đź’ŞCan You Spot Me, Bro? Part II.đź’Ş

🏋️‍♂️New Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Filing - Town Sports International LLC🏋️‍♂️

In Sunday’s Members’-only briefing, we discussed the plight of brick-and-mortar gyms. As anticipated, on Monday, Town Sports International LLC, the company behind, among other brands, Johnny’s beloved New York Sports Club, filed for bankruptcy in the District of Delaware (along with 161 affiliates, the “debtors”). Pre-COVID, the debtors employed 9,200 people and serviced over 605,000 members across 183 locations primarily in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions — proof-positive, given the disturbing lack of cleanliness Johnny experienced at those hell holes, of why this country is so susceptible to a pandemic.

Jokes (“jokes”) aside, this is, no doubt, in large part a COVID story. COVID shut down gyms, COVID spikes delayed re-openings, COVID has customers skittish about returning, and COVID is causing a complete re-evaluation of what it means to provide fitness services to customers while keeping them safe. The latter part has culminated in the debtors’ “COVID Plan,” which, in turn, translates into “…significant costs related to increased training, more comprehensive cleaning, disinfecting, and health screening protocols, and enhanced facilities maintenance.” It also means “…modifying activities, restricting programs, adjusting hours of operation, travel restrictions, telecommuting opportunities and virtual communication platforms.” And so it’s a pretty rudimentary calculus: customer revenues (and satisfaction) ⬇️ + operating expenses ⬆️. With no options for revenue generation and few reasons for optimism, the debtors spent the last few months trying to navigate its expenses and carve a path forward: they fired thousands of people; they negotiated with their landlords; they engaged their lenders and third parties on strategic alternatives. None of it could stave off bankruptcy.

Bankruptcy avails the debtors of two very powerful tools. First, in light of failed negotiations with landlords over lease concessions, they can use section 365 of the bankruptcy code as a hammer and reject those leases and free themselves from ongoing obligations thereunder (relegating the landlords to general unsecured creditors which, per an absolute priority waterfall, puts them behind senior lenders but in front of the equity for any recovery coming out of the bankrupt “estate”). The debtors already have a motion on file seeking to reject 35 leases.

Second, bankruptcy code section 364 can confer certain benefits upon lenders willing to provide new financing — including, among other things, “priming” of pre-petition debt and super-priority lien and claim status. The debtors go into the bankruptcy with approximately $167.5mm of funded secured debt, inclusive of accrued and unpaid interest: $12.5mm under a revolver that matured on August 14, 2020 and $155mm under a term loan facility that matures on November 15, 2020. Behind that, they have approximately $74mm in outstanding trade and other unsecured liability. Given its liquidity challenges, the debtors have spent the last several months trying to find new financing alternatives while parallel-pathing a potential sale of substantially all of their assets.

Two options emerged. Pre-petition lender Kennedy Lewis Investment Management LLC, a middle-market focused opportunistic credit investor,* owns over 45% of the total amount of pre-petition secured debt and offered a $80mm DIP credit facility and expressed a desire to credit bid its debt for the debtors’ assets. The other lenders, however, said “thanks but no thanks,” blocking this proposal purportedly because the credit bid component wouldn’t lead to a suitable recover for them to (PETITION Note: at the time of this writing, the loan is quoted at or around 16.5 cents on the dollar). Rather, those other lenders — which, significantly, account for the majority needed to consent to priming liens â€” currently support a third-party proposal from private equity firm, Tacit Capital.** That proposal involves a (i) $17.5mm DIP, (ii) commitment for an additional $47.5mm in exit financing and (iii) credit bidding their debt.

And so you have a lender game of chicken.

Or so they say. But they’re not exactly staying neutral here. They also say they believe the KLIM proposal is the better one. It provides more liquidity; it provides for the potential assumption and assignment of 94 of the debtors’ leases — a greater number than that contemplated by Tacit Capital and the other lenders. That would, obviously, preserve more jobs, tax revenue, yada yada yada. So they need KLIM and the other lenders to come together and kumbaya around a go-forward plan. The debtors indicate that discussions are ongoing and the debtors have established a special committee of independent directors to help facilitate.

