XML 33 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.22.0.1

Commitment and Contingencies | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2021
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Repurchase Commitments In connection with its dealers’ wholesale floor plan financing of boats, the Company has entered into repurchase agreements with various lending institutions. The reserve methodology used to record an estimated expense and loss reserve in each accounting period is based upon an analysis of likely repurchases based on current field inventory and likelihood of repurchase. Subsequent to the inception of the repurchase commitment, the Company evaluates the likelihood of repurchase and adjusts the estimated loss reserve accordingly. When a potential loss reserve is recorded it is presented in accrued liabilities in the accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated balance sheet. If the Company were obligated to repurchase a significant number of units under any repurchase agreement, its business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected. The total amount financed under the floor financing programs with repurchase obligations was $154,368 and $79,599 as of December 31, 2021 and June 30, 2021, respectively. Repurchases and subsequent sales are recorded as a revenue transaction. The net difference between the repurchase price and the resale price is recorded against the loss reserve and presented in cost of sales in the accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income. During the three and six months ended December 31, 2021, there were no repurchases and as of December 31, 2021, the Company has not been notified about any probable repossessions. Therefore, the Company did not carry a reserve for repurchases as of December 31, 2021 consistent with June 30, 2021. The Company has collateralized receivables financing arrangements with a third-party floor plan financing provider for European dealers. Under terms of these arrangements, the Company transfers the right to collect a trade receivable to the financing provider in exchange for cash but agrees to repurchase the receivable if the dealer defaults. Since the transfer of the receivable to the financing provider does not meet the conditions for a sale under ASC Topic 860, Transfers and Servicing, the Company continues to report the transferred trade receivable in other current assets with an offsetting balance recorded as a secured obligation in accrued expenses in the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets. As of December 31, 2021, the Company had no financing receivables and at June 30, 2021, the Company had $95 recorded in other current assets and accrued expenses related to these arrangements. Contingencies Product Liability The Company is engaged in a business that exposes it to claims for product liability and warranty claims in the event the Company’s products actually or allegedly fail to perform as expected or the use of the Company’s products results, or is alleged to result, in property damage, personal injury or death. Although the Company maintains product and general liability insurance of the types and in the amounts that the Company believes are customary for the industry, the Company is not fully insured against all such potential claims. The Company may have the ability to refer claims to its suppliers and their insurers to pay the costs associated with any claims arising from the suppliers’ products. The Company’s insurance covers such claims that are not adequately covered by a supplier’s insurance and provides for excess secondary coverage above the limits provided by the Company’s suppliers. The Company may experience legal claims in excess of its insurance coverage or claims that are not covered by insurance, either of which could adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. Adverse determination of material product liability and warranty claims made against the Company could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition and harm its reputation. In addition, if any of the Company's products are, or are alleged to be, defective, the Company may be required to participate in a recall of that product if the defect or alleged defect relates to safety. These and other claims that the Company faces could be costly to the Company and require substantial management attention. Refer to Note 9 for discussion of warranty claims. The Company insures against product liability claims and except as disclosed below, believes there are no product liability claims as of December 31, 2021 that will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition or cash flows, after considering available insurance coverage. Litigation Certain conditions may exist which could result in a loss, but which will only be resolved when future events occur. The Company, in consultation with its legal counsel, assesses such contingent liabilities, and such assessments inherently involve an exercise of judgment. If the assessment of a contingency indicates that it is probable that a loss has been incurred, the Company accrues for such contingent loss when it can be reasonably estimated. If the assessment indicates that a potentially material loss contingency is not probable but reasonably estimable, or is probable but cannot be estimated, the nature of the contingent liability, together with an estimate of the range of possible loss if determinable and material, is disclosed. If the assessment of a contingency deemed to be both probable and reasonably estimable involves a range of possible losses, the amount within the range that appears at the time to be a better estimate than any other amount within the range would be accrued. When no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, the minimum amount in the range is accrued even though the minimum amount in the range is not necessarily the amount of loss that will be ultimately determined. Estimates of potential legal fees and other directly related costs associated with contingencies are not accrued but rather are expensed as incurred. Except as disclosed below, management does not believe there are any pending claims (asserted or unasserted) that would have a material adverse impact on the Company's results of operations at December 31, 2021. Legal Proceedings Batchelder Matter The Company and its indirect subsidiary Malibu Boats, LLC (“Boats LLC”) are defendants in the product liability case Batchelder et al. v. Malibu Boats, LLC, f/k/a Malibu Boats, Inc.; Malibu Boats West, Inc., et. al., Superior Court of Rabun County, Georgia, Civil Action Case No. 2016-CV-0114-C, brought by, among others, Stephen Paul Batchelder and Margaret Mary Batchelder, and as Administrators of the Estate of Ryan Paul Batchelder, deceased (“Plaintiffs”). Plaintiffs also sued the manufacturer of the boat at issue in the case, Malibu Boats West, Inc. (“West”). West is not, and has never been, a subsidiary of the Company but was a separate legal entity whose assets were purchased by Boats LLC in 2006. The case involves a personal injury accident in 2014 involving a 2000 model year boat that was manufactured by West. On August 28, 2021, the jury rejected the Plaintiffs’ design defect claims and found that the driver of the boat was 75% at fault for the accident. Notwithstanding those findings, the jury found that Boats LLC and West negligently failed to warn of a hazard posed by the relevant boat and that such failure was a proximate cause of the death of the decedent. The jury also found that Boats LLC is a legal successor of, and responsible for the liabilities of, West. The jury awarded compensatory damages of $80 million and apportioned 15% of such damages to Boats LLC and 10% of such damages to West. The jury also awarded $80 million of punitive damages against Boats LLC and $40 million of punitive damages against West. Based on the jury’s finding of successor liability, which Boats LLC contends is erroneous, immediately after the verdict the trial court entered judgment against West and Boats LLC, with a potential maximum liability to Boats LLC of $140 million, plus post-judgment interest. The Plaintiffs have also alleged that they have the right to receive pre-judgment interest and a portion of their attorney fees, which the Company disagrees with and intends to oppose. While the Company and Boats LLC maintain product liability insurance applicable to this case, such insurance coverage may be limited to $26 million. The Company has filed post-trial motions with the trial judge. In addition, the Company intends to appeal in the event that its post-trial motions are unsuccessful. Pending resolution of the post-trial and appeals process, the payment of any damages in this matter is expected to be stayed. Based on the current status of the process, the Company believes a loss is reasonably possible and that the potential range of loss could be from $0 to $140 million, plus post-judgment interest. As noted above, the Plaintiffs have also alleged that they have the right to receive pre-judgment interest and a portion of their attorney fees, which the Company disagrees with and intends to oppose. The Company did not carry a reserve for loss as of December 31, 2021. The Company has been made aware of the potential for additional litigation related to the surviving children involved in the incident. They were plaintiffs in the initial lawsuit, but their claims were dismissed without prejudice prior to the trial in that case. No such litigation has been filed at this time. Skier's Choice Matter On January 12, 2018, the Company filed suit against Skier’s Choice, Inc., or "Skier’s Choice," in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, seeking monetary and injunctive relief. The Company's complaint alleges Skier’s Choice’s infringement of three utility patents - U.S. Patent Nos. 9,260,161, 8,578,873, and 9,199,695 - related to wake surfing technology. Skier’s Choice denied liability arising from the causes of action alleged in the Company's complaint and filed counterclaims alleging invalidity of the asserted patents. On June 19, 2019, the Company filed a second action against Skier’s Choice in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, seeking monetary and injunctive relief. The Company’s complaint alleges Skier’s Choice’s surf systems on its Moomba and Supra lines of boats infringe U.S. Patent No. 10,322,777, a patent related to wake surfing technology. Skier’s Choice denied liability arising from the causes of action alleged in the Company's complaint and filed counterclaims alleging invalidity of the asserted patents. On June 27, 2019, Skier’s Choice filed a motion to consolidate these two actions, and to continue deadlines in the earlier case for nine months, which the Company opposed. On August 22, 2019, the motion for consolidation was referred by Judge Thomas Varlan to Magistrate Judge Bruce Guyton, and the two cases were stayed pending resolution of that motion. On November 27, 2019, Judge Guyton ordered the two cases to be consolidated. On January 7, 2020, the consolidated cases were reassigned to Judge Jon McCalla. On January 23, 2020, Judge McCalla issued a Scheduling Order, scheduling trial on the consolidated cases to begin on September 29, 2020. On July 23, 2020, the Company moved to dismiss its allegations of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,199,695, which Skier’s Choice opposed. On August 25, 2020, Judge McCalla issued a claim construction order and set a scheduling conference for August 27, 2020, for purposes of resetting the pretrial calendar and trial dates. On September 11, 2020, the Court issued a Scheduling Order resetting the trial for the consolidated cases to begin on January 25, 2021. On December 11, 2020, the Court issued an Order resetting the trial for the consolidated cases to begin on May 10, 2021. During the trial, the Court found that Skier’s Choice did not infringe one claim of the ’873 Patent, and also found that Skier’s Choice did infringe one claim of the ’777 Patent. On May 21, 2021, a jury returned a verdict finding that Skier’s Choice did not infringe three claims from the ’777 and ’161 Patents, and also found four claims from the ’777 and ’161 Patents to be invalid. Malibu did not pursue an appeal of the verdict. On June 4, 2021, Skier’s Choice filed a motion seeking an award of attorney’s fees and costs. Malibu opposed Skier’s Choice’s motion.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration