Commitments And Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments And Contingencies	8. Commitments and Contingencies In lieu of paying maintenance fees for unsold VOI inventory, we provide subsidies to certain HOAs to provide funds to operate and maintain vacation ownership properties in excess of assessments collected from owners of the VOIs. During the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, we made payments related to such subsidies of $2.2 million and $1.7 million, respectively. As of September 30, 2018, we were providing subsidies to ten HOAs and had $6.2 million accrued for such subsidies, which is included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheet as of such date herein. As of December 31, 2017, we had no accrued liabilities for such subsidies. In September 2017, we entered into an agreement with a former executive in connection with his retirement. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, we agreed to make payments totaling approximately $2.9 million through March 2019. As of September 30, 2018, $1.2 million remained payable under this agreement. Also, during the second half of 2017, we commenced an initiative designed to streamline our operations in certain areas to facilitate future growth. Such initiative resulted in $5.8 million of severance accrued as of December 31, 2017 and $0.4 million accrued as of September 30, 2018. Such amounts are included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheets herein. In March 2018, our Compensation Committee approved in principle the material terms of an Executive Leadership Incentive Plan (the “ELIP”), which provides for the grant of cash-settled performance units (“Performance Units”) and cash-settled stock appreciation rights (“SARs”) to participants in the ELIP. It is contemplated that each participant will be granted award opportunities representing a percentage of his or her base salary (the “Target LTI”). In the case of certain of our executive officers, the award will be divided 30% to SARs and 70% to Performance Units. For other participants, including certain of our senior vice presidents, certain vice presidents and certain other employees, the award will be 100% in Performance Units. Performance Units will represent the right of the recipient to receive a cash payment based on the achievement of levels of EBITDA and return on invested capital (“ROIC”) during a two-year period. SARs granted under the ELIP, upon exercise after vesting, will entitle the holder to a cash payment in an amount equal to the excess of the market price of our common stock on the date of exercise over the exercise price of the SAR. The SARs will vest in equal annual installments on the first, second and third anniversary of the date of grant and have a five-year term. In March 2018, our Compensation Committee approved grants of 639,643 SARs at an exercise price of $19.72 per share to certain of our officers, as well as Performance Units to receive up to approximately $7.4 million in 2020, depending on actual results from the two years ending December 31, 2019. As of September 30, 2018, we had $3.7 million accrued for the ELIP included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheet. In the ordinary course of business, we become subject to claims or proceedings from time to time relating to the purchase, sale, marketing, or financing of VOIs or our other business activities. Additionally, from time to time in the ordinary course of business, we become involved in disputes with existing and former employees, vendors, taxing jurisdictions and various other parties, and we also receive individual consumer complaints, as well as complaints received through regulatory and consumer agencies, including Offices of State Attorneys General. We take these matters seriously and attempt to resolve any such issues as they arise. Reserves are accrued for matters in which management believes it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. Management does not believe that the aggregate liability relating to known contingencies in excess of the aggregate amounts accrued will have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition. However, litigation is inherently uncertain and the actual costs of resolving legal claims, including awards of damages, may be substantially higher than the amounts accrued for these claims and may have a material adverse impact on our results of operations or financial condition. Management is not at this time able to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to matters in which it is reasonably possible that a loss will occur. In certain matters, management is unable to estimate the loss or reasonable range of loss until additional developments provide information sufficient to support an assessment of the loss or range of loss. Frequently in these matters, the claims are broad, and the plaintiffs have not quantified or factually supported their claim. On August 24, 2016, Whitney Paxton and Jeff Reeser filed a lawsuit against Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited, Inc. (“BVU”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, and certain of its employees, seeking to establish a class action of former and current employees of BVU and alleging violations of plaintiffs’ rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (the “FLSA”) and breach of