Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies The Company is regularly involved in litigation, both as a plaintiff and as a defendant, relating to its business and operations. The Company assesses the likelihood of any judgments or outcomes with respect to these matters and determines loss contingency assessments on a gross basis after assessing the probability of incurrence of a loss and whether a loss is reasonably estimable. In addition, the Company considers other relevant factors that could impact its ability to reasonably estimate a loss. A determination of the amount of reserves required, if any, for these contingencies is made after analyzing each matter. The Company’s reserves may change in the future due to new developments or changes in strategy in handling these matters. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company currently believes the final outcome of the matters listed below will not have a material adverse effect on its business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can adversely impact the Company as a result of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors. Williams, et al. v. Angie’s List, Inc., 1:16-cv-878. On April 20, 2016, a group of former employees filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The lawsuit alleges the Company failed to pay (i) wages earned in a timely manner as required under Indiana Wage Statutes and (ii) overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 206-07) and is requesting payment of all damages, including unpaid wages, interest, attorneys’ fees and other charges. Six amended complaints were filed, adding additional named plaintiffs, and the Company filed its answer to the sixth amended complaint on April 10, 2017. The plaintiffs filed a motion for conditional certification on June 10, 2016, and the Company filed its response brief in opposition on July 15, 2016. The Court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification on November 30, 2016 but allowed the plaintiffs to refile with a more narrow class definition. On December 9, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a renewed motion for conditional certification. The Company filed its response to the renewed motion on January 6, 2017, and the plaintiffs filed their reply on January 17, 2017. The Court denied the plaintiffs’ renewed motion for conditional certification on April 28, 2017. The Company is currently unable to determine the likely outcome or reasonably estimate the amount or range of potential liability, if any, related to this matter, and accordingly, has not established any reserve for this matter. Crabtree, et al. v. Angie’s List, Inc., 1:16-cv-877. On April 20, 2016, three former employees filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The lawsuit alleges the Company failed to pay (i) wages earned in a timely manner as required under Indiana Wage Statutes and (ii) overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 206-07) and is requesting payment of all damages, including unpaid wages, interest, attorneys’ fees and other charges. The plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint in May 2016, adding one additional Indiana wage statute claim. The Company filed its answer and defenses on June 9, 2016. Discovery with respect to this matter is ongoing. The Company is currently unable to determine the likely outcome or reasonably estimate the amount or range of potential liability, if any, related to this matter, and accordingly, has not established any reserve for this matter. Paul Parshall v. Angie’s List, Inc., et. al.; David Pill v. Angie’s List, Inc., et. al. On July 18, 2017 (Parshall) and July 20, 2017 (Pill), respectively, two putative securities class action complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, naming the Company, its directors and IAC, in connection with IAC’s acquisition of the Company. The lawsuits allege the Company and its directors violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by omitting certain financial information from the Form S-4 Registration Statement filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the Merger. Based on these allegations, the complaints seek equitable relief, including additional disclosure in the Form S-4 Registration Statement, an injunction of the Merger and costs and expenses of the litigation, including attorneys’ fees. As of the date of the filing of this report, the Company has not received notice of service of process in these matters. Based on the facts known to date, the Company considers the claims asserted to be without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them.

Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is regularly involved in litigation, both as a plaintiff and as a defendant, relating to its business and operations. The Company assesses the likelihood of any judgments or outcomes with respect to these matters and determines loss contingency assessments on a gross basis after assessing the probability of incurrence of a loss and whether a loss is reasonably estimable. In addition, the Company considers other relevant factors that could impact its ability to reasonably estimate a loss. A determination of the amount of reserves required, if any, for these contingencies is made after analyzing each matter. The Company’s reserves may change in the future due to new developments or changes in strategy in handling these matters. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company currently believes the final outcome of the matters listed below will not have a material adverse effect on its business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can adversely impact the Company as a result of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

Williams, et al. v. Angie’s List, Inc., 1:16-cv-878. On April 20, 2016, a group of former employees filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The lawsuit alleges the Company failed to pay (i) wages earned in a timely manner as required under Indiana Wage Statutes and (ii) overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 206-07) and is requesting payment of all damages, including unpaid wages, interest, attorneys’ fees and other charges. Six amended complaints were filed, adding additional named plaintiffs, and the Company filed its answer to the sixth amended complaint on April 10, 2017. The plaintiffs filed a motion for conditional certification on June 10, 2016, and the Company filed its response brief in opposition on July 15, 2016. The Court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification on November 30, 2016 but allowed the plaintiffs to refile with a more narrow class definition. On December 9, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a renewed motion for conditional certification. The Company filed its response to the renewed motion on January 6, 2017, and the plaintiffs filed their reply on January 17, 2017. The Court denied the plaintiffs’ renewed motion for conditional certification on April 28, 2017. The Company is currently unable to determine the likely outcome or reasonably estimate the amount or range of potential liability, if any, related to this matter, and accordingly, has not established any reserve for this matter.

Crabtree, et al. v. Angie’s List, Inc., 1:16-cv-877. On April 20, 2016, three former employees filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The lawsuit alleges the Company failed to pay (i) wages earned in a timely manner as required under Indiana Wage Statutes and (ii) overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 206-07) and is requesting payment of all damages, including unpaid wages, interest, attorneys’ fees and other charges. The plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint in May 2016, adding one additional Indiana wage statute claim. The Company filed its answer and defenses on June 9, 2016. Discovery with respect to this matter is ongoing. The Company is currently unable to determine the likely outcome or reasonably estimate the amount or range of potential liability, if any, related to this matter, and accordingly, has not established any reserve for this matter.

Paul Parshall v. Angie’s List, Inc., et. al.; David Pill v. Angie’s List, Inc., et. al. On July 18, 2017 (Parshall) and July 20, 2017 (Pill), respectively, two putative securities class action complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, naming the Company, its directors and IAC, in connection with IAC’s acquisition of the Company. The lawsuits allege the Company and its directors violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by omitting certain financial information from the Form S-4 Registration Statement filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the Merger. Based on these allegations, the complaints seek equitable relief, including additional disclosure in the Form S-4 Registration Statement, an injunction of the Merger and costs and expenses of the litigation, including attorneys’ fees. As of the date of the filing of this report, the Company has not received notice of service of process in these matters. Based on the facts known to date, the Company considers the claims asserted to be without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them.