Wait. Hold on. This is bankruptcy so of course there have to be allegations of shady-a$$ sh*t transpiring. In fact, an ad hoc group of “other” lenders allege that attempts to discuss and negotiate have been rejected by the debtors; they allege that this is an inside job by KLIM (which also happens to be a large shareholder) and board member Kennedy Lewis himself; and they assert that this is all supported by the debtors. In a response to the cash collateral motion, they wrote:

…after months of the Ad Hoc Term Lender Group trying to bring the Debtors to the table, this filing makes clear what we suspected all along—the Debtors never had any real intention of providing access to information, running a marketing process, or reaching out to third parties. Instead, the Debtors have been solely focused on pursuing a deal with Kennedy Lewis Investment Management, LLC (“Kennedy Lewis”), the second largest shareholder of the Debtors’ parent entity (“Parent”) at 14.1%, which contemplates a priming debtor in possession (“DIP”) financing facility and a sale transaction pursuant to a credit bid. Based on currently available information, the Kennedy Lewis deal would then provide the shareholders of the Parent with a material recovery by virtue of a post-sale merger whereby certain non-Debtor entities (the “Unrestricted Group”) owned by the Parent would be merged with the reorganized Debtors in exchange for providing the Parent shareholders with a material percentage of the overall reorganized Debtor equity, all while the existing lenders would receive little or no recovery.

They continue:

The largest shareholder of the Parent is Patrick Walsh, the Debtors’ Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Parent board of directors (the “Board”). The second largest shareholder of the Parent is Kennedy Lewis itself. The conflict of interest here is clear and explains the Debtors’ insistence on preventing third parties from accessing information, failing to run any kind of sales or marketing process, and continuing to insist that the non-consensual Kennedy Lewis transaction is in the best interests of the Debtors and their estates.

Which explains the appointment of the independent directors. This potential “conflict of interest” wasn’t entirely clear from the debtors’ papers.

So the upshot is that the debtors do not have a definitive DIP, do not have a stalking horse purchaser and, for now, don’t even have consent to use the lenders’ cash collateral. Good times. To make matters worse, the ad hoc group foreshadows dark times ahead if these issues aren’t resolved pronto:

While the Ad Hoc Term Lender Group is working with the Debtors on the terms of a limited duration, consensual cash collateral order, this is a short-term bandage for a much larger problem—the Debtors need a new source of capital. The Debtors’ budget demonstrates that they cannot run these chapter 11 cases on the use of cash collateral only.

While all of that fun stuff is happening behind the scenes, gym-goers are looking at all of this and wondering “WTF.” They were outraged to see charges in March and April for their gym fees while clubs were closed. The subsequent social media backlash caught the attention of New York Attorney General Letitia James, who forced the gym operator to temporarily stop charging members and introduce flexible cancellation policies. Recently, Bloomberg reported that the debtors billed their members for full September dues despite the gyms’ limited operating hours and reduced capacity. 

Members are pissed; they’re staring down the barrel of paying effectively the same amount going forward for fewer fitness services and more administrative hassle to get through the door; they’re requesting credits and refunds. Clearly this is credit negative for the business.

As part of their motion seeking the ability to continue various customer programs, the debtors indirectly acknowledge these challenges:

The Debtors do not issue any cash payments on account of the Member Satisfaction Credits, and estimate that approximately $1.9 million worth of Member Satisfaction Credits have accrued, but not been applied, as of the Petition Date.

Particularly following the onset of COVID-19, certain customers may hold contingent claims against the Debtors for refunds and other credit balances (collectively, the “Refunds”). In addition, certain customers may dispute certain charges with their credit card issuer, and the Debtors may be obligated to refund to such issuer the disputed amounts, subject to certain adjustments (the “Chargebacks”). As of the Petition Date, the Debtors estimate that approximately $225,000 is owed and outstanding on account of the Refunds and Chargebacks, respectively. This estimate does not include additional Refunds or Chargebacks that relate to the prepetition period, but which have not yet been requested. The Debtors believe that the increase in customer loyalty generated by the Refunds and Chargebacks far outweighs the costs thereof. Accordingly, the Debtors seek authority to continue to issue Refunds and Chargebacks, in their discretion, in the ordinary course of business, whether related to payments made before or after the Petition Date.

If the above doesn’t make this clear, members ought to be sure to affirmatively request a refund. Even better to request the refund from the debtors while also initiating a process with credit card companies.

Finally, there’s the employees. As of the petition date, the employee ranks are down to 2,169 people. That’s a 7,000 employee reduction! What was once a $5.6mm bi-weekly payroll dropped down to $1.2mm over the last three months and is expected to recover less than halfway to $2.5mm. This demonstrates in real quantifiable terms the impact of COVID.

So we are left with two big questions.

Will the parties come to an agreement such that Town Sports will be able to avoid liquidation?

And given the wave of gyms that have capitulated into bankruptcy to this point, are there any gyms that can avoid chapter 11?


