Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
 
FORM 10-Q
 
 
xQUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013
OR
oTRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from             to             
Commission File No. 001-32697  
 
American Apparel, Inc.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
 

Delaware20-3200601
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
  
747 Warehouse Street, Los Angeles, California90021
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)(Zip Code)
Registrant's Telephone Number, Including area code: (213) 488-0226
 
 
Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes x    No  o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes x    No   o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer” and “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.  
Large accelerated fileroAccelerated filero
    
Non-accelerated filer
o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Smaller reporting companyx
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  o    No  x
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
The number of shares of the registrant's common stock issued and outstanding as of NovemberMay 1, 20122013 was approximately110,035,094110,643,198 and 106,439,304107,763,103.


Table of Contents

AMERICAN APPAREL, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
Item 1.
 
 
 
 
Item 2.
Item 3.
Item 4.
Item 1.
Item 1A.
Item 2.
Item 3.
Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures
Item 5.
Item 6.
 
 

 

2

Table of Contents



Unless the context requires otherwise, all references in this report to the “Company,” “Registrant”, “we,” “our,” and “us” refer to American Apparel, Inc., a Delaware corporation, together with its wholly owned subsidiary, American Apparel (USA), LLC, and its other direct and indirect subsidiaries.
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including the documents incorporated by reference herein, contains forward-looking statements within the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q other than statements of historical fact are “forward-looking statements” for purposes of these provisions. Statements that include the use of terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expects,” “believes,” “plans,” “estimates,” “potential,” or “continue,” or the negative thereof or other and similar expressions are forward-looking statements. In addition, in some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by words or phrases such as “trend,” “potential,” “opportunity,” “believe,” “comfortable,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “current,” “intention,” “estimate,” “position,” “assume,” “outlook,” “continue,” “remain,” “maintain,” “sustain,” “seek,” “achieve,” and similar expressions.
Any statements that refer to projections of our future financial performance, our anticipated growth and trends in our business, our goals, strategies, focuses and plans and other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including statements expressing general expectations or beliefs, whether positive or negative, about future operating results or the development of our products and any statement of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this report may include, without limitation, statements about:
future financial condition and operating results;
our ability to remain in compliance with financial covenants under our financing arrangements;
our ability to extend, renew or refinance our existing debt;
our liquidity operating results and projected cash flows;
our plan to make continued investments in advertising and marketing; 
our growth, expansion and acquisition prospects and strategies, the success of such strategies, and the benefits we believe can be derived from such strategies; 
the outcome of investigations, enforcement actions and litigation matters, including exposure, which could exceed expectations;
our intellectual property rights and those of others, including actual or potential competitors, our personnel, consultants, and collaborators; 
operations outside the United States; 
trends in raw material costs and other costs both in the industry, and specific to the Company;
the supply of raw materials and the effects of supply shortages on our financial condition, and results of operations;
economic and political conditions; 
overall industry and market performance; 
the impact of accounting pronouncements; 
our ability to improve manufacturing efficiency at our production facilities;
management's goals and plans for future operations; and 
other assumptions described in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q underlying or relating to any forward-looking statements.

The forward-looking statements in this report speak only as of the date of this report and caution should be taken not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, which are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. Forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, events, risks, uncertainties and other factors, including those that may be outside of our control and that change over time. As a result, actual results and/or the timing of events could differ materially from those expressed in or implied by the forward-looking statements and future results could differ materially from historical performance. Such assumptions, events, risks, uncertainties and other factors include, among others, those described

3

Table of Contents



under Part II, Item IA and elsewhere in this report and in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20112012 (filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on March 14, 2012)5, 2013) as well as in other reports and documents we file with the SEC and include, without limitation, the following:

3

Table of Contents



our ability to generate or obtain from external sources sufficient liquidity for operations and debt service;
changes in the level of consumer spending or preferences or demand for our products;
our liquidity,financial condition, operating results and projected cash flows;
disruptions in the global financial markets;
consequences of our significant indebtedness, including our relationship with our lenders, our ability to comply with our debt agreements and generate cash flow to service our debt;
our ability to maintain compliance with the exchange rules of the NYSE MKT, LLC.;LLC;
the highly competitive and evolving nature of our business in the U.S. and internationally;
our ability to effectively carry out and manage our strategy, including growth and expansion both in the U.S. and internationally;
loss of U.S. import protections or changes in duties, tariffs and quotas, and other risks associated with international business;
intensity of competition, both domestic and foreign;
technological changes in manufacturing, wholesaling, or retailing;
risks that our suppliers or distributors may not timely produce or deliver our products;
loss or reduction in sales to our wholesale or retail customers or financial nonperformance by our wholesale customers;
the adoption of new accounting standards or changes in interpretations of accounting principles;
our ability to pass on the added cost of raw materials to our wholesale and retail customers;
the availability of store locations at appropriate terms and our ability to identify and negotiate new store locations effectively and to open new stores and expand internationally;
our ability to attract customers to our stores;
seasonality and fluctuations in comparable store sales and margins;
our ability to successfully implement our strategic, operating, financial and personnel initiatives;
our ability to maintain the value and image of our brand and protect our intellectual property rights;
changes in the cost of materials and labor, including increases in the price of raw materials in the global market;
our ability to improve manufacturing efficiency at our production facilities;
location of our facilities in the same geographic area;
risks associated with our foreign operations and foreign supply sources, such as disruption of markets, changes in import and export laws, currency restrictions, and currency exchange rate fluctuations;
adverse changes in our credit ratings and any related impact on financial costs and structure;
continued compliance with U.S. and foreign government regulations, legislation, and regulatory environments, including environmental, immigration, labor, and occupational health and safety laws and regulations;
the risk that information technology systems changes and the transition to our new distribution center in La Mirada, California (as described herein) may disrupt our supply chain or operations and our ability to upgrade our information technology infrastructure and other risks associated with the systems that operate our online retail operations;
litigation and other inquiries and investigations, including the risks that we or our officers will not be successful in defending any proceedings, lawsuits, disputes, claims or audits, and that exposure could exceed expectations or insurance coverages;
our ability to effectively manage inventory levels;
changes in key personnel, our ability to hire and retain key personnel, and our relationship with our employees;
material weaknesses in internal controls;
costs as a result of operating as a public company;
general economic conditions, including increases in interest rates, geopolitical events, other regulatory changes and inflation or deflation;
disruptions due to severe weather or climate change; and
disruptions due to earthquakes, flooding, tsunamis or other natural disasters.
All forward-looking statements included in this document are made as of the date hereof, based on information available to us as of the date hereof, and we assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

4


PART I-FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1.Financial Statements (unaudited)
American Apparel, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Amounts and shares in thousands, except per share amounts)
(unaudited)
 
September 30, 2012 December 31, 2011*March 31, 2013 December 31, 2012*
ASSETS      
CURRENT ASSETS      
Cash$7,186
 $10,293
$5,688
 $12,853
Trade accounts receivable, net of allowances of $2,143 and $2,195 at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively25,951
 20,939
Trade accounts receivable, net of allowances of $1,915 and $2,085 at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively23,042
 22,962
Prepaid expenses and other current assets10,800
 7,631
9,295
 9,589
Inventories, net180,879
 185,764
177,351
 174,229
Restricted cash5,928
 
2,678
 3,733
Income taxes receivable and prepaid income taxes1,475
 5,955
259
 530
Deferred income taxes, net of valuation allowance of $12,003 at both September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011639
 148
Deferred income taxes, net of valuation allowance of $12,760 at both March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012426
 494
Total current assets232,858
 230,730
218,739
 224,390
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, net65,959
 67,438
68,173
 67,778
DEFERRED INCOME TAXES, net of valuation allowance of $61,770 at both September 30, 2012 and December 31, 20111,559
 1,529
DEFERRED INCOME TAXES, net of valuation allowance of $64,818 at both March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20121,209
 1,261
RESTRICTED CASH1,629
 
OTHER ASSETS, net33,269
 25,024
37,201
 34,783
TOTAL ASSETS$333,645
 $324,721
$326,951
 $328,212
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY 
  
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' (DEFICIT) EQUITY 
  
CURRENT LIABILITIES 
  
 
  
Cash overdraft$2,625
 $1,921
$1,340
 $
Revolving credit facilities and current portion of long-term debt71,586
 50,375
68,116
 60,556
Accounts payable37,247
 33,920
41,784
 38,160
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities38,750
 43,725
40,675
 41,516
Fair value of warrant liability28,455
 9,633
40,886
 17,241
Income taxes payable389
 2,445
2,257
 2,137
Deferred income tax liability, current697
 150
257
 296
Current portion of capital lease obligations1,017
 1,181
1,737
 1,703
Total current liabilities180,766
 143,350
197,052
 161,609
LONG-TERM DEBT, net of unamortized discount of $29,959 and $20,183 at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively103,964
 97,142
LONG-TERM DEBT, net of unamortized discount of $25,899 and $27,929 at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively118,358
 110,012
CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS, net of current portion1,083
 1,726
2,632
 2,844
DEFERRED TAX LIABILITY108
 96
247
 262
DEFERRED RENT, net of current portion21,597
 22,231
20,115
 20,706
OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES12,250
 12,046
10,932
 10,695
TOTAL LIABILITIES319,768
 276,591
349,336
 306,128
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 



 

STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY 
  
STOCKHOLDERS' (DEFICIT) EQUITY 
  
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value per share, authorized 1,000 shares; none issued
 

 
Common stock, $0.0001 par value per share, authorized 230,000 shares; 110,020 shares issued and 106,384 shares outstanding at September 30, 2012 and 108,870 shares issued and 105,588 shares outstanding at December 31, 201111
 11
Common stock, $0.0001 par value per share, authorized 230,000 shares; 110,533 shares issued and 107,624 shares outstanding at March 31, 2013 and 110,111 shares issued and 107,181 shares outstanding at December 31, 201211
 11
Additional paid-in capital173,787
 166,486
180,627
 177,081
Accumulated other comprehensive loss(2,735) (3,356)(4,229) (2,725)
Accumulated deficit(155,029) (112,854)(196,637) (150,126)
Less: Treasury stock, 304 shares at cost(2,157) (2,157)(2,157) (2,157)
TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY13,877
 48,130
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY$333,645
 $324,721
TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS' (DEFICIT) EQUITY(22,385) 22,084
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' (DEFICIT) EQUITY$326,951
 $328,212
* Condensed from audited financial statements.
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

5


American Apparel, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
(Amounts and shares in thousands, except per share amounts)
(unaudited)

Three Months Ended September 30, Nine Months Ended September 30,Three Months Ended March 31,
2012 2011 2012 20112013 2012
Net sales$162,160
 $140,889
 $444,282
 $389,760
$138,060
 $132,660
Cost of sales76,960
 65,898
 209,990
 178,705
65,192
 62,604
Gross profit85,200
 74,991
 234,292
 211,055
72,868
 70,056
Selling expenses58,017
 52,283
 168,258
 152,536
55,463
 54,929
General and administrative expenses (including related party charges of $332 and $177 for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and $883 and $628 for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively)22,566
 24,552
 71,792
 77,025
General and administrative expenses (including related party charges of $217 and $321 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)27,804
 24,922
Retail store impairment
 784
 129
 2,436
78
 
          
Income (loss) from operations4,617
 (2,628) (5,887) (20,942)
Loss from operations(10,477) (9,795)
          
Interest expense10,454
 8,832
 30,274
 23,715
11,214
 9,553
Foreign currency transaction (gain) loss(685) 1,855
 141
 780
Unrealized loss (gain) on change in fair value of warrants and purchase rights13,312
 (6,101) 15,340
 (21,201)
(Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt
 
 (11,588) 3,114
Other expense (income)36
 (186) 188
 (240)
Foreign currency transaction loss (gain)713
 (950)
Unrealized loss on change in fair value of warrants23,645
 651
Gain on extinguishment of debt
 (11,588)
Other (income) expense(5) 128
Loss before income taxes(18,500) (7,028) (40,242) (27,110)(46,044) (7,589)
Income tax provision512
 166
 1,933
 1,042
467
 302
Net loss$(19,012) $(7,194) $(42,175) $(28,152)$(46,511) $(7,891)
          
Basic and diluted loss per share$(0.18) $(0.07) $(0.40) $(0.32)$(0.42) $(0.07)
Weighted average basic and diluted shares outstanding106,248
 102,279
 105,960
 88,614
109,918 105,707
          
Net loss (from above)
$(19,012) $(7,194) $(42,175) $(28,152)$(46,511) $(7,891)
Other comprehensive income (loss) item:
       
Other comprehensive (loss) income item:
   
Foreign currency translation, net of tax1,073
 (1,279) 622
 135
(1,504) 331
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax1,073
 (1,279) 622
 135
Other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax(1,504) 331
Comprehensive loss$(17,939) $(8,473) $(41,553) $(28,017)$(48,015) $(7,560)

See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
 

6


American Apparel, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Amounts in thousands)
(unaudited)

Nine Months Ended September 30,Three Months Ended March 31,
2012 20112013 2012
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES      
Cash received from customers$439,634
 $387,780
$137,654
 $133,818
Cash paid to suppliers, employees and others(431,915) (392,684)(139,649) (141,724)
Income taxes refunded (paid)646
 (1,413)
Income taxes refunded9
 745
Interest paid(6,635) (3,959)(4,040) (1,376)
Other(160) 323
18
 (109)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities1,570
 (9,953)
Net cash used in operating activities(6,008) (8,646)
      
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES      
Capital expenditures(14,257) (7,284)(7,354) (3,690)
Proceeds from sale of fixed assets70
 72
12
 34
Restricted cash(5,926) 
(622) (6,802)
Net cash used in investing activities(20,113) (7,212)(7,964) (10,458)
      
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES      
Cash overdraft704
 (2,484)1,340
 114
Repayments of expired revolving credit facilities, net(48,324) (1,309)
 (45,121)
Borrowings under current revolving credit facilities, net39,337
 
7,624
 29,997
Borrowings (repayments) of term loans and notes payable30,042
 (10)
Payment of debt issuance costs(4,965) (1,690)
Net proceeds from issuance of common stock and purchase rights
 21,710
Proceeds from equipment lease financing
 3,100
Repayment of capital lease obligations(810) (996)
(Repayments) borrowings of term loans and notes payable(3) 35,785
Payments of debt issuance costs(1,678) (4,696)
Repayments of capital lease obligations(176) (271)
Net cash provided by financing activities15,984
 18,321
7,107
 15,808
      
EFFECT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATE ON CASH(548) (844)(300) 305
      
NET (DECREASE) INCREASE IN CASH(3,107) 312
NET DECREASE IN CASH(7,165) (2,991)
CASH, beginning of period10,293
 7,656
12,853
 10,293
CASH, end of period$7,186
 $7,968
$5,688
 $7,302

See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

7



American Apparel, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (continued)
(Amounts in thousands)
(unaudited)
Nine Months Ended September 30,Three Months Ended March 31,
2012 20112013 2012
RECONCILIATION OF NET LOSS TO NET CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
RECONCILIATION OF NET LOSS TO NET CASH USED IN OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net loss$(42,175) $(28,152)$(46,511) $(7,891)
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment, and other assets17,040
 19,109
6,031
 5,852
Retail store impairment129
 2,436
78
 
Loss on disposal of property and equipment28
 83
13
 18
Share-based compensation expense7,333
 4,538
3,547
 1,842
Unrealized loss (gain) on change in fair value of warrants and purchase rights15,340
 (21,201)
Unrealized loss on change in fair value of warrants23,645
 651
Amortization of debt discount and deferred financing costs7,655
 6,120
2,610
 2,943
(Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt(11,588) 3,114
Gain on extinguishment of debt
 (11,588)
Accrued interest paid-in-kind15,984
 13,636
4,564
 5,234
Foreign currency transaction loss141
 780
Foreign currency transaction loss (gain)713
 (950)
Allowance for inventory shrinkage and obsolescence(339) 783
254
 128
Bad debt expense73
 503
139
 41
Deferred income taxes32
 793

 (7)
Deferred rent(649) (1,862)(448) (8)
Changes in cash due to changes in operating assets and liabilities:      
Trade accounts receivables(4,721) (2,483)(545) 1,117
Inventories6,238
 (8,651)(4,811)��(93)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets(3,343) (174)220
 (1,668)
Other assets(5,756) (2,880)(1,825) (583)
Accounts payable2,471
 1,492
3,999
 2,333
Accrued expenses and other liabilities(4,750) 3,227
1,859
 (7,043)
Income taxes receivable / payable2,427
 (1,164)460
 1,026
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities$1,570
 $(9,953)
Net cash used in operating activities$(6,008) $(8,646)
      
NON-CASH INVESTING AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES      
Property and equipment acquired, and included in accounts payable$98
 $1,488
$3,433
 $782
Reclassification of Lion Warrant from equity to debt
 11,339
Conversion of debt to equity
 4,688
Issuance of warrants and purchase rights at fair value
 6,387
Exercise of purchase rights
 2,857

See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.


8



American Apparel, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Three and Nine Months Ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012 and 2011
(Amounts and shares in thousands, except per share amounts)
(unaudited)

Note 1. Organization and Business
American Apparel, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively the “Company”) is a vertically-integrated manufacturer, distributor, and retailer of branded fashion basic apparel products and designs, manufactures and sells clothing and accessories for women, men, children and babies. The Company sells its products through the wholesale distribution channel supplying t-shirts and other casual wear to distributors and screen printers, as well as direct to customers through its retail stores located in the United States, and internationally. In addition, the Company operates an online retail e-commerce website. At September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the Company operated a total of 251249 retail stores in 20 countries, includingcountries: the United States, Canada and 18 other countries.
Liquidity and Management's Plan
On April 4, 2013, the Company closed a private offering of $206,000 aggregate principal amount of its 13% Senior Secured Notes due 2020 at 97% of par and also entered into a new $35,000 asset-backed revolving credit facility with Capital One Leverage Finance Corp. maturing on April 4, 2018, subject to a January 15, 2018 maturity under certain circumstances.
The Company used the net proceeds from the offering of the notes, together with borrowings under the new credit facility to repay and terminate its credit agreement with Crystal Financial LLC and its loan agreement with Lion Capital LLP. The notes and the new credit facility are senior secured obligations of the Company and are guaranteed, on a senior secured basis, by the Company's domestic restricted subsidiaries, subject to some exceptions (see Notes 6 and 7).
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the Company had approximately $7,1865,688 in cash, and $3,4932,417 of availability for additional borrowings under the Crystal Credit Agreement and Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement (as defined in Note 6). Additionally, the Company had outstanding $35,57637,594 on the $50,000 revolving credit facility under the Crystal Credit Agreement, $30,000 of term loans outstanding under the Crystal Credit Agreement, $5,901477 outstanding on a C$11,000 (Canadian dollars) revolving credit facility under the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement, and $103,614118,039 (including paid-in-kind interest of $12,43322,798 and net of discount $29,95925,899) of term loans outstanding under the Lion CreditLoan Agreement (as defined in Note 7).
On March 13, 2012, the Company replaced its existing revolving credit facility of $75,000 with Bank of America ("BofA") with a $80,000 senior secured credit facility with Crystal Financial LLC ("Crystal") and other lenders. The Crystal Credit Agreement calls for the $80,000 to be allocated between an asset based revolving credit facility of $50,000 and term loan of $30,000 that matures on March 13, 2015. Among other provisions, the Crystal Credit Agreement requires that the Company maintain an arrangement similar to a traditional lockbox and contains certain subjective acceleration clauses. In addition, Crystal may at its discretion, adjust the advance restriction and criteria for eligible inventory and accounts receivable. Proceeds from the Crystal Credit Agreement were used to repay the existing revolving credit facility with BofA, fees and expenses related to the transaction, and for general working capital purposes. See Note 6.
In connection with the Crystal Credit Agreement, the Company entered into a seventh amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement, which among other things: (i) consented to the Crystal Credit Agreement, (ii) extends the maturity date of the term loan with Lion Capital LLP ("Lion") to December 31, 2015, (iii) reduced the minimum Consolidated EBITDA amounts for any twelve consecutive months as determined at the end of each fiscal quarter (Quarterly Minimum Consolidated EBITDA), (iv) modified certain financial covenants and covenants related to capital expenditures and (v) requires a minimum of 5% of each interest payment on the outstanding principal in cash starting on September 1, 2012.
On August 30, 2012, the Company entered into a second amendment to the Crystal Credit Agreement ("Crystal Second Amendment") and an eighth amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement ("Lion Eighth Amendment"). The Crystal Second Amendment extended until December 31, 2012 the period during, which loans under the Crystal Credit Agreement based on the American Apparel brand name may remain outstanding, added a minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant for the remainder of 2012 and a minimum excess availability covenant for the period of December 17, 2012 through February 1, 2013. In connection with the Crystal Second Amendment, the Lion Eighth Amendment added a second minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant that conforms to the Crystal minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant (Monthly Minimum Consolidated EBITDA). See Notes 6 and 7.
The Company entered into a ninth amendment and waiver to the Lion Credit Agreement (the "Lion Ninth Amendment") effective as of September 30, 2012, which among other things, waived the Company's obligation to maintain the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenants specified in the Lion Credit Agreement, as amended, for the twelve month period ended September 30, 2012. As a result, the Company was in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Lion Credit Agreement on September 30, 2012.
On November 12, 2012, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries entered into amendments to both the Crystal Credit Agreement and the Lion Credit Agreement that, among other things, reduced by $600 the target minimum EBITDA for the twelve months ended October 31, 2012 under the financial covenants of each credit agreement, respectively.


9


As a result of these financing transactions described above, the Company believes that it will havehas sufficient financing commitments to meet funding requirements for the next twelve months.
The C$11,000 Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement matures in December 2012. While the Company intends to negotiate an extension of this credit agreement, it does not believe that this credit agreement represents a material component of the Company's current or future capital requirements.
The Company is in the process ofcontinues to executing aits plan, which was commenced in late 2010, to improve its operating performance and financial position. This plan includes optimizing production levels atAmong other things, in 2013, the Company's manufacturing facilities including raw material purchasesCompany intends to complete the installation of RFID tracking systems in all of its stores, complete the opening of its new distribution facility in La Mirada, California, continue with expansion of its selling square footage in its stores, continue with its inventory productivity improvement program, further reduce operating expenses, and labor; streamliningimprove online sales performance with the logistics operations; Web platform refinement; reducing corporate expenses; merchandise price rationalizationimplementation of the Oracle ATG back-end online system for international store fronts. In addition, the Company continues to seek improvements in store labor productivity and workers' compensation exposure. The Company expects to fully transition its distribution operations into the new distribution facility in the wholesale and retail channels; store renovations; and improving merchandise distribution and allocation procedures.first half of 2013. The Company believes that the new distribution center will continuecontribute to processing efficiencies and effectiveness and will reduce operating expenses and cost of sales. The Company continues to develop other initiatives intended to either increase sales, reduce costs or improve liquidity.
There can be no assurance that plans to improve operating performance and financial position will be successful.
Note 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Principles of Consolidation and Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of American Apparel, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated upon consolidation. Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior year's condensed consolidated financial statements and related footnotes to conform them to the 20122013 presentation.
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries have been prepared by the Company, in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) for interim financial information, and are presented in accordance with the requirements of Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X, and have not been audited. Accordingly, these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements do not include all of the information and notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements and should be read in

9


conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20112012 included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K. In the opinion of management, the interim unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements included herein contain all adjustments, including normal recurring adjustments, considered necessary to present fairly the Company's financial position, the results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented.
The operating results and cash flows of the interim periods presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for any other interim period or the full year.

Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets, and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and reported amounts of revenues, and expenses during the reporting period. Management bases its estimates on historical experience and on various assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets, and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. The most complex and subjective estimates include: self-insured liabilities, inventory valuation and obsolescence; valuation and recoverability of long-lived assets, including the values assigned to goodwill, property and equipment; fair value calculations, including derivative liabilities such as the Lion warrants; contingencies, including accruals for the outcome of current litigation and self-insurance liabilities; gift card liabilities;litigation; and income taxes as well as other taxes and governmental assessments, including uncertain income tax positions and recoverability of deferred income taxes.
On a regular basis, management reviews its estimates utilizing currently available information, changes in facts and circumstances, historical experience, and reasonable assumptions. After such reviews, and if deemed appropriate, those estimates are adjusted accordingly. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Restricted Cash
Restricted cash primarily represents cash collateral on standby letters of credit the value of which was previously deducted against the availability of the Company's prior revolving credit agreement, and certain other obligations. The standby letters of credit are predominantly used as collateral for the Company's workers' compensation program (seeprogram. See Note 14).

14.
Concentration of Credit Risk
Financial instruments, which potentially subject the Company to credit risk consist primarily of cash (the amounts of which

10


may, at times, exceed Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation limits on insurable amounts) and trade accounts receivable (including credit card receivables), relating substantially to the Company’s U.S. Wholesale segment. The Company mitigates its risk by investing through major financial institutions. The Company had approximately $5,5044,495 and $9,5498,265 held in foreign banks at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, respectively.
The Company mitigates its risks related to trade receivables by performing on-going credit evaluations of its customers and adjusts credit limits based upon payment history and the customer’s current credit worthiness, as determined by the review of their current credit information. The Company also maintains an insurance policy for certain customers based on a customer’s credit rating and established limits. Collections and payments from customers are continuously monitored. One customer in the Company's U.S. Wholesale segment accounted for 22.5%20.6% and 16.3%15.1% of the Company’s total accounts receivables as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, respectively. The Company maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts, which is based upon historical experience and specific customer collection issues that have been identified. While bad debt expenses have historically been within expectations and allowances established, the Company cannot guarantee that it will continue to experience the same credit loss rates that it has in the past.

Fair Value Measurements
The Company’s financial instruments are primarily composed of cash, restricted cash, accounts receivable (including credit card receivables), accounts payable, revolving credit borrowings, its term loan and term loan.warrants. The fair value of cash, restricted cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable and variable rate borrowings closely approximates their carrying value due to their short maturities.maturities and variable rates. The fair value of the fixed-rate term note is estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis.
The valuation techniques utilized are based upon observable and unobservable inputs. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect internal market assumptions. These two types of inputs create the following fair value hierarchy:
Level 1 – Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 – Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the related asset or liabilities.
Level 3 – Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of assets or liabilities.

10


The Company utilizes observable market inputs (quoted market prices) when measuring fair value whenever possible.
For fair value measurements categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, the Company's accounting and finance department, who report to the Chief Financial Officer, determine its valuation policies and procedures. The development and determination of the unobservable inputs for Level 3 fair value measurements and fair value calculations are the responsibility of the Company's accounting and finance department and are approved by the Chief Financial Officer.
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, there were no transfers in or out of Level 3 from other levels in the fair value hierarchy.levels.
The fair value of the fixed rate term note is estimated using a projected discounted cash flow analysis based on unobservable inputs including interest payments, principal payments and discount rate, and is classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. An increase or decrease in the discount rate assumption, in isolation, can significantly decrease or increase the fair value of the term note (seenote. See Note 8).8.
The fair value of each warrant is estimated using either a Monte Carlo simulation model or the Binomial Lattice option valuation model. Significant observable and unobservable inputs include stock price, exercise price, annual risk free rate, term, and expected volatility, and are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. An increase or decrease in volatility, in isolation, can significantly increase or decrease the fair value of the warrant (seewarrant. See Notes 8 and 11).11.
The fair value of indefinite-lived assets, which consists exclusively of goodwill, is measured in connection with the Company’s annual goodwill impairment test.  The fair value of the reporting unit to which goodwill has been assigned, is determined using a projected discounted cash flow analysis based on unobservable inputs including gross profit, discount rate, working capital requirements, capital expenditures, depreciation and terminal value assumptions, and are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. An increase or decrease in the discount rate assumption and/or the terminal value assumption, in isolation, can have a significant effect on the fair value of the reporting unit.
Retail stores that have indicators of impairment and whose carrying value of assets are greater than their related projected undiscounted future cash flows, are measured for impairment by comparing the fair value of the assets against their carrying value. Fair value of the assets is estimated using a projected discounted cash flow analysis based on unobservable inputs

11


including gross profit and discount rate, and is classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy.  An increase or decrease in the discount rate assumption, in isolation, can significantly decrease or increase the fair value of the assets, which would have an effect on the impairment recorded.


Gift Cards

Upon issuance of a gift card a liability is established for its cash value. The liability is relieved and net sales are recorded upon redemption by the customer. Over time, some portion of gift cards is not redeemed ("breakage"). The Company determines breakage income for gift cards based on historical redemption patterns. Breakage income is recorded in selling expenses, which is a component of operating expenses in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, when the Company can determine the portion of the selling expense where redemption is remote, which is two years after the gift card is issued. The Company's gift cards do not have expiration dates.

The Company does not believe there is a reasonable likelihood that there will be a material change in the future estimates or assumptions the Company uses to calculate its breakage income. However, if the actual rate of redemption of gift cards increases significantly, the Company's operating results could be adversely affected.

Income Taxes
The Company recognizes deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns.  Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse.  The Company estimates the degree to which tax assets and credit carryforwards will result in a benefit based on expected profitability by tax jurisdiction.  A valuation allowance for such tax assets and loss carryforwards is provided when it is determined that it issuch amounts will more likely than not that those assets will not be realized.go unrealized.  If it becomes more likely than not that a tax asset will be realized, theany related valuation allowance of such assets would be reversed.
During the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company incurred losses from operations.  Based upon these results, and trends in the Company's performance projected through 2013, it is more likely than not that the Company will not realize any benefit from the deferred tax assets recorded by the Company in previous periods.  The Company did not record income tax benefits in the condensed consolidated financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012 as the Company determined that it was more likely than not that sufficient taxable income in the future will not be generated in the respective jurisdictions to realize the deferred income tax assets. 
Management makes judgments as to the interpretation of the tax laws that might be challenged upon an audit and cause changes to previous estimates of tax liabilities.liability.  In management’saddition, the Company operates within multiple taxing jurisdictions and is subject to audit in these jurisdictions.  In management's opinion, adequate provisions for income taxes have been made for all years.  If actual taxable income by tax jurisdiction varies from estimates, additional allowances or reversals of reserves may be necessary.
The Company’sCompany's foreign domiciled subsidiaries are subject to foreign income taxes on earnings in their respective jurisdictions. The Company elected to have their foreign subsidiaries, except for its subsidiaries in Brazil, Canada, Korea, China, Spain, Italy, Ireland and Ireland,Korea, consolidated in the Company’sCompany's U.S. federal income tax return.  The Company will generally be eligible to receive tax credits on its U.S. federal income tax return for most of the foreign taxes paid.paid by the Company's entities included in the United States Federal income tax return.
The Company accounts for uncertain tax positions in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") 740—ASC 740-“Income Taxes”, and gross unrecognized tax benefits at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012 are included in other long-termcurrent liabilities in the accompanying condensed

11


consolidated balance sheets.  The Company accrues interest and penalties if incurred, on unrecognized tax benefits as components of the income tax provision in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

operations.
Accounting Standards Updates
Beginning in the quarter ended March 31, 2012, the Company enhanced its fair value measurement application and disclosures as a result of adopting new requirementsRecently issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") in May 2011.  The new rules include revisionsaccounting standards updates are not expected to the standards for the use of fair value measurements and additional disclosures for: (i) all transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy; (ii) Level 3 measurements; and (iii) hierarchy classifications used for assets and liabilities whose fair value is disclosed only in the footnotes.  The new rules did not have a material impacteffect on the Company.Company's condensed consolidated financial statements.
Subsequent Events
The Company has evaluated events that occurred subsequent to September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and through the date the financial statements were available to be issued. ManagementOther than those events disclosed in these notes to these financial statements, including the financing transactions that closed on April 4, 2013, management concluded that no additional subsequent events required disclosure in these financial statements other than those disclosed in these notes to these financial statements.

12


Note 3. Inventories
The components of inventories are as follows:  
September 30, 2012 December 31, 2011March 31, 2013 December 31, 2012
Raw materials$21,695
 $18,326
$22,261
 $22,301
Work in process2,383
 2,468
2,999
 2,197
Finished goods160,429
 168,902
154,984
 152,384
184,507
 189,696
180,244
 176,882
Less reserve for inventory shrinkage and obsolescence(3,628) (3,932)(2,893) (2,653)
Total, net of reserves$180,879
 $185,764
$177,351
 $174,229
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is primarily determined on the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method. The cost elements of inventories include materials, labor and overhead. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012, no one supplier provided more than 10% of the Company’s raw material purchases.
The Company identifies potentially excess and slow-moving inventories by evaluating turn rates, inventory levels and other factors and provides reserves for lower of cost or market reserves for such identified excess and slow-moving inventories. At September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, the Company had a lower of cost or market reserve for excess and slow-moving inventories of $2,1641,921 and $2,0502,140, respectively.
The Company establishes a reserve for inventory shrinkage for each of its retail locations and its warehouse. The reserve is based on the historical results of physical inventory cycle counts. The Company had a reserve for inventory shrinkage in the amount of $1,464972 and $1,882513 at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, respectively.
Note 4. Property and Equipment
Depreciation and amortization expense relating to property and equipment (including capitalized leases) is recorded in cost of sales and operating expenses. For the three and nine months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012,, depreciation and amortization expense was $5,5386,031 and $17,040, respectively. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, depreciation and amortization expense was $6,126 and $19,1095,852, respectively.
The Company evaluates its retail stores for indicators of impairment, specifically related to under-performance or operating losses relative to expected historical or projected future operating results. Stores whose carrying value of assets are greater than their related projected undiscounted future cash flows, are measured for impairment by comparing the fair value of the assets against their carrying value. The fair value of the assets is estimated using a projected discounted cash flow analysis (Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy). The key assumptions used in the estimates of projected cash flows were sales, gross margins, and payroll costs. These forecasts were based on historical trends and take into account recent developments, as well as the Company's plans and intentions.
Based uponFor the resultsthree months ended March 31, 2013, the Company recorded impairment charges relating to retail stores leasehold improvements of the analyses above, the$78. The Company determined that no impairment charges for the three months ended September 30,March 31, 2012 were required. For the nine months ended September 30, 2012, the Company incurred impairment charges of $129 relating to a store closure in Canada. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, the Company incurred impairment charges of $784 and $2,436, respectively, primarily related to certain retail store leasehold improvements and key money in the International and the U.S. Retail segments.

1312


Note 5. Accrued Expenses and Other Current Liabilities
The components of accrued expenses and other current liabilities are as follows:
September 30, 2012 December 31, 2011March 31, 2013 December 31, 2012
Compensation, bonuses and related taxes$9,682
 $11,339
$9,778
 $11,524
Workers' compensation and other self-insurance reserves (Note 14)5,807
 5,318
5,609
 5,288
Sales, value and property taxes3,640
 3,721
3,752
 4,751
Gift cards and store credits4,223
 6,939
5,070
 5,964
Loss contingencies572
 1,575
752
 752
Accrued vacation898
 790
1,522
 1,055
Deferred revenue830
 892
414
 590
Deferred rent2,303
 2,170
2,913
 2,997
Other10,795
 10,981
10,865
 8,595
Total accrued expenses$38,750
 $43,725
$40,675
 $41,516

Note 6. Revolving Credit Facilities and Current Portion of Long-Term Debt
RevolvingThe following table presents revolving credit facilities and current portion of long-term debt consists of the following:debt:
September 30, 2012 December 31, 2011March 31, 2013 December 31, 2012
Revolving credit facility (Crystal), maturing March 2015(a)$35,576
 $
$37,594
 $26,113
Term loan (Crystal), maturing March 2015(a)30,000
 
30,000
 30,000
Revolving credit facility (Bank of America), replaced in March 2012
 48,324
Revolving credit facility (Bank of Montreal), maturing December 20125,901
 1,995
Revolving credit facility (Bank of Montreal), maturing December 2013477
 4,387
Current portion of long-term debt (Note 7)109
 56
45
 56
Total revolving credit facilities and current portion of long-term debt$71,586
 $50,375
$68,116
 $60,556
(a) All outstanding principal amounts and accrued and unpaid interest and fees under the Crystal revolving credit facility and term loan were repaid with the proceeds of the financing transactions that the Company closed on April 4, 2013.
The Company incurred interest charges of $10,45411,214 and $30,2749,553 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, and $8,832March 31, 2013 and $23,715 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011,2012, respectively, for all outstanding borrowings. The interest charges subject to capitalization for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012 were notnot significant.
Revolving Credit Facility and Term Loan - CrystalCapital One
On March 13, 2012,April 4, 2013, the Company and its domestic subsidiaries replaced its existing revolving credit facility of $75,000 with BofA with a $80,000 senior securedthe credit facility with Crystal Financial LLCwith a new $35,000 asset-based revolving facility with Capital One Leverage Finance Corp. ("Crystal"Capital One" and the credit facility, the "Crystal"Capital One Credit Agreement"Facility"), and other lenders. .
The CrystalCapital One Credit Agreement calls forFacility permits the $80,000Company to be allocated between an asset based revolving credit facility ofincrease commitments to up to $50,000 in the aggregate, subject to obtaining additional commitments from other third parties and term loan ofother customary conditions. The Capital One Credit Facility matures on April 4, 2018, subject to a January 15, 2018 maturity if excess availability is less than $30,00015,000 at the time of notice to Capital One of a determination by the Company that an Applicable High Yield Discount Obligation ("AHYDO") redemption will be required pursuant to Section 3.01(e) of the indenture governing the Senior Secured Notes due 2020 (the "Notes"). Borrowings under the CrystalCapital One Credit AgreementFacility bear interest equal to LIBOR plus 3.5% or the bank's prime rate plus 2.5% (at the Company's option) and are subject to certain borrowing reserves based on eligible inventory and accounts receivable. In addition, the initialmaintenance of specified borrowing base under the revolving credit facility was increasedrequirements and covenants. The Capital One Credit Facility is secured by $12,500 for the value associated with the brand name. On August 30, 2012, the Company entered into a second amendment to the Crystal Credit Agreement ("Crystal Second Amendment"), which extended until December 31, 2012 the period during which loans under the Crystal Credit Agreement basedlien on the American Apparel brand name may remain outstanding. This initial increase based on the brand name will be ratably reduced to $0 during the period from April 13, 2012 through January 1, 2013. The Crystal Credit Agreement matures on March 13, 2015 and is collateralized by substantially all of the assets of the Company's U.S. and U.K. assetsdomestic subsidiaries and equity interests in certain of itsthe Company's foreign subsidiaries. subsidiaries, subject to some exceptions.
The amount available for additional borrowings onCompany is required to maintain a minimum fixed charge coverage ratio of not less than September 30, 20121.00 was $1,443.to 1.00 and is also required to not exceed certain maximum leverage ratio thresholds, both determined as at the end of each fiscal quarter. Additionally, the Company's domestic subsidiaries are subject to an annual limitation of certain specified capital expenditure amounts as determined at the end of each fiscal year.
Among other provisions, the CrystalCapital One Credit AgreementFacility requires that the Company maintain ana lockbox arrangement similar to a traditional lockbox and contains certain subjective acceleration clauses. In addition, CrystalCapital One may at its discretion, adjust the advance restriction and criteria for eligible inventory and accounts receivable. Consequently, the amounts outstanding under the CrystalThe Capital One Credit Agreement are classified as a current liability.
As of September 30, 2012, the interest rate under the agreement was 9.47% (the 90-day LIBOR at 0.47% plus 9.0%) and also included an unused facility fee ranging from 0.375% to 1.0% on the unused portion of the revolving credit facility, payableFacility contains cross-default provisions

1413


monthly. Beginning August 30, 2012, as a resultwhereby an event of the second amendment, the interest rate with respect to the brand name portion of the outstanding principal amount of the revolving credit facility of $5,000 was 20.22% (the 90-day LIBOR at 0.47% plus 19.75%). The Crystal Credit Agreement also includes an early termination fee if the term loan is prepaid or if the commitmentsdefault under the revolving credit facility are permanently reduced of (a) 3.0% if such payment or reduction occurs in the first year, (b) 2.0% if such payment or reduction occurs in the second year, and (c) 0.0% thereafter.
In connection with the financing from Crystal, the Company entered into amendments to the Lion Credit Agreement. See Notes 7 and 11.
Significant covenants in the Crystal Credit Agreement include a minimum excess availability covenant that requires us to maintain minimum excess availability of the greater of (1) $8,000, or (2) 10.0% of the borrowing base. If the excess availability falls below this minimum, then we will be required to maintain a fixed charge coverage ratio of not less than 1.00:1.00 to be calculated monthly on a consolidated trailing twelve-month basis and continuing until the excess availability exceeds this minimum for sixty consecutive days. The Crystal Second Amendment adds a new minimum excess availability covenant that requires the Company to maintain minimum excess availability to be no less than $5,000 during the period from December 17, 2012 to February 1, 2012 and also adds a minimum monthly Consolidated EBITDA covenant for the remainder of 2012 to be determined at the end of each month. Furthermore, the Crystal Credit Agreement includes an annual limitation of our capital expenditures at the Company's domestic subsidiaries to no more than $17,000 for the year ending December 31, 2012 and $25,000 for each year thereafter.
The Crystal Credit Agreement contains cross-default provisions with the Lion Credit Agreement and the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement, whereby an event of default (as defined) occurring under the Lion Credit Agreementindenture governing the Notes or the Bankother indebtedness, in each case of Montreal Credit Agreementan amount greater than a specified threshold, would cause an event of default under the CrystalCapital One Credit Agreement.
DuringFacility. If an event of default occurs and is continuing under the nine months ended September 30, 2012,Capital One Credit Facility, Capital One may, among other things, terminate the Company's excess availability was belowobligations of the minimum amountlenders to make loans, and as a result, it was requiredthe obligation of the letter of credit issuer to maintain the fixed charge coverage ratio. Asmake letter of September 30, 2012,credit extensions, and require the Company was in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Crystal Credit Agreement.
Revolving Credit Facility - Bank of America
The Company had a revolving credit facility of $75,000 with BofA, which was replaced with the Crystal Credit Agreement on March 13, 2012.to repay all outstanding amounts.
Revolving Credit Facility - Bank of Montreal
TheOn December 29, 2012, the Company's wholly-owned subsidiaries, American Apparel Canada Wholesale, Inc. and American Apparel Canada Retail Inc. (collectively, the “CI Companies”), have aentered into an amendment to their existing line of credit with Bank of Montreal (the "Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement") that extended the maturity of the agreement to December 31, 2013. The agreement provides for borrowings up to C$11,000 with a fixed maturity date of December 30, 2012(Canadian dollars), bearing interest at 7.0% (the bank's prime rate at 3.0% as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 plus 4.0% per annum payable monthly). This line of credit is secured by a lien on the CI Companies' accounts receivable, inventory and certain other tangible assets. Available borrowing capacity at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 was $2,050656.
The Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement contains a fixed charge coverage ratio tested at the end of each month which, as defined in the agreement, must not be less than 1.25 to 1.00. The Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement alsoand restricts the Company's Canadian subsidiaries from entering into operating leases that would lead to payments under such leases totaling more than $8,500 in any fiscal year, andabove a specified threshold. Additionally, the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement imposes a minimum excess availability covenant, which requires the Company's Canadian subsidiaries to maintain at all times minimum excess availability of 5.0% of the revolving credit commitment under the facility.
Additionally, theThe Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement also contains cross-default provisions with the Crystal Credit Agreement and the Lion CreditLoan Agreement, whereby an event of default occurring under either of those credit agreements would have caused an event of default under the CrystalBank of Montreal Credit Agreement. The Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement also contains cross-default provisions with the Capital-One Credit Facility and Lion Credit Agreementthe Notes, whereby an event of default occurring thereunder would cause an event of default under the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement.
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the Company was in compliance with all required financial covenants of the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement.

Revolving Credit Facility and Term Loan - Crystal


As of March 31, 2013, the Company was party to a credit agreement, maturing on March 13, 2015, with Crystal Financial LLC ("Crystal" and the "Crystal Credit Agreement", respectively), and other lenders party thereto, that provided the Company with a $80,000 senior credit facility. The Crystal Credit Agreement calls for the $80,000 to be allocated between an asset-based revolving credit facility of $50,000 and term loan of $30,000. As of March 31, 2013, the Company had $780 of outstanding letters of credit secured against the Crystal Credit Agreement. The amount available for additional borrowings on March 31, 2013 was $1,761.

As of March 31, 2013, the interest under the Crystal Credit Agreement was 9.78% (the 90-day LIBOR at 0.28% plus 9.5%) and included an unused facility fee ranging from 0.375% to 1.0% on the unused portion of the revolving credit facility, payable monthly. Additionally, the interest rate with respect to the brand name portion of the outstanding principal amount was 19.28% (the 90-day LIBOR at 0.28% plus 19.0%).

On April 4, 2013, the Company replaced its existing revolving credit facility and term loan with Crystal with a new $35,000 asset-based revolving credit agreement with Capital One. In connection with the termination of the Crystal Credit Agreement, the Company paid an early termination fee of $2,400. The difference between the net carrying amount of the Crystal loans of $60,533 (which includes the outstanding balance, accrued but unpaid interest, and unamortized financing cost immediately prior to the date of the extinguishment) and the cash paid to Crystal of $66,468, which includes the early termination fee, will be recorded as a $5,935 loss on early extinguishment of debt in the statement of operations for the quarter ended June 30, 2013.

1514


Note 7. Long-Term Debt
Long-term debt consists of the following:
 
September 30, 2012 December 31, 2011March 31, 2013 December 31, 2012
Long-term debt with Lion (a)$103,614
 $96,760
$118,039
 $109,680
Other459
 438
364
 388
Total long-term debt104,073
 97,198
118,403
 110,068
Current portion of debt(109) (56)(45) (56)
Long-term debt, net of current portion$103,964
 $97,142
$118,358
 $110,012
(a) Including accrued interest paid-in-kind of $12,43322,798 and $17,55016,469 and net of unamortized discount of $29,95925,899 and $20,18327,929 at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, respectively. All amounts owed to Lion were repaid with the proceeds of the financing transactions that the Company closed on April 4, 2013.
Lion Credit AgreementSenior Secured Notes due 2020
On March 13, 2009,April 4, 2013, the Company entered into anissued $80,000206,000 term loan with Lion Capital LLP (the "Lion Credit Agreement"). Pursuant to the Lion Credit Agreement, Lion made term loans to the Company in an aggregate principal amount equal toof its $80,00013% Senior Secured Notes due 2020 (the "Notes"). The original term loans under the Lion Credit Agreement were scheduled toNotes will mature on April 15, 2020. The Notes were issued at December 13, 201397% of par value and borewill bear interest at a rate of 13% per annum. Interest on the Notes is payable semi-annually, in arrears, on April 15 and October 15 of each year, beginning on October 15, 2013.
A "special interest trigger event" will be deemed to have occurred under the indenture governing the Notes if the Company's net leverage ratio for the year ended December 31, 2013 is greater than 4.50 to 1.00. If a special interest trigger event occurs, interest on the Notes will accrue at the rate of 15% per annum, payable quarterly in arrears. Effective June 23, 2010 and on February 18, 2011, the Lion Credit Agreement was amendedretroactive to increaseApril 4, 2013, with the interest ratein excess of 13% per annum payable (i) in the case of any interest payment date prior to April 15, 2018, by adding such excess interest to the principal amount of the Notes on the interest payment date, and (ii) for any interest payment date on or after April 15, 2018, in cash.
On or after April 15, 2017, the Company may, at its option, redeem some or all of the Notes at a premium decreasing ratably to zero as specified in the indenture, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the redemption date. Prior to April 15, 2017, the Company may, at its option, redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal amount of the Notes with the net cash proceeds of certain equity offerings at a redemption price of 113% of the aggregate principal amount of the redeemed notes plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the redemption date. In addition, at any time prior to April 15, 2017 the Company may, at its option, redeem some or all of the Notes by paying a "make whole" premium, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the redemption date. If the Company experiences certain change of control events, the holders of the Notes will have the right to require the Company to purchase all or a portion of the Notes at a price in cash equal to 101% of the principal amount of such Notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the date of purchase. In addition, the Company is required to use the net proceeds of certain asset sales, if not used for specified purposes, to purchase some of the Notes at 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the date of purchase. On each interest payment date after April 4, 2018, the Company will be required to redeem, for cash, a portion of each Note then outstanding equal to the amount necessary to prevent such Note from being treated as an “applicable high yield discount obligation” within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code. The redemption price will be 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon on the date of redemption.
The Notes are guaranteed, jointly and severally, on a senior secured basis by the Company's existing and future domestic subsidiaries. The Notes and the related guarantees are secured by a first-priority lien on the Company's and its domestic subsidiaries' assets (other than the Credit Facility Priority Collateral, as defined below, subject to some exceptions and permitted liens). The Notes and the related guarantees also are secured by a second-priority lien on all of Company's and its domestic subsidiaries' accounts receivable, inventory, cash, and certain other assets (collectively, the "Credit Facility Priority Collateral"), subject to certain exceptions and permitted liens. The Notes and the guarantees, respectively, rank equal in right of payment with the Company's and its domestic subsidiaries' senior indebtedness, including indebtedness under the Capital One Credit Facility, before giving effect to collateral arrangements.
The Notes impose certain limitations on the ability of the Company and its domestic subsidiaries to, among other things, and subject to a number of important qualifications and exceptions, incur additional indebtedness or issue disqualified capital stock or preferred stock (with respect to restricted subsidiaries), grant liens, make payments in respect of their capital stock or certain indebtedness, enter into transactions with affiliates, create dividend or other payment restrictions affecting subsidiaries, merge or consolidate with any other person, sell, assign, transfer, lease, convey or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of its assets or adopt a plan of liquidation. The Company must annually report to the trustee on compliance with such limitations.

15


The Notes also contain cross-default provisions whereby a payment default or acceleration of any indebtedness in an aggregate amount greater than a specified threshold would cause an event of default with respect to the Notes.
In connection with the issuance of the Notes, the Company entered into a Registration Rights Agreement under which the Company has agreed to, among other things, conduct a registered exchange offer with respect to the Notes. If the Company fails to fulfill its obligations under the Registration Rights Agreement in a timely manner, it may be required to pay additional interest on the Notes.
Lion Loan Agreement
On March 31, 2013, the Company had a loan agreement, maturing on December 31, 2015, with Lion Capital LLP ("Lion" and the "Lion Loan Agreement", respectively) and the other lenders party thereto. The term loan, as amended, bore interest at a range between 15% and 18% per annum, depending on certain financial covenants, relating to the ratio of Total Debt to Consolidated EBITDA for the trailing four quarters and Consolidated EBITDA for the trailing twelve months.payable quarterly in arrears. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, the Company did not meet these financial covenants and as a result,March 31, 2013, the interest rate was 18% per annum. Onannum on an outstanding amount of $118,039, net of discount and including paid-in-kind interest. Amortization of debt discount included in interest expense was $2,030 and $2,193 for the three months ended March 13, 2012, in connection with the Crystal Credit Agreement (see Note 6), the Company entered into a seventh amendment to extend the maturity date of the Lion Credit Agreement to December 31, 2015, as described below. On August 30, 2012, in connection with the Crystal Second Amendment (see Note 6), the Lion Eighth Amendment added a second minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant that conforms to the Crystal minimum consolidated EBITDA covenant, as described below. The Company entered into the Lion Ninth Amendment effective as of September 30, 2012, which waived the requirement that the Company meet the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenants for the twelve month period ended September 30, 2012. The Lion Ninth Amendment further provides for an increase of 0.52%2013 in the interest rate under the Lion Credit Agreement for the period from October 1,and 2012, to December 31, 2012, payable in-kind.
At the Company's option, except as described below, accrued interest may be paid (i) entirely in cash, (ii) paid half in cash and half in-kind, or (iii) entirely in-kind. In connection with the seventh amendment (described below), beginning on September 1, 2012, the Company is required to pay a portion of its interest in cash. The additional 0.52% interest payable under the Lion Credit Agreement for the period of October 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012 is payable in-kind.respectively. The Company's obligations under the Lion CreditLoan Agreement arewere secured by a second lien on substantially all of the assets of the Company. The Lion Credit Agreement isCompany and was subordinated to the Crystal Credit Agreement and contains customary representations, and warranties, events of default, affirmative covenants and negative covenants (which impose restrictions and limitations on, among other things, dividends, investments, asset sales, capital expenditures, and the ability of the Company to incur additional debt and liens), and certain financial covenants. Agreement.
The Company is permitted to prepay the loans in whole or in part at any time atrepaid and terminated its option, with no prepayment penalty.
Significant covenants in the Lion Credit Agreement include an annual limitation of the Company's capital expenditures to $30,000. Other covenantsoutstanding obligations under the Lion CreditLoan Agreement have been modified over time in connection with amendments.
Seventh Amendment - On March 13, 2012, in connectiona portion of the proceeds of the financing transactions closed by the Company on April 4, 2013. There were no early termination penalties associated with the new credit agreement with Crystal (see Note 6), the Company entered into a seventh amendment totermination of the Lion Credit Agreement, which among other things: (i) consented to the Crystal Credit Agreement, (ii) extends the maturity date to December 31, 2015, (iii) reduced the minimum Consolidated EBITDA amounts for any twelve consecutive months as determined at the end of each fiscal quarter (Quarterly Minimum Consolidated EBITDA) and, (iv) modifies certain other financial covenants, including covenants related to capital expenditures. The amendment also required that the Lion Warrant be amended (see Note 11). In addition, the seventh amendment modifies the Lion Credit Agreement to provide for interest at a rate of 5% per annum to be paid in cash commencing on the interest accruing from and after September 1, 2012 (with the remainder of the interest under the Lion Credit Agreement payable in-kind or in cash at the option of the Company).
In connection with the March 13, 2012 amendment, the Company evaluated the change in cash flows in connection with the amendment to the Lion CreditLoan Agreement. The Company determined that there was a greater than 10% changedifference between the present values of the existing debt and the amended debt causing an extinguishment of debt. The Company recorded the

16


modified debt and related warrant at its fair value and recognized a gain of $11,588 on extinguishment of existing debt. This gain on extinguishment was determined by calculating the difference of the net carrying amount of the Lion debt of $116,507117,926 (which includes the principal, paid-in-kindaccrued but unpaid interest, fair value of the Lion Warrant, unamortized discount and unamortized deferred financing cost immediately prior to the amendment)date of extinguishment) and the fair value of the modified debtcash paid to Lion of $104,919144,177 (which includeswill be recorded in its statement of operations for the fair value of modified debt, fair value of the modified Lion Warrant and amendment related fees). The difference between the carrying net amount of the existing debt of $121,140 and the fair value of the modified debt of $86,898 was recordedquarter ended June 30, 2013 as a discount to$26,251 loss on the modified debt, and will be recognized as interest expense using the effective interest method over the remaining termearly extinguishment of the Lion Credit Agreement.this debt.
Eighth Amendment - On August 30, 2012, in connection with the second amendment to the Crystal Credit Agreement (see Note 6), the Company entered into an eighth amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement that, among other things, adds a second minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant for the remainder of 2012 to be determined at the end of each month (Monthly Minimum Consolidated EBITDA) that conforms to the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant in the Crystal Credit Agreement.
Ninth Amendment - The Company entered into the Lion Ninth Amendment effective September 30, 2012, which among other things waived the the Company's obligation to maintain the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenants for the twelve month period ended September 30, 2012. As of result, the Company was in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Lion Credit Agreement on September 30, 2012.
Amortization of debt discount included in interest expense was $1,986 and $6,100 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, and $2,178 and $5,064 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively.
The Lion Credit Agreement contains certain cross-default provisions by which noncompliance with covenants under the Crystal Credit Agreement, the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement and certain other existing and potential agreements also constitutes an event of default under the Lion Credit Agreement.
Note 8. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The fair value of the Company's financial instruments are measured on a recurring basis. The carrying amount reported in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets for cash, accounts receivable (including credit card receivables), accounts payable and accrued expenses approximates fair value because of the short-term maturity of those instruments. The carrying amount for borrowings under the revolving credit facilities withfrom Crystal and the Bank of Montreal and the term loan with Crystal approximates fair value because of the variable market interest rate charged to the Company for these borrowings. The fair value of the term loan with Lion was estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis and a yield rate that was estimated using yield rates for publicly traded debt instruments of comparable companies with similar features. The fair value of each warrant was estimated using either a Monte Carlo simulation model or the Binomial Lattice option valuation model.  
The Company did not have any assets or liabilities categorized as Level 1 or 2 as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013.
The following table presents carrying amounts and fair values of the Company's financial instruments are presented below as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013:
 Carrying Amount Fair Value
Liabilities   
Long-term debt with Lion, net of discount of $29,959 and including interest paid-in-kind of $12,433 (Level 3)$103,614
 $100,646
Lion Warrant (Level 3)
(a)28,243
SOF Warrant (Level 3)
(a)212
 $103,614
 $129,101
 Carrying Amount Fair Value
Liabilities   
Long-term debt with Lion, net of discount of $25,899 and including interest paid-in-kind of $22,798$118,039
 $113,080
Lion Warrant
(a)40,524
SOF Warrant
(a)362
 $118,039
 $153,966
(a) noNo cost is associated with these liabilities (see Note 11)










1716


The following table summarizes the activity of Level 3 inputs measured on a recurring basis:
Fair Value Measurements of Common Stock Warrants and Purchase Rights using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) Nine Months Ended September 30,
  2012 2011
Balance at January 1, $9,633
 $993
Additions 
 38,154
Exercises 
 (2,857)
Adjustment resulting from change in value recognized in earnings 15,340
 (24,391)
Gain on extinguishment of debt (see Note 7) 3,482
 
Balance at September 30, $28,455
 $11,899
Fair Value Measurements of Common Stock Warrants using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)Three Months Ended March 31,
 2013 2012
Balance at January 1,$17,241
 $9,633
Adjustment resulting from change in value recognized in earnings (a)23,645
 651
Gain on extinguishment of debt
 3,482
Balance at March 31,$40,886
 $13,766

(a) Adjustment resulting from change in fair value is the amount of total gains or losses for the period attributable to the change in unrealized gains or losses relating to liabilities held at the reporting date. The unrealized gain or loss is recorded in unrealized loss on change in fair value of warrants in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.
Note 9. Income Taxes
Income taxes for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 were computed using the effective tax rate estimated to be applicable
for the full fiscal year, which is subject to ongoing review and evaluation by management. In accordance with ASC 740, “Income
“Income Taxes”, the Company evaluates whether a valuation allowance should be established against the net deferred tax assets
based upon the consideration of all available evidence and using a “more likely than not” standard. Significant weight is given
to evidence that can be objectively verified. The determination to record a valuation allowance is based on the recent history of
cumulative losses and current operating performance. In conducting the analysis, the Company utilizes an approach, which
considers the current year loss, including an assessment of the degree to which any losses are driven by items that are unusual
in nature and incurred to improve future profitability. In addition, the Company reviews changes in near-term market
conditions and any other factors arising during the period, which may impact its future operating results.
The Company reported income from operations for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and a loss from operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2012. The Company incurred a loss from operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011March 31, 2013 and also incurred a loss for the year ended December 31, 2011.2012. Based primarily upon recent history of cumulative losses and the results of operations for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012,, the Company determined that it is more likely than not it will not realize benefits from the deferred tax assets in certain jurisdictions. The Company will not record income tax benefits in the condensed consolidated financial statements until it is determined that it is more likely than not that the Company will generate sufficient taxable income in the respective jurisdictions to realize the deferred income tax assets. As a result of the analysis, the Company determined that a full valuation allowance against the net deferred tax assets in certain jurisdictions, primarily in the U.S., and a partial valuation allowances in certain foreign jurisdictions, is required. At September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, the Company recorded valuation allowances against its current and non-current deferred tax assets totaling $73,77377,578. At September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 the Company had federal net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $73,27195,647.  Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code in the United States limits the utilization of net operating losses when ownership changes, as defined by that section, occur. The Company has not completedperformed an analysis of its Section 382and determined it is more likely than not that ownership changes to determine whetherchange has not occurred through December 31, 2012 and, accordingly, the utilization of certain of its net operating loss carryforwards in the United States is limited.carryfowards through such date are not subject to an annual Section 382 limitation.
Management makes judgments as to the interpretation of the tax laws that might be challenged upon an audit and cause changes to previous estimates of tax liability. In addition, the Company operates within multiple taxing jurisdictions and is subject to audit in these jurisdictions.
The Company is currently subject to audit under the statute of limitations by the Internal Revenue Service for the calendar years ended December 31, 2008 through December 31, 2011. through December 31, 2012. The Company and its subsidiaries' state and foreign tax returns are open to audit under similar statute of limitations for the calendar years ended December 31, 2007 through December 31, 2011,2012, depending on the particular jurisdiction. The Company's uncertain tax positions are related to tax years that remain subject to examination byCompany concluded its audit with the relevant taxing authorities and there have been no material changesInternal Revenue Service for the three monthsyears ended September 30, 2012.December 31, 2008 through December 31, 2010 with no tax owed due to utilization of net operating losses. The Company recognizes interest and penalties relatedagreed to unrecognized tax benefits as a componentsettlement with Canada Revenue Agency for audit of the income tax expenseyears ended December 31, 2005 through December 31, 2007.  Amounts to be paid pursuant to the agreed settlement are recorded in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations. Accrued interest and penalties are included within the related tax liability line in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.current liabilities at March 31, 2013.
The Company is currently being audited by various state jurisdictions. In management's opinion, adequate provisions for income taxes have been made for all years. If actual taxable income by tax jurisdiction varies from estimates, additional allowances or reversals of reserves may be necessary.
The Company is being audited by the Canadian Revenue Agency (“CRA”) for the years ended December 31, 2005 through December 31, 2007. In connection with the audit, the CRA issued a proposed adjustment disallowing certain management fees. At this time, the Company does not anticipate this audit to result in a material impact on the Company. The Company

18


concluded its audit by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service for the years ended December 31, 2008 through December 31, 2010 with no tax owed due to utilization of federal net operating loss carryback. The state jurisdiction impact of the federal audit adjustments is included in the Company's current liabilities. The Company is also currently being audited by various state jurisdictions. At this time, the Company does not anticipate these audits to result in a material impact on the Company.
Note 10. Related Party Transactions
ForSee Note 8 for a description of loans made by Lion to the Company and Note 11 for a description of the warrants issued by the Company to Lion see Notes 7 and 11.Lion.

17


Personal Guarantees by the Company’s CEO
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the CEO of the Company has personally guaranteed the obligations of American Apparel under four property leases aggregating $8,0987,202 in obligations. Additionally, the CEO of the Company has personally guaranteed the obligations of the Company with twoone vendorsvendor aggregating $900600.
Lease Agreement Between the Company and a Related Party
In December 2005, the Company entered into an operating lease, which commenced on November 15, 2006, for its knitting facility with a related company (“American Central Plaza, LLC”), which is partially owned by the CEO and the Chief Manufacturing Officer ("CMO") of the Company. The Company's CEO holds an 18.75% ownership interest in American Central Plaza, LLC, while the CMO holds a 6.25% interest. The remaining members of American Central Plaza, LLC are not affiliated with the Company. The lease expired in November 2011, and was subsequently extended for the next five years on substantially the same terms. Rent expense (including property taxes and insurance payments) for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 was $272March 31, 2013 and $675, and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 20112012 was $155 and $466247, respectively.
Payments to Morris Charney
Morris Charney, (“Mr. M. Charney”), is the father of the Company's CEO and serves as a director of American Apparel Canada Wholesale Inc. and a director of American Apparel Canada Retail Inc. Day to day operations of these two Canadian subsidiaries are handled by management and other employees of these subsidiaries, none of whom performs any policy making functions for the Company. Management of American Apparel sets the policies for American Apparel and its subsidiaries as a whole. Mr. M. Charney does not perform any policy making functions for the Company or any of its subsidiaries. Instead, Mr. M. Charney only provides architectural consulting services primarily for stores located in Canada and, in limited cases, in the United States.U.S. Mr. M. Charney was paid architectural consulting and director fees amounting to $6062 and $20874 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, and $22March 31, 2013 and $162 for the three and nine months endedSeptember 30, 2011,2012, respectively.
Employment Agreement with the Company's CEO
In March 2012 the Company's Board of Directors approved a three-year employment agreement with Mr. Charney commencing on April 1, 2012 that will automatically extend for successive one-year periods unless earlier terminated by the Company. The agreement provides for, among other things, a minimum annual base compensation of $800 plus performance bonuses and the right to receive 7,500 shares of the Company's common stock, subject to performance hurdles and other terms, and conditions as described in the agreement. See Note 12.
Note 11. Stockholders' (Deficit) Equity
Common Stock Warrants
Lion Warrants
OnAs of March 31, 2013, Lion held warrants (the "Lion Warrants") to purchase March 13, 201221,606, in connection with the new credit agreement with Crystal Financial, LLC, the Company entered into an amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement (see Note 7), which required that the warrants issued to Lion be amended to, among other things, extend the term shares of the warrants to February 18, 2022 and add a provision pursuant to which, if American Apparel does not meet a certain quarterly EBITDA amount, theCompany's common stock, with an exercise price of the warrants would be reduced by $0.25 (a one-time adjustment for the first violation of such covenant; subsequent violations would not result in further adjustment). As of March 31, 2012, the Company did not meet the EBITDA requirement, and, as a result, the exercise price of the existing Lion warrants was reduced by $0.25 to $0.75 per share. These warrants expire on February 18, 2022.
The fair value for the warrantsLion Warrants at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 was estimated using the Binomial Lattice option valuation model. The fair value of the warrantsLion Warrants at September 30, 2011March 31, 2012 was estimated using the Monte Carlo simulation valuation model. On a weighted average basis, the calculations assumed a stock price of $1.06, exercise price of $0.81, volatility of 76.05%, annual risk free rate of 2.01%, and a term of 9.78 years.

19


As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the fair value of the 21,606 Lion Warrants was estimated to be $28,24340,524 and was recorded as a current liability in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets. The calculation as of March 31, 2013 assumed a stock price of $2.17, exercise price of $0.75, volatility of 73.72%, annual risk free interest rate of 1.66%, a contractual remaining term of 9.02 years and no dividends.
SOF Warrants
As a resultof March 31, 2013, SOF Investments, L.P. ("SOF") held warrants to purchase 1,000 shares of the change inCompany's common stock, with an exercise price for the Lion Warrants on March 31, 2012, the exercise price of the SOF warrants were changed to $2.148 per share. share, subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. These warrants expire on December 19, 2013.
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the fair value of the SOF warrants, estimated using the Binomial Lattice option valuation model, was $212362 and wasis recorded as a current liability in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets. On a weighted average basis, theThe calculation as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 was based onassumed a contractual remaining termstock price of 1.2 years$2.17, exercise price of $2.148, volatility of 49.77%, annual risk free interest rate of 0.19%0.12%, volatilitya contractual remaining term of 58.99%0.72 years and no dividends.

18


The following table summarizes common stock warrants issued, forfeited, expired and outstanding (shares in thousands):
 Number of Shares Weighted Average Exercise Price Weighted Average Contractual Life (Years)
Outstanding - January 1, 201222,606
 $1.05
 6.0
 
Issued (1)
44,212
 0.90
 7.3
 
Forfeited (1)
(44,212) 1.03
 
 
Expired
 
 
 
Outstanding - September 30, 201222,606
 $0.81
 9.0
 
Fair value - September 30, 2012$28,455
     
(1) Issued and forfeited warrants represents repriced shares.
 Number of Shares Weighted Average Exercise Price Weighted Average Contractual Life (Years)
Outstanding - January 1, 201322,606
 $0.81
 8.8
 
Issued
 
 
 
Forfeited
 
 
 
Expired
 
 
 
Outstanding - March 31, 201322,606
 $0.81
 8.5
 
Fair value - March 31, 2013$40,886
     
Earnings Per Share
The Company presents earnings per share (“EPS”) utilizing a dual presentation of basic and diluted EPS. Basic EPS includes no dilution and is computed by dividing net loss available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted EPS includes the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into common stock.
The Company had common stock under various options, warrants and other agreements at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012. The weighted average effects of 56,87453,456 and 51,86256,566 shares at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012, respectively, were excluded from the calculations of net loss per share for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012, because their impact would have been anti-dilutive.
A summary of the potential stock issuances under various options, warrants and other agreements that could have a dilutive effect on the shares outstanding as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012 are as follows:
 2012 20112013 2012
SOF warrants 1,000
 1,000
1,000
 1,000
Lion warrants 21,606
 21,606
21,606
 21,606
Shares issuable to Mr. Charney based on market conditions (1)
 20,416
 20,416
20,416
 20,416
Contingent shares issuable to Mr. Charney based on market conditions (2)
 2,112
 2,112
2,112
 2,112
Contingent shares issuable to Mr. Charney based on performance factors (3)
 7,500
 
5,000
 7,500
Employee options & restricted shares 4,240
 6,728
3,322
 3,932
 56,874
 51,862
53,456
 56,566
(1) Included Charney Anti-Dilution Rights pursuant to the April 26, 2011 Investor Purchase Agreement
(2) Pursuant to the March 24, 2011 conversion of debt to equity
(3) Pursuant to hisMr. Charney's employment agreement commencing April 1, 2012
The table above does not include additional warrants that may be issuable to Lion pursuant to the anti-dilution provisions under the Lion CreditLoan Agreement such as in the event anti-dilutive shares are issued to Mr. Charney pursuant to the Charney Anti-Dilution Rights.

20


Note 12. Share-Based Compensation
PlansPlan Description
2007 - Plan
On December 12, 2007, the Company's stockholders approved the 2007 Performance Equity Plan (as amended, the “2007 Plan”). The 2007 Plan authorizes the granting of a variety of incentive awards, the exercise or vesting of which would allow up to an aggregate of 11,000 shares of the Company's common stock to be acquired by the holders of such awards. The purpose of the 2007 Plan is to enable the Company to offer its employees, officers, directors and consultants whose past, present and/or potential contributions to the Company has been, are or will be important to the success of the Company, an opportunity to acquire a proprietary interest in the Company. The 2007 Plan provides for various types of incentive awards including, but not limited to: incentive stock options, non-qualifying stock options, reload stock options, restricted stock and stock appreciation rights. The 2007 Plan enables the compensation committee to exercise its discretion to determine virtually all terms of each grant, which allowed the Company to respond to changes in compensation practices, tax laws, accounting regulations and the size and diversity of its business.
2011 Plan
On June 21, 2011 the Company's Board of Directors and stockholders approved the American Apparel, Inc. 2011 Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan (the 2011“2011 Plan”). The 2011 Plan authorizes the granting of a variety of incentive awards, the exercise or vesting of which would allow up to an aggregate of 10,000 shares of the Company's common stock to be acquired by the holders of such awards. On March 21, 2013, the Company's Board of Directors approved, subject to stockholders approval at the June 25, 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of American Apparel, Inc., amendments to the 2011 Plan to increase the maximum number of shares reserved under the 2011 Plan to 17,500 shares and increase the number of shares that may be awarded to any one participant during any calendar year to 3,000 shares. The purpose of the 2011 Plan is to provide an incentive to selected employees, directors, independent contractors, and consultants of the Company or its affiliates, and provides that the Company may grant options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, and other stock-based and cash-based awards. The 2011 Plan provides for each of the Company's non-employee directors to automatically receive an annual stock grant, equal to the number of shares of the Company's common stock having an aggregate market value of $80, at the beginning of each year of Board service. As of September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, there were approximately 9,2958,841 shares available for future grants under the 2011 Plan.
Restricted Share Awards - The following table summarizes shares of restricted stock that were granted, vested, forfeited and outstanding under the 2007 and 2011 Plans (shares in thousands):

19


Number of Restricted Shares Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Weighted Average Remaining Vesting Period (in years)Number of Restricted Shares Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Weighted Average Remaining Vesting Period (in years)
Non-vested - January 1, 20123,186
 $1.45
 2.7
Non-vested - January 1, 20132,644
 $1.33
 1.3
Granted1,348
 0.92
 434
 1.80
 
Vested(796) 0.88
 (443) 1.00
 
Forfeited(198) 1.25
 (13) 1.53
 
Non-vested - September 30, 20123,540
 $1.38
 1.1
Non-vested - March 31, 20132,622
 $1.46
 1.3
Vesting of the restricted share awards to employees may be either immediately upon grant or over a period of fourthree to five years of continued service by the employee in equal annual installments. Vesting is immediate in the case of members of the Board of Directors. Share-based compensation is recognized over the vesting period based on the grant-date fair value.