contract. The lawsuit also claims that the defendants terminated plaintiff Whitney Paxton as retaliation for her complaints about alleged violations of the FLSA. The lawsuit seeks damages in the amount of the unpaid compensation owed to the plaintiffs. During July 2017, a magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation that the plaintiffs’ motion to conditionally certify collective action and facilitate notice to potential class members be granted with respect to certain employees and denied as to others. During September 2017, the judge accepted the recommendation and granted preliminary approval of class certification. Based on that conditional class certification, all potential class members were provided Consent Forms to opt-in to the lawsuit, which opt-in period has since expired, and a set number of opt-ins has been determined (approximately 80). Class-wide discovery was subsequently served and plaintiffs filed a Motion for Protective Order which is pending. We intend to seek to compel 59 of the currently named opt-in plaintiffs to submit their respective claims to arbitration on an individual basis. We believe that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action. On September 22, 2017, Stephen Potje, Tamela Potje, Sharon Davis, Beafus Davis, Matthew Baldwin, Tammy Baldwin, Arnor Lee, Angela Lee, Gretchen Brown, Paul Brown, Jeremy Estrada, Emily Estrada, Michael Oliver, Carrie Oliver, Russell Walters, Elaine Walters, and Mike Ericson, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, filed a purported class action lawsuit against us which asserted claims for alleged violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and the Florida False Advertising Law. In the complaint, the plaintiffs alleged the making of false representations in connection with our sales of VOIs, including representations regarding the ability to use points for stays or other experiences with other vacation providers, the ability to cancel VOI purchases and receive a refund of the purchase price and the ability to roll over unused points, and that annual maintenance fees would not increase. The complaint sought to establish a class of consumers who, since the beginning of the applicable statute of limitations, purchased VOIs from us, had their annual maintenance fees relating to our VOIs increased, or were unable to roll over their unused points to the next calendar year. The plaintiffs sought damages in the amount alleged to have been improperly obtained by us, as well as any statutory enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and equitable and injunctive relief. On November 20, 2017, we moved to dismiss the complaint and, in response, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint dropping the claims relating to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and adding claims for fraud in the inducement and violation of the Florida Vacation Plan and Timesharing Act. On March 20, 2018, the plaintiffs withdrew their motion for class action certification and on March 23, 2018, the court ordered dismissal of the suit. On April 24, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a new lawsuit against BVU, for substantially the same claims, but only on behalf of the 18 named individuals and not as a class action. We believe that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action. On January 4, 2018, Gordon Siu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a lawsuit against BVU and Choice Hotels International, Inc. which asserted claims for alleged violations of California law that relates to the recording of telephone conversations with consumers. Plaintiff alleges that after staying at a Choice Hotels resort, defendants placed a telemarketing call to plaintiff to sell the Choice Hotels customer loyalty program and a vacation package at a Choice hotel via the Bluegreen Getaways vacation package program. Plaintiff alleges that he was not timely informed that the phone conversation was being recorded and is seeking certification of a class comprised of other persons recorded on calls without their consent within one year before the filing of the original complaint. After BVU moved to dismiss the complaint, plaintiff amended his complaint to dismiss one of the two causes of action in the original complaint on the basis that that particular statute only concerns land line phones. Plaintiff and Choice agreed to a confidential settlement and Choice has been dismissed from this lawsuit. Plaintiff seeks money damages and injunctive relief. We believe the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action. On May 3, 2018, Katja Anderson and George Galloway, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, filed a lawsuit against us which asserted violations of the Telephone Consumer Practices Act. The plaintiffs claimed that they received multiple telemarketing calls in the spring of 2015 despite their requests not to be called. Plaintiffs sought certification of a class of individuals in the United States who received more than one telephone call made by us or on our behalf within a 12-month period; to a telephone number that was registered with the National Do Not Call Registry for at least 30 days. Plaintiffs sought money damages, attorneys’ fees and a court order requiring us to cease all unsolicited telephone calling activities. We moved to dismiss the lawsuit and, on August 13, 2018, this case was dismissed without prejudice. On June 28, 2018, Melissa S. Landon, Edward P. Landon, Shane Auxier and Mu Hpare, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a purported class action lawsuit against the Company and BVU asserting claims for alleged violations of the Wisconsin Timeshare Act, Wisconsin law prohibiting illegal referral selling, and Wisconsin law prohibiting illegal attorney’s fee provisions. Plaintiffs allegations include that we failed to disclose the identity of the seller of real property at the beginning of its initial contact with the purchaser; that we misrepresented who the seller of the real property was; that we misrepresented the buyer’s right to cancel; that we included an illegal attorney’s fee provision in the sales document(s); that we offered an illegal “today only” incentive to purchase; and that we utilize an illegal referral selling program to induce the sale of VOIs. Plaintiffs seek certification of a class consisting of all persons who, in Wisconsin, purchased from us one or more VOIs within six years prior to the filing of this lawsuit. Plaintiffs seek statutory damages, attorneys’ fees and injunctive relief. We believe the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action. Commencing in 2015, it came to our attention that our collection efforts with respect to our VOI notes receivable were being impacted by a then emerging, industry-wide trend involving the receipt of “cease and desist” letters from attorneys and timeshare exit companies purporting to represent certain VOI owners. Following receipt of these letters, we are unable to contact the owners unless allowed by law. We believe these attorneys and timeshare exit companies have encouraged such owners to become delinquent and ultimately default on their obligations and that such actions and our inability to contact the owners are a primary contributor to the increase in our annual default rates. Our average annual default rates have increased from 6.9% in 2015 to 8.4% in 2018. We also estimate that approximately 16.8% of the total delinquencies on our VOI notes receivable as of September 30, 2018 related to VOI notes receivable subject to these letters. We have in a number of cases pursued, and we may in the future pursue, legal action against the VOI owners. We have an exclusive marketing agreement with Bass Pro, a nationally-recognized retailer of fishing, marine, hunting, camping and sports gear, that provides us with the right to market and sell vacation packages at kiosks in each of Bass Pro’s retail locations and through certain other means. As of September 30, 2018, we were selling vacation packages in 69 of Bass Pro’s stores. We compensate Bass Pro based on VOI sales generated through the program. No compensation is paid to Bass Pro under the agreement on sales made at Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations’ resorts. During the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, VOI sales to prospects and leads generated by the agreement with Bass Pro accounted for approximately 14% and 15%, respectively, of our VOI sales volume. On October 9, 2017, Bass Pro advised us that it believed the amounts paid to it as VOI sales commissions should not have been adjusted for certain purchaser defaults. We previously had informed Bass Pro that the aggregate amount of such adjustments for defaults charged back to Bass Pro between January 2008 and June 2017 totaled approximately $4.8 million. While we believed and continue to believe that these adjustments were appropriate and consistent with both the terms and the intent of the agreements with Bass Pro, in October 2017, in order to demonstrate our good faith, we paid the amount at issue to Bass Pro pending future resolution of the matter. We have continued to make payments to Bass Pro as we believe appropriate and consistent with the agreements, which continue to be adjusted for defaults and Bass Pro has accepted these payments as historically calculated. Subsequently, and again more recently, Bass Pro has raised issues regarding adjustments for defaults and requested additional information regarding the calculation of commissions payable to Bass Pro and other amounts payable under the agreements, including reimbursements paid to us, as well as regarding the operations at Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations. We do not believe that the issues raised by Bass Pro have impacted current operations under the marketing agreement or relative to Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations. We have formally responded to Bass Pro with our view on these matters and intend to provide Bass Pro with all appropriately requested information. Our agreements with Bass Pro provide that in the event of any dispute the CEOs of the companies will meet to work toward a resolution of the issues or disagreements between the parties. Accordingly, it is anticipated that such process will be followed in good faith and that the parties will appropriately resolve any issues. While we do not believe that any material additional amounts are due to Bass Pro as a result of these matters, our future results may be impacted by any change in the calculations utilized in connection with payments or reimbursements required under the agreements or if we are unable to resolve the issue.

8. Commitments and Contingencies

In lieu of paying maintenance fees for unsold VOI inventory, we provide subsidies to certain HOAs to provide funds to operate and maintain vacation ownership properties in excess of assessments collected from owners of the VOIs. During the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, we made payments related to such subsidies of $2.2 million and $1.7 million, respectively. As of September 30, 2018, we were providing subsidies to ten HOAs and had $6.2 million accrued for such subsidies, which is included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheet as of such date herein. As of December 31, 2017, we had no accrued liabilities for such subsidies.

In September 2017, we entered into an agreement with a former executive in connection with his retirement. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, we agreed to make payments totaling approximately $2.9 million through March 2019. As of September 30, 2018, $1.2 million remained payable under this agreement. Also, during the second half of 2017, we commenced an initiative designed to streamline our operations in certain areas to facilitate future growth. Such initiative resulted in $5.8 million of severance accrued as of December 31, 2017 and $0.4 million accrued as of September 30, 2018. Such amounts are included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheets herein.

In March 2018, our Compensation Committee approved in principle the material terms of an Executive Leadership Incentive Plan (the “ELIP”), which provides for the grant of cash-settled performance units (“Performance Units”) and cash-settled stock appreciation rights (“SARs”) to participants in the ELIP. It is contemplated that each participant will be granted award opportunities representing a percentage of his or her base salary (the “Target LTI”). In the case of certain of our executive officers, the award will be divided 30% to SARs and 70% to Performance Units. For other participants, including certain of our senior vice presidents, certain vice presidents and certain other employees, the award will be 100% in Performance Units. Performance Units will represent the right of the recipient to receive a cash payment based on the achievement of levels of EBITDA and return on invested capital (“ROIC”) during a two-year period. SARs granted under the ELIP, upon exercise after vesting, will entitle the holder to a cash payment in an amount equal to the excess of the market price of our common stock on the date of exercise over the exercise price of the SAR. The SARs will vest in equal annual installments on the first, second and third anniversary of the date of grant and have a five-year term. In March 2018, our Compensation Committee approved grants of 639,643 SARs at an exercise price of $19.72 per share to certain of our officers, as well as Performance Units to receive up to approximately $7.4 million in 2020, depending on actual results from the two years ending December 31, 2019. As of September 30, 2018, we had $3.7 million accrued for the ELIP included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheet.

In the ordinary course of business, we become subject to claims or proceedings from time to time relating to the purchase, sale, marketing, or financing of VOIs or our other business activities. Additionally, from time to time in the ordinary course of business, we become involved in disputes with existing and former employees, vendors, taxing jurisdictions and various other parties, and we also receive individual consumer complaints, as well as complaints received through regulatory and consumer agencies, including Offices of State Attorneys General. We take these matters seriously and attempt to resolve any such issues as they arise.

Reserves are accrued for matters in which management believes it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. Management does not believe that the aggregate liability relating to known contingencies in excess of the aggregate amounts accrued will have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition. However, litigation is inherently uncertain and the actual costs of resolving legal claims, including awards of damages, may be substantially higher than the amounts accrued for these claims and may have a material adverse impact on our results of operations or financial condition.

Management is not at this time able to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to matters in which it is reasonably possible that a loss will occur. In certain matters, management is unable to estimate the loss or reasonable range of loss until additional developments provide information sufficient to support an assessment of the loss or range of loss. Frequently in these matters, the claims are broad, and the plaintiffs have not quantified or factually supported their claim.

On August 24, 2016, Whitney Paxton and Jeff Reeser filed a lawsuit against Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited, Inc. (“BVU”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, and certain of its employees, seeking to establish a class action of former and current employees of BVU and alleging violations of plaintiffs’ rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (the “FLSA”) and breach of contract. The lawsuit also claims that the defendants terminated plaintiff Whitney Paxton as retaliation for her complaints about alleged violations of the FLSA. The lawsuit seeks damages in the amount of the unpaid compensation owed to the plaintiffs. During July 2017, a magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation that the plaintiffs’ motion to conditionally certify collective action and facilitate notice to potential class members be granted with respect to certain employees and denied as to others. During September 2017, the judge accepted the recommendation and granted preliminary approval of class certification. Based on that conditional class certification, all potential class members were provided Consent Forms to opt-in to the lawsuit, which opt-in period has since expired, and a set number of opt-ins has been determined (approximately 80). Class-wide discovery was subsequently served and plaintiffs filed a Motion for Protective Order which is pending. We intend to seek to compel 59 of the currently named opt-in plaintiffs to submit their respective claims to arbitration on an individual basis. We believe that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action.

On September 22, 2017, Stephen Potje, Tamela Potje, Sharon Davis, Beafus Davis, Matthew Baldwin, Tammy Baldwin, Arnor Lee, Angela Lee, Gretchen Brown, Paul Brown, Jeremy Estrada, Emily Estrada, Michael Oliver, Carrie Oliver, Russell Walters, Elaine Walters, and Mike Ericson, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, filed a purported class action lawsuit against us which asserted claims for alleged violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and the Florida False Advertising Law. In the complaint, the plaintiffs alleged the making of false representations in connection with our sales of VOIs, including representations regarding the ability to use points for stays or other experiences with other vacation providers, the ability to cancel VOI purchases and receive a refund of the purchase price and the ability to roll over unused points, and that annual maintenance fees would not increase. The complaint sought to establish a class of consumers who, since the beginning of the applicable statute of limitations, purchased VOIs from us, had their annual maintenance fees relating to our VOIs increased, or were unable to roll over their unused points to the next calendar year. The plaintiffs sought damages in the amount alleged to have been improperly obtained by us, as well as any statutory enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and equitable and injunctive relief. On November 20, 2017, we moved to dismiss the complaint and, in response, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint dropping the claims relating to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and adding claims for fraud in the inducement and violation of the Florida Vacation Plan and Timesharing Act. On March 20, 2018, the plaintiffs withdrew their motion for class action certification and on March 23, 2018, the court ordered dismissal of the suit. On April 24, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a new lawsuit against BVU, for substantially the same claims, but only on behalf of the 18 named individuals and not as a class action. We believe that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action.

On January 4, 2018, Gordon Siu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a lawsuit against BVU and Choice Hotels International, Inc. which asserted claims for alleged violations of California law that relates to the recording of telephone conversations with consumers. Plaintiff alleges that after staying at a Choice Hotels resort, defendants placed a telemarketing call to plaintiff to sell the Choice Hotels customer loyalty program and a vacation package at a Choice hotel via the Bluegreen Getaways vacation package program. Plaintiff alleges that he was not timely informed that the phone conversation was being recorded and is seeking certification of a class comprised of other persons recorded on calls without their consent within one year before the filing of the original complaint. After BVU moved to dismiss the complaint, plaintiff amended his complaint to dismiss one of the two causes of action in the original complaint on the basis that that particular statute only concerns land line phones. Plaintiff and Choice agreed to a confidential settlement and Choice has been dismissed from this lawsuit. Plaintiff seeks money damages and injunctive relief. We believe the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action.

On May 3, 2018, Katja Anderson and George Galloway, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, filed a lawsuit against us which asserted violations of the Telephone Consumer Practices Act. The plaintiffs claimed that they received multiple telemarketing calls in the spring of 2015 despite their requests not to be called. Plaintiffs sought certification of a class of individuals in the United States who received more than one telephone call made by us or on our behalf within a 12-month period; to a telephone number that was registered with the National Do Not Call Registry for at least 30 days. Plaintiffs sought money damages, attorneys’ fees and a court order requiring us to cease all unsolicited telephone calling activities. We moved to dismiss the lawsuit and, on August 13, 2018, this case was dismissed without prejudice.

