rule” prohibits the Company from owning television stations that, in the aggregate, reach more than 39% of total U.S. television households, subject to a 50% discount of the number of television households attributable to UHF stations (the “UHF Discount”). In a Report and Order issued on September 7, 2016, the FCC repealed the UHF Discount but grandfathered existing station combinations, like ours, that exceeded the 39% national reach cap as a result of the elimination of the UHF Discount, subject to compliance in the event of a future change of control or assignment of license. The FCC reinstated the UHF Discount in an Order on Reconsideration adopted on April 20, 2017 (the “UHF Discount Reconsideration Order”). Both the September 7, 2016 order repealing the UHF Discount and the April 20, 2017 order reinstating it are subject to pending petitions for judicial review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. On December 18, 2017, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment generally, on the continuing propriety of a national cap and the Commission’s jurisdiction with respect to the cap. The Company cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings, or their effect on its business.

Federal legislation enacted in February 2012 authorized the FCC to conduct a voluntary “incentive auction” in order to reallocate certain spectrum currently occupied by television broadcast stations to mobile wireless broadband services, to “repack” television stations into a smaller portion of the existing television spectrum band and to require television stations that do not participate in the auction to modify their transmission facilities, subject to reimbursement for reasonable relocation costs up to an industry-wide total of $1.750 billion, which amount was increased by $1 billion pursuant to the adoption of an amended version of the Repack Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services (RAY BAUM’S) Act of 2018 by the U.S. Congress on March 23, 2018. On April 13, 2017, the FCC announced the conclusion of the incentive auction, the results of the reverse and forward auction and the repacking of the broadcast television spectrum. The Company participated in the auction and has received approximately $191 million in pretax proceeds (including $26 million of proceeds received by a Dreamcatcher station) as of December 31, 2017. The Company used $102 million of after-tax proceeds to prepay a portion of the Term Loan Facility. After-tax proceeds of $12.6 million received by a Dreamcatcher station were used to prepay a substantial portion of the Dreamcatcher Credit Facility. The Company received gross pretax proceeds of $172 million from licenses sold by the Company in the FCC spectrum auction in 2017 and recognized a net pretax gain of $133 million in the first quarter of 2018 related to the surrender of the spectrum of these television stations in January 2018. In 2017, the Company also received $84 million of pretax proceeds for sharing arrangements whereby the Company will provide hosting services to the counterparties. Additionally, the Company paid $66 million of proceeds in 2017 to counterparties who will host certain of the Company’s television stations under sharing arrangements. The proceeds received by the Company for hosting the counterparties have been recorded in deferred revenue and other long-term liabilities and is being amortized to other revenue over a period of 30 years starting with the commencement of each arrangement. The proceeds paid to the counterparties have been recorded in prepaid and other-long term assets and will be amortized to direct operating expense over a period of 30 years starting with the commencement of each arrangement.

Twenty-two of the Company’s television stations (including WTTK, which operates as a satellite station of WTTV) will be required to change frequencies or otherwise modify their operations as a result of the repacking. In doing so, the stations could incur substantial conversion costs, reduction or loss of over-the-air signal coverage or an inability to provide high definition programming and additional program streams. The Company expects that the reimbursements from the FCC’s special fund will cover the majority of the Company’s costs and expenses related to the repacking. However, the Company cannot currently predict the effect of the repacking, whether the special fund will be sufficient to reimburse all of the Company’s costs and expenses related to the repacking, the timing of reimbursements or any spectrum-related FCC regulatory action.

As described in Note 1 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, the Company completed the Local TV Acquisition on December 27, 2013 pursuant to FCC staff approval granted on December 20, 2013 in the Local TV Transfer Order. On January 22, 2014, Free Press filed an Application for Review seeking review by the full Commission of the Local TV Transfer Order. The Company filed an Opposition to the Application for Review on February 21, 2014. Free Press filed a reply on March 6, 2014. The matter is pending.

From time to time, the FCC revises existing regulations and policies in ways that could affect the Company’s broadcasting operations. In addition, Congress from time to time considers and adopts substantive amendments to the governing communications legislation. The Company cannot predict such actions or their resulting effect upon the Company’s business and financial position.

Other Contingencies—The Company and its subsidiaries are defendants from time to time in actions for matters arising out of their business operations. In addition, the Company and its subsidiaries are involved from time to time as parties in various regulatory, environmental and other proceedings with governmental authorities and administrative agencies. See Note 9 for a discussion of potential income tax liabilities.

In July 2017, following the initial filing of the proxy statement/prospectus (the “Proxy Statement/Prospectus”) by each of Sinclair and the Company with the SEC relating to the Merger, four purported Tribune Media Company shareholders (the “Plaintiffs”) filed putative class action lawsuits against the Company, members of the Company’s Board of Directors, and, in certain instances, Sinclair and Samson Merger Sub, Inc. (collectively, the “Parties”) in the United States District Courts for the Districts of Delaware and Illinois. The actions are captioned McEntire v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-05179 (N.D. Ill.), Duffy v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-00919 (D. Del.), Berg v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-00938 (D. Del.), and Pill v. Tribune Media Company, et al., 1:17-cv-00961 (D. Del.) (collectively, the “Actions”). These lawsuits allege that the Proxy Statement/Prospectus omitted material information and was materially misleading in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and SEC Rule 14a-9 and generally seek, as relief, class certification, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, rescission or rescissory damages, and unspecified damages. On September 15, 2017, the Parties entered into a memorandum of understanding (the “MOU”) to resolve the individual claims asserted by the Plaintiffs. The MOU acknowledges that the Company, in part in response to the claims asserted in the Actions, filed certain supplemental disclosures with the SEC on August 16, 2017 and that the Company, solely in response to the Actions, communicated to four third parties that participated in the sale process and twenty-three third parties that have signed confidentiality agreements in connection with potential divestitures that the “standstill” obligations of such third parties were waived. The Parties further agreed that the Company would make the additional supplemental disclosures, which are set forth in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on September 15, 2017. Further, the MOU specifies that within five business days of the closing of the Merger, the Parties will file stipulations of dismissal for the Actions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), which will dismiss Plaintiffs’ individual claims with prejudice, and dismiss the claims asserted on behalf of a purported class of the Company’s shareholders without prejudice. The MOU will not affect the timing of the Merger or the amount or form of consideration to be paid in the Merger.

The Company does not believe that any other matters or proceedings presently pending will have a material adverse effect, individually or in the aggregate, on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity.