Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Sep. 30, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies License Agreements The Company enters into license agreements with various licensors of copyrighted and trademarked characters and design in connection with the products that it sells. The agreements generally require royalty payments based on product sales and in some cases may require minimum royalty and other related commitments. Employment Agreements The Company has employment agreements with certain officers. The agreements include, among other things, an annual bonus based on certain performance metrics of the Company, as defined by the board of directors, and up to one year’s severance pay beyond termination date. Debt The Company is party to a New Credit Agreement which includes a New Term Loan Facility and a New Revolving Credit Facility. The Company is also party to an Equipment Finance Loan. See Note 4, Debt. Tax Receivable Agreement The Company is party to the Tax Receivable Agreement that provides for the TRA Payment by the Company to the TRA Parties under certain circumstances. See Note 5, Liabilities under Tax Receivable Agreement. Leases The Company has entered into non-cancellable operating leases for office, warehouse, and distribution facilities, with original lease periods expiring through 2032. Some operating leases also contain the option to renew for five-year periods at prevailing market rates at the time of renewal. In addition to minimum rent, certain of the leases require payment of real estate taxes, insurance, common area maintenance charges, and other executory costs. During the three and nine months ended, we recorded a $6.2 million charge related to the termination of a lease agreement and related expenses, for a lease that had not yet commenced. Legal Contingencies The Company is involved in claims and litigation in the ordinary course of business, some of which seek monetary damages, including claims for punitive damages, which are not covered by insurance. For certain pending matters, accruals have not been established because such matters have not progressed sufficiently through discovery, and/or development of important factual information and legal information is insufficient to enable the Company to estimate a range of possible loss, if any. An adverse determination in one or more of these pending matters could have an adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company is, and may in the future become, subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in or outside the ordinary course of business. For example, several stockholder derivative actions based on the Company’s earnings announcement and Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2019 have been brought on behalf of the Company against certain of its directors and officers. Specifically, on April 23, June 5, and June 10, 2020, the actions captioned Cassella v. Mariotti et al., Evans v. Mariotti et al., and Igelido v. Mariotti et al., respectively, were filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. On July 6, 2020, these three actions were consolidated for all purposes into one action under the title In re Funko, Inc. Derivative Litigation, and on August 13, 2020, the consolidated action was stayed pending final resolution of the motion to dismiss in the Ferreira action. On May 9, 2022, another complaint, asserting substantially similar claims, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, captioned Smith v. Mariotti, et al. On July 5, 2022, two purported stockholders filed an additional derivative action in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, captioned Fletcher, et al. v. Mariotti. The Company has reached a non-monetary settlement in principle in In re Funko, Inc. Derivative Litigation, Smith v. Mariotti, and Fletcher, et al. v. Mariotti and the actions are stayed pending finalization of the settlement. On June 11, 2021, a purported stockholder filed a related derivative action, captioned Silverberg v. Mariotti, et al., in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The Company moved to dismiss the Silverberg complaint on April 3, 2023. Plaintiff responded on May 3, 2023, and briefing was completed on May 18, 2023. The motion remains pending before the Court of Chancery. Additionally, between November 16, 2017 and June 12, 2018, seven purported stockholders of the Company filed putative class action lawsuits in the Superior Court of Washington in and for King County against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, ACON, Fundamental Capital, LLC and Funko International, LLC (collectively, “Fundamental”), the underwriters of its IPO, and certain other defendants. On July 2, 2018, the suits were ordered consolidated for all purposes into one action under the title In re Funko, Inc. Securities Litigation. On August 1, 2018, plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, ACON, Fundamental, and certain other defendants. The Company moved to dismiss twice, and the Court twice granted the Company's motions to dismiss, the second time with prejudice. Plaintiffs appealed, and on November 1, 2021, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s dismissal decision in most respects. On May 4, 2022, the Washington State Supreme Court denied the Company’s petition, and the case was remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings. The Company filed its answer on September 19, 2022 and discovery is currently ongoing. Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification on July 7, 2023, and briefing was completed on the class certification motion on October 25, 2023. On June 4, 2018, a putative class action lawsuit entitled Kanugonda v. Funko, Inc., et al. was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, and certain other defendants. On January 4, 2019, a lead plaintiff was appointed in that case. On April 30, 2019, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint against the previously named defendants. The Company moved to dismiss the Complaint in the federal action, now captioned Berkelhammer v. Funko, Inc. et al., on June 14, 2023. Plaintiff filed an opposition on July 27, 2023, cross moving for an order voluntarily dismissing the action without prejudice so that he can pursue status as a class representative in In re Funko, Inc. Securities Litigation, or in the alternative, a court order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss. Briefing completed on August 18, 2023. On October 13, 2023, the District Court granted plaintiff’s motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice, denied defendants’ motion to dismiss, and dismissed the action. The case in Washington state court alleges that the Company violated Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, by making allegedly materially misleading statements in documents filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the Company’s IPO and by omitting material facts necessary to make the statements made therein not misleading. The lawsuit seeks, among other things, compensatory statutory damages and rescissory damages in account of the consideration paid for the Company’s Class A common stock by the plaintiffs and members of the putative class, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. On January 18, 2022, a purported stockholder filed a putative class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, captioned Shumacher v. Mariotti, et al., relating to the Company’s corporate “Up-C” structure and bringing direct claims for breach of fiduciary duties against certain current and former officers and directors. On March 31, 2022, the defendants moved to dismiss the action. In response to defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on May 25, 2022. The amendment did not materially change the claims at issue, and the Defendants again moved to dismiss on July 29, 2022. On December 15, 2022, Plaintiff opposed the Defendants’ motion to dismiss, and also moved for attorneys’ fees. Briefing on the motion to dismiss was completed on February 8, 2023; briefing on Plaintiff’s fee application was completed on April 6, 2023. The Court heard oral argument on both motions on July 24, 2023. On June 2, 2023, a purported stockholder filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, captioned Studen v. Funko, Inc., et al. The Complaint alleges that the Company and certain individual defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as well as Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making allegedly materially misleading statements in documents filed with the SEC, as well as in earnings calls and presentations to investors, regarding a planned upgrade to its enterprise resource planning system and the relocation of a distribution center, as well as by omitting material facts about the same subjects necessary to make the statements made therein not misleading. The lawsuits seek, among other things, compensatory damages and attorneys’ fees and costs. On August 17, 2023, the Court appointed lead plaintiff, and on October 29, 2023, the parties submitted a joint stipulated scheduling order. Plaintiff’s amended complaint was filed October 19, 2023. The amendment adds additional allegations by including accounts from purported former employees and contractors. Plaintiff seeks to represent a putative class of investors who purchased or acquired Funko common stock between March 3, 2022 and March 1, 2023. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is due December 15, 2023, and the motion will be fully briefed by March 22, 2024. The Company is party to additional legal proceedings incidental to its business. While the outcome of these additional matters could differ from management’s expectations, the Company does not believe that the resolution of such matters is reasonably likely to have a material effect on its results of operations or financial condition.