GOODWILL	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2019
Goodwill [Abstract]
Goodwill	NOTE 8 – GOODWILL Goodwill was tested for impairment at the reporting unit level (the Company has determined that it has a single reporting unit) on an annual basis (October 1st) and between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value. As discussed below, during 2017, due to impairment indicators noted in between annual tests, the Company performed impairment testing at September 30, 2017, which replaced its October 1st annual test. In evaluating goodwill for impairment, the Company first assesses qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of its reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Qualitative factors considered include, for example, macroeconomic and industry conditions, overall financial performance and other relevant entity-specific events. If the Company bypasses the qualitative assessment, or concludes that it is more likely than not that the fair value of its reporting unit is less than its carrying value, it then performs a quantitative impairment test to identify potential goodwill impairment and measure the amount of goodwill impairment to be recognized, if any. If the carrying value of the reporting unit’s goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of the goodwill, an impairment loss is recognized in the amount of that excess, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. Due to impairment indicators noted during the third quarter of 2017, specifically the impairment of certain tradenames due to reduced contractual minimums or reduced sales forecasts in key distribution channels, the Company, with the assistance of a third party valuation specialist, performed a quantitative assessment at September 30, 2017, which replaced its October 1st annual test. Fair value for the quantitative assessment was determined under an income approach using estimates of discounted future cash flows. The income approach relies on assumptions such as the Company’s projected future earnings and appropriate discount rates. Significant assumptions used in the income approach were as follows: (i) discount rates; (ii) projected annual revenue growth rates; and (iii) projected long-term growth rates. The Company’s estimates also factor in economic conditions and expectations of management which may change in the future based on period-specific facts and circumstances. The Company corroborated the results of the income approach by reconciling to within a reasonable range of the Company’s market capitalization, (calculated as total common shares outstanding multiplied by the common equity price per share, as adjusted for a control premium factor). The control premium was estimated based upon control premiums observed in comparable market transactions. Reconciling items identified included the benefit of the Company’s fully reserved tax assets for which the market may not have been giving full value and depressed market multiples experienced by the entities within our brand licensing peer group. Based on the results of the quantitative assessment, the Company determined that goodwill was not impaired as of September 30, 2017. Due to additional impairment indicators noted during the fourth quarter of 2017, specifically a sharp and continued decline in its stock price and the related decline in its market capitalization, the Company determined that there was a fourth quarter impairment indicator and a quantitative impairment test was required to be performed at December 31, 2017. During the fourth quarter of 2017, the Company’s stock price and market capitalization declined approximately 41%, consistent with the decline in market capitalization of similar companies in the Company’s sector. The Company evaluated the fair value of its reporting unit under the income approach (in the same manner as noted above in its assessment at September 30, 2017), adjusting its assumptions to reflect additional market risk in the discount rate (from 10.25% to 11.25%), as well as adjusted future effective tax rates, noting that the fair value of its reporting unit indicated by the income approach at December 31, 2017 was no longer in excess of its carrying value. At December 31, 2017, after comparing the results of the income approach to the market capitalization approach, the Company noted it could no longer corroborate the results of the income approach by reconciling to within a reasonable range of the Company’s market capitalization, including an assumed control premium. As discussed above, the two primary differences between the market approach and income approach were determined to be the Company’s fully reserved tax assets, for which the market may not have been giving full value and depressed market multiples experienced by all entities within the brand licensing peer group. The reconciliation was significantly impacted by the decreased market capitalization, as well as the enactment in December 2017 of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which reduced the aforementioned reconciling item for fully reserved tax assets. As such, the Company determined that the value indicated by the market capitalization approach, calculated using the December 31, 2017 closing stock price of $1.78 and an estimated control premium factor of 20%, was the most appropriate measure of the fair value of the Company as of December 31, 2017. Based on this analysis, the fair value of the Company’s single reporting unit was below its carrying value by an amount greater than the carrying value of goodwill, and the Company recorded an impairment charge of $304.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2017 to fully write off its goodwill.

NOTE 8 – GOODWILL

Goodwill was tested for impairment at the reporting unit level (the Company has determined that it has a single reporting unit) on an annual basis (October 1st) and between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value. As discussed below, during 2017, due to impairment indicators noted in between annual tests, the Company performed impairment testing at September 30, 2017, which replaced its October 1st annual test. In evaluating goodwill for impairment, the Company first assesses qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of its reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Qualitative factors considered include, for example, macroeconomic and industry conditions, overall financial performance and other relevant entity-specific events. If the Company bypasses the qualitative assessment, or concludes that it is more likely than not that the fair value of its reporting unit is less than its carrying value, it then performs a quantitative impairment test to identify potential goodwill impairment and measure the amount of goodwill impairment to be recognized, if any. If the carrying value of the reporting unit’s goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of the goodwill, an impairment loss is recognized in the amount of that excess, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill.

Due to impairment indicators noted during the third quarter of 2017, specifically the impairment of certain tradenames due to reduced contractual minimums or reduced sales forecasts in key distribution channels, the Company, with the assistance of a third party valuation specialist, performed a quantitative assessment at September 30, 2017, which replaced its October 1st annual test. Fair value for the quantitative assessment was determined under an income approach using estimates of discounted future cash flows. The income approach relies on assumptions such as the Company’s projected future earnings and appropriate discount rates.

Significant assumptions used in the income approach were as follows: (i) discount rates; (ii) projected annual revenue growth rates; and (iii) projected long-term growth rates. The Company’s estimates also factor in economic conditions and expectations of management which may change in the future based on period-specific facts and circumstances. The Company corroborated the results of the income approach by reconciling to within a reasonable range of the Company’s market capitalization, (calculated as total common shares outstanding multiplied by the common equity price per share, as adjusted for a control premium factor). The control premium was estimated based upon control premiums observed in comparable market transactions. Reconciling items identified included the benefit of the Company’s fully reserved tax assets for which the market may not have been giving full value and depressed market multiples experienced by the entities within our brand licensing peer group. Based on the results of the quantitative assessment, the Company determined that goodwill was not impaired as of September 30, 2017.

Due to additional impairment indicators noted during the fourth quarter of 2017, specifically a sharp and continued decline in its stock price and the related decline in its market capitalization, the Company determined that there was a fourth quarter impairment indicator and a quantitative impairment test was required to be performed at December 31, 2017. During the fourth quarter of 2017, the Company’s stock price and market capitalization declined approximately 41%, consistent with the decline in market capitalization of similar companies in the Company’s sector. The Company evaluated the fair value of its reporting unit under the income approach (in the same manner as noted above in its assessment at September 30, 2017), adjusting its assumptions to reflect additional market risk in the discount rate (from 10.25% to 11.25%), as well as adjusted future effective tax rates, noting that the fair value of its reporting unit indicated by the income approach at December 31, 2017 was no longer in excess of its carrying value.

At December 31, 2017, after comparing the results of the income approach to the market capitalization approach, the Company noted it could no longer corroborate the results of the income approach by reconciling to within a reasonable range of the Company’s market capitalization, including an assumed control premium. As discussed above, the two primary differences between the market approach and income approach were determined to be the Company’s fully reserved tax assets, for which the market may not have been giving full value and depressed market multiples experienced by all entities within the brand licensing peer group. The reconciliation was significantly impacted by the decreased market capitalization, as well as the enactment in December 2017 of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which reduced the aforementioned reconciling item for fully reserved tax assets. As such, the Company determined that the value indicated by the market capitalization approach, calculated using the December 31, 2017 closing stock price of $1.78 and an estimated control premium factor of 20%, was the most appropriate measure of the fair value of the Company as of December 31, 2017. Based on this analysis, the fair value of the Company’s single reporting unit was below its carrying value by an amount greater than the carrying value of goodwill, and the Company recorded an impairment charge of $304.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2017 to fully write off its goodwill.