*KLIM is also the largest creditor of Flywheel Sports Inc., a spin boutique that was once wildly popular. Earlier this year, Town Sports, likely at the behest of KLIM, explored an acquisition of Flywheel. On Monday Flywheel filed a chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding in NY.

**If this name rings a bell, it may be because Tacit Capital was also in the mix to buy Rudy’s Barbershop Holdings, which filed for bankruptcy back in April.

đźš´ Peloton = Gympocalypse? đźš´

The Rise of Peloton, Tonal, Mirror and Other DTC Home Fitness Products (Long Seclusion)

Source: Mirror

Source: Mirror

Back in January we wrote a longform piece about the rise of Peloton. It’s worth revisiting. Subsequently, the at-home fitness space has only gotten more interesting with (i) Peloton’s soon-to-be-released treadmill and (ii) a couple more well-funded startups going after the gym crowd with high-priced at-home apparatuses that give one further incentive to just stay home, never talk to anyone and never do anything outside. Because that's just what we need in today's hyper-polarized environment: more people just scurrying off into their own corners and refusing to deal with and compromise with anyone or anything. And that apparently includes the use of gym equipment.

The New York TimesErin Griffith recently wrote that Tonal and Mirror, two new on-the-wall connected fitness platforms, are…

"…among the first start-ups to pounce on the success of Peloton, a stationary bike start-up that investors recently valued at $4 billion. Peloton blends the hardware of a bike with the software of a video streaming subscription and the content of spin classes. Its skyrocketing growth has made investors wary of missing the next big thing in fitness." 

The next big thing in fitness appears to be a flashy screen, a solid wifi connection, expensive hardware and streaming fitness instruction brought to you by a recurring revenue subscription model. 

Web Smith frames it another way

He writes:

Silicon Valley wants to redefine the fitness membership. Through the adoption of connected devices like the Peloton bike, there’s been an inflection point as consumers seem to be trickling away from the current model. No longer do you have to drive to a place to be in a community. As Americans become more health conscious and driven to maximize performance, the DTC equipment industry is a timely bet on the next generation of  fitness data-driven IoT (internet of things).

He continues:

Whereas the Fitbit-phase of wearables emphasized individual fitness, the next generation of connected devices seem to be incorporating community in ways that could emerge as a challenge to the status quo: community-driven fitness facilities.

And:

By building systems that allow community to be gained outside of physical retail outlets, these tools are aiming to become the new medium for instruction and training.  These internet-enabled equipment manufacturers aren’t just selling plastic and metal, they’re selling virtual community.

He finished by saying:

"...it could spell trouble for your gym. Spin franchises are already beginning to adjust to the threat of Peloton and as the threat of connected cycles continues to grow as also-has brands rise up in the wake of Peloton’s premium pricing."

That sound you may have just heard was the collective moan of mall owners who are increasingly dependent upon gyms to fill space:

Okay, okay, let's dial it down. Peloton has created a luxury brand experience that, it is argued, makes economic sense relative to the long-term economics of attending Flywheel or SoulCycle classes. We're not so sure that translates to other non-niche forms of fitness. Especially at the price-points these companies are touting. 

Apropos, some of the comments to the NYT piece are amusing:

Obviously, these machines are for a niche market where money is irrelevant and style is paramount. Best of luck to them, but I'll stick to the free version...my own body. 

So far the comments are 22-0 against. I wonder if the Tonal can automatically adjust that resistance.

Or, you know, you could just go outside, feel the sun and wind on your back, do some pushups and chinups to feel your own weight against the pull of the Earth, hear nature all around you, talk to a person (gasp!)... 

But then again it's so nice to stare at a screen all day long, so what do I know.

Look for these items in the free piles left curbside after garage sales in about 6 years. 

While we're not necessarily convinced that Tonal and Mirror are the future of fitness, it seems to us that gyms ought to start thinking "omnichannel" like retailers and figure out way to drive more value to customers both in and outside of the gym, during on and off hours. How is it, for instance, that Equinox doesn't have any streaming classes that you can do at home or in your office? 

Whatever happens, expect the area to get more heated as more and more money chases this burgeoning at-home community-based exercise market. Bloomberg already notes that â€śthe treadmill wars are here.” And, Peloton, for instance, is now suing Flywheel for patent infringement. It knows that the at-home fitness opportunity is now. If it can slow down a rival (in advance of an IPO?), all the better.

We asked in January whether Peloton could thrive in a downturn. Now the question is broader: will any of these companies with high-priced hardware be able to survive a downturn?