Note 2 - Loss of a Key Customer and Management's Recovery Plans	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Risks and Uncertainties [Abstract]
Concentration Risk Disclosure [Text Block]	(2) Loss of a Key Customer and Management's Recovery Plans Our supply agreement with Dana Holding Corporation (“Dana”) was originally scheduled to expire on December 31, 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2014, Dana represented approximately 59% of our net revenue. In July 2013, Sypris and Dana signed an amended and restated supply agreement to extend the supply agreement term beyond December 31, 2014, the binding effect of which is currently in dispute. Dana has repudiated this July 2013 agreement, and Dana has ceased ordering any components from us effective December 31, 2014. Sypris disputes Dana’s ability to do so and is seeking to recover its lost margins and additional remedies with respect to the revenues to which Sypris was entitled under the renewed agreement. Dana initiated an ancillary action in Ohio state court challenging the arbitrability of the existence and enforceability of the amended and restated July 2013 supply agreement on January 17, 2014. The parties have conducted discovery, and the Ohio trial court has granted an initial motion for judgment on the pleadings or summary judgment, which Sypris has appealed. If the case goes to trial and if ruled in the Company’s favor, the dispute would revert to the arbitrator to determine damages. The parties have also asserted various damages claims against each other arising out of their prior supply agreement and have sought the assistance of an arbitrator in connection with these disputes. The parties have had an arbitration hearing in January 2015, but the arbitrator has yet to rule. Even if we prevail on the merits in the arbitration or litigation proceedings, there can be no assurance as to the size or timing of any monetary damages awarded. As a result of the dispute with Dana and the loss of the Dana business, the Company has taken significant actions during the fourth quarter of 2014 and the first quarter of 2015, including but not limited to the following: (i) quoting new business opportunities with existing and potential customers resulting from the strength of the commercial vehicle market and a perceived shift in market share among tier one suppliers, (ii) reduced workforce at the locations most impacted by the loss of Dana, (iii) reduced employment costs by reduced work schedules, senior management pay reductions, deferral of merit increases and certain benefit payments, and (iv) utilized labor for preventative maintenance on equipment and facilities, deployment of Toyota Production System and refurbishing the overall appearance of facilities to attract customers. The Company has engaged an investment banking firm to provide financial advisory services in connection with its effort to secure new subordinated debt. The Company has also engaged a commercial real estate firm to provide advisory and brokerage services related to a potential transaction involving certain real property owned by the Company. However, there can be no assurance that our plans to mitigate the loss and to effectively manage our costs during the transition will be successful. Additionally, the Company amended its Credit Facility in March 2015 to support management’s plans and provide liquidity through January 2016. (See Note 12 “Credit Facility” for further discussion on liquidity). As of December 31, 2014, the Company had net accounts receivable and net accounts payable specifically related to Dana of $27,363,000 and $18,912,000, respectively.

Note 2 - Loss of a Key Customer and Management's Recovery Plans

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2014

Concentration Risk Disclosure [Text Block]

(2) Loss of a Key Customer and Management's Recovery Plans

Our supply agreement with Dana Holding Corporation (“Dana”) was originally scheduled to expire on December 31, 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2014, Dana represented approximately 59% of our net revenue.

In July 2013, Sypris and Dana signed an amended and restated supply agreement to extend the supply agreement term beyond December 31, 2014, the binding effect of which is currently in dispute. Dana has repudiated this July 2013 agreement, and Dana has ceased ordering any components from us effective December 31, 2014. Sypris disputes Dana’s ability to do so and is seeking to recover its lost margins and additional remedies with respect to the revenues to which Sypris was entitled under the renewed agreement.

Dana initiated an ancillary action in Ohio state court challenging the arbitrability of the existence and enforceability of the amended and restated July 2013 supply agreement on January 17, 2014. The parties have conducted discovery, and the Ohio trial court has granted an initial motion for judgment on the pleadings or summary judgment, which Sypris has appealed. If the case goes to trial and if ruled in the Company’s favor, the dispute would revert to the arbitrator to determine damages.

The parties have also asserted various damages claims against each other arising out of their prior supply agreement and have sought the assistance of an arbitrator in connection with these disputes. The parties have had an arbitration hearing in January 2015, but the arbitrator has yet to rule. Even if we prevail on the merits in the arbitration or litigation proceedings, there can be no assurance as to the size or timing of any monetary damages awarded.

As a result of the dispute with Dana and the loss of the Dana business, the Company has taken significant actions during the fourth quarter of 2014 and the first quarter of 2015, including but not limited to the following: (i) quoting new business opportunities with existing and potential customers resulting from the strength of the commercial vehicle market and a perceived shift in market share among tier one suppliers, (ii) reduced workforce at the locations most impacted by the loss of Dana, (iii) reduced employment costs by reduced work schedules, senior management pay reductions, deferral of merit increases and certain benefit payments, and (iv) utilized labor for preventative maintenance on equipment and facilities, deployment of Toyota Production System and refurbishing the overall appearance of facilities to attract customers. The Company has engaged an investment banking firm to provide financial advisory services in connection with its effort to secure new subordinated debt. The Company has also engaged a commercial real estate firm to provide advisory and brokerage services related to a potential transaction involving certain real property owned by the Company. However, there can be no assurance that our plans to mitigate the loss and to effectively manage our costs during the transition will be successful. Additionally, the Company amended its Credit Facility in March 2015 to support management’s plans and provide liquidity through January 2016. (See Note 12 “Credit Facility” for further discussion on liquidity).

As of December 31, 2014, the Company had net accounts receivable and net accounts payable specifically related to Dana of $27,363,000 and $18,912,000, respectively.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for any concentrations existing at the date of the financial statements that make an entity vulnerable to a reasonably possible, near-term, severe impact. This disclosure informs financial statement users about the general nature of the risk associated with the concentration, and may indicate the percentage of concentration risk as of the balance sheet date.

+ References+ Details