On June 28, 2018, Melissa S. Landon, Edward P. Landon, Shane Auxier and Mu Hpare, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a purported class action lawsuit against the Company and BVU asserting claims for alleged violations of the Wisconsin Timeshare Act, Wisconsin law prohibiting illegal referral selling, and Wisconsin law prohibiting illegal attorney’s fee provisions. Plaintiffs allegations include that we failed to disclose the identity of the seller of real property at the beginning of its initial contact with the purchaser; that we misrepresented who the seller of the real property was; that we misrepresented the buyer’s right to cancel; that we included an illegal attorney’s fee provision in the sales document(s); that we offered an illegal “today only” incentive to purchase; and that we utilize an illegal referral selling program to induce the sale of VOIs. Plaintiffs seek certification of a class consisting of all persons who, in Wisconsin, purchased from us one or more VOIs within six years prior to the filing of this lawsuit. Plaintiffs seek statutory damages, attorneys’ fees and injunctive relief. We believe the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action.

Commencing in 2015, it came to our attention that our collection efforts with respect to our VOI notes receivable were being impacted by a then emerging, industry-wide trend involving the receipt of “cease and desist” letters from attorneys and timeshare exit companies purporting to represent certain VOI owners. Following receipt of these letters, we are unable to contact the owners unless allowed by law. We believe these attorneys and timeshare exit companies have encouraged such owners to become delinquent and ultimately default on their obligations and that such actions and our inability to contact the owners are a primary contributor to the increase in our annual default rates. Our average annual default rates have increased from 6.9% in 2015 to 8.4% in 2018. We also estimate that approximately 16.8% of the total delinquencies on our VOI notes receivable as of September 30, 2018 related to VOI notes receivable subject to these letters. We have in a number of cases pursued, and we may in the future pursue, legal action against the VOI owners.

We have an exclusive marketing agreement with Bass Pro, a nationally-recognized retailer of fishing, marine, hunting, camping and sports gear, that provides us with the right to market and sell vacation packages at kiosks in each of Bass Pro’s retail locations and through certain other means. As of September 30, 2018, we were selling vacation packages in 69 of Bass Pro’s stores. We compensate Bass Pro based on VOI sales generated through the program. No compensation is paid to Bass Pro under the agreement on sales made at Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations’ resorts. During the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, VOI sales to prospects and leads generated by the agreement with Bass Pro accounted for approximately 14% and 15%, respectively, of our VOI sales volume. On October 9, 2017, Bass Pro advised us that it believed the amounts paid to it as VOI sales commissions should not have been adjusted for certain purchaser defaults. We previously had informed Bass Pro that the aggregate amount of such adjustments for defaults charged back to Bass Pro between January 2008 and June 2017 totaled approximately $4.8 million. While we believed and continue to believe that these adjustments were appropriate and consistent with both the terms and the intent of the agreements with Bass Pro, in October 2017, in order to demonstrate our good faith, we paid the amount at issue to Bass Pro pending future resolution of the matter. We have continued to make payments to Bass Pro as we believe appropriate and consistent with the agreements, which continue to be adjusted for defaults and Bass Pro has accepted these payments as historically calculated. Subsequently, and again more recently, Bass Pro has raised issues regarding adjustments for defaults and requested additional information regarding the calculation of commissions payable to Bass Pro and other amounts payable under the agreements, including reimbursements paid to us, as well as regarding the operations at Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations. We do not believe that the issues raised by Bass Pro have impacted current operations under the marketing agreement or relative to Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations. We have formally responded to Bass Pro with our view on these matters and intend to provide Bass Pro with all appropriately requested information. Our agreements with Bass Pro provide that in the event of any dispute the CEOs of the companies will meet to work toward a resolution of the issues or disagreements between the parties. Accordingly, it is anticipated that such process will be followed in good faith and that the parties will appropriately resolve any issues. While we do not believe that any material additional amounts are due to Bass Pro as a result of these matters, our future results may be impacted by any change in the calculations utilized in connection with payments or reimbursements required under the agreements or if we are unable to resolve the issue.