21


Stock Option Awards - The following table summarizes stock options granted, forfeited, expired and outstanding (shares in thousands):
 Number of Shares Weighted Average Exercise Price Weighted Average Contractual Remaining Life (Years) Aggregate Intrinsic Value
Outstanding - January 1, 2012950
 $1.06
 9.5
  
Granted
 
 
  
Forfeited
 
 
  
Expired(250) 1.75
 
  
Outstanding - September 30, 2012700
 $0.82
 9.0
  
Vested (exercisable) - September 30, 2012350
 $0.82
 9.0
 $
Non-vested (exercisable) - September 30, 2012350
 $0.82
 9.0
 $
 Number of Shares Weighted Average Exercise Price Weighted Average Contractual Remaining Life (Years) Aggregate Intrinsic Value
Outstanding - January 1, 2013700
 $0.82
 8.8
  
Granted
 
 
  
Forfeited
 
 
  
Expired
 
 
  
Outstanding - March 31, 2013700
 $0.82
 8.5
  
Vested (exercisable) - March 31, 2013525
 $0.82
 8.5
 $
Non-vested (exercisable) - March 31, 2013175
 $0.82
 8.5
 $
Share-Based Compensation Expense
- During the three months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012, the Company recorded share-based compensation expense of $2,9493,547 and $2,0931,842, respectively, related to its share-based compensation awards that are expected to vest. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012No and 2011, the Company recorded share-based compensation expense of $7,333 and $4,538, respectively, related to its share-based compensation awards that are expected to vest. No amounts have been capitalized. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 unrecorded compensation cost related to non-vested awards was $11,02412,380, which is expected to be recognized through 20152016.
CEO Anti-Dilution Rights - During the three months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012, the Company recorded share-based compensation expense (included in the above) associated with Mr. Charney's certain anti-dilution rights of $1,1052,071 and $1,197, respectively. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, the Company recorded share-based compensation expense of $3,599 and $1,8081,247, respectively. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, unrecorded compensation cost was $3,4316,373, which is expected to be recognized through 2015.
On October 16, 2012, the Company and Mr. Charney entered into an amendment to the anti-dilution provisions contained in the Purchase Agreement with Mr. Charney dated as of April 27, 2011. Subject to receipt of any required shareholder approval under the rules of the NYSE MKT, the amendment extends by one year the measurement periods for Mr. Charney’s anti-dilution protection provisions and reduces the length of the corresponding stock price target periods from 60 days to 30 days. As of October 16, 2012, the fair value of these awards of $13,192 was determined under the Monte Carlo simulation pricing model. The calculation was based on the exercise price of $0, the stock price of $1.3, annual risk free rate of 0.45%, volatility of 90.46% and a term of 3.5 years.
CEO Performance-Based Award - Pursuant to an employment agreement with Mr. Charney commencing on April 1, 2012, the Company provided to the CEO rights to 7,500 shares of the Company's stock (see Note 10).stock. The shares are issuable in three equal installments, one per each measurement period, only upon the achievement of certain EBITDA targets for each of fiscal 2012, 2013 and 2014. For the fiscal 2012 measurement period, the Company achieved the target EBITDA and approved the award of such shares. Subject to approval of the Amended and Restated 2011 Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan by the stockholders of the Company, 2,500 shares will be issued during 2013.
The grant date fair value of the award is based on the share price of $0.75 and will be recognized over the related service and amortization period in three probability-weighted terms of 1.2, 2.1 and 3.1 years corresponding to the three measurement periods. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the Company recorded share-based compensation expense of $859 and $1,718, respectively.. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, unrecorded compensation cost was $3,9062,188, which is expected to be recognized through 2015.
Non-Employee Directors
On January 2 and April 1, 2012, July 2, 2012 and October 1, 20122013, the Company issued a quarterly stock grant to each non-employee director of approximately 12, 11$10 and 7 sharesworth of the Company's common stock, based upon the closing priceson grant date fair values of $0.82, $0.901.13 and $1.532.10 per share, respectively. Additionally, Messrs. Danzinger and Igelman each received an additional 23 sharesrespectively, for services performed during the second half of 2011. The share-based compensation is reflected in operating expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.quarters ended December 31, 2012 and March 31, 2013, respectively.

20


Note 13. Commitments and Contingencies
Operating Leases
The Company conducts retail operations under operating leases, which expire at various dates through September 2022. The Company's primary manufacturing facilities and executive offices are currently under a long-term lease, which expires on

22


July 31, 2019. Operating lease rent expense (including real estate taxes and common area maintenance costs) was approximately $19,66719,902 and $57,48318,788 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, and $19,612March 31, 2013 and $58,874 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011,2012, respectively. The Company did not incur any significant contingent rent during these periods. Rent expense is allocated to cost of sales (for production-related activities), selling expenses (primarily for retail stores) and general and administrative expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.
Sales Tax
The Company sells its products through its wholesale business, retail stores and the internet. The Company operates these channels separately and accounts for sales and use tax accordingly. The Company is periodically audited by state taxing authorities and it is possible they may disagree with the Company's method of assessing and remitting these taxes. The Company believes that it properly assesses and remits all applicable state sales taxes in the applicable jurisdictions and has accrued approximately $289 as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and as of December 31, 20112012 for state sales tax contingencies.
Customs and duties
The Company is being audited by the German customs authorities for the years ended December 31, 2009 through December 31, 2011. As2011. In connection with the audit, the German customs has issued retroactive assessments on the Company's imports totaling $4,657 at the March 31, 2013 exchange rates (assessment was issued in Euros). The size of the retroactive assessments are largely due to member countries of the European Union (“E.U.”) limited right to impose retaliatory duties on certain imports of U.S. origin goods into the E.U., based upon the World Trade Organization's (“WTO”) Dispute Settlement procedures and the related WTO arbitrator rulings brought into place as a result of EU complaint against the U.S. "Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000" (the "CDSOA") usually referred to as "the Byrd Amendment". Consequently, the German customs are attempting to impose a substantially higher tariff rate than the original rate that the Company had paid on the imports, approximately doubling the amount of the tariff that the Company would have to pay.
The Company believes that it has valid arguments to challenge the merit of the German customs assessment and has filed litigation in German courts to contest such assessment. However, as the case is still in its preliminary stages, the Company is unable to predictreasonably estimate the financial outcome of the matter at this time as it cannot predict whether the outcome will be favorable or unfavorable to the Company, or if the Company will be required to advance material amounts during the pendency of the litigation, and accordingly has not recorded a provision for this matter. However, noNo assurance can be made that this matter will not result in a material financial exposure in connection with the audit, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Advertising
At September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, the Company had approximately $1,6073,242 and $4,3784,456, respectively, in open advertising commitments, which primarily relate to print advertisements in various newspapers and magazines, as well as outdoor advertisingadvertising. The majority of these commitments are expected to be paid during the remainder of 20122013.
Note 14. Workers' Compensation and Other Self-Insurance Reserves
The Company uses a combination of third-party insurance and/or self-insurance for a number of risks including workers’ compensation, medical benefits provided to employees, and general liability claims. General liability costs relate primarily to litigation that arises from store operations. Self-insurance reserves include estimates of both filed claims carried at their expected ultimate settlement value and claims incurred but not yet reported. The Company’s estimated claim amounts are discounted using a rate of 0.62% with a duration that approximates the duration of the Company’s self-insurance reserve portfolio. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 the undiscounted liability amount was $14,94015,035. The Company’s liability reflected on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets represents an estimate of the ultimate cost of claims incurred as of the balance sheet dates. In estimating this liability, the Company utilizes loss development factors based on Company specific data to project the future development of incurred losses. Loss estimates are adjusted based upon actual claim settlements and reported claims. These projections are subject to a high degree of variability based upon future inflation rates, litigation trends, legal interpretations, benefit level changes and claim settlement patterns. Although the Company does not expect the amounts ultimately paid to differ significantly from its estimates, self-insurance reserves could be affected if future claim experience differs significantly from the historical trends and the assumptions applied.
The workers' compensation liability is based on an estimate of losses for claims incurred, but not paid at the end of the period. Funding is made directly to the providers and/or claimants by the insurance company. To guarantee performance under the

21


workers' compensation program, as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, the Company had issued standby letters of credit in the amountsamount of $3,326 and $5,4921,100, respectively, with three insurance companies being the beneficiaries, through a bank.bank, and cash deposits of $16,124 and $14,624, respectively, in favor of insurance company beneficiaries. At September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the Company recorded a total reserve of $14,68514,773, of which $3,8973,857 is included in accrued expenses and $10,78810,916 is included in other long-term liabilities on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 20112012, the Company recorded a total reserve of $14,18914,472, of which $3,5983,778 is included in accrued expenses and $10,59110,694 is included in other long-term liabilities on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets. These reserves for potential losses on existing claims are believed to be for potential losses, which are probable and reasonably estimable.
The Company self-insures its health insurance benefit obligations while the claims are administered through a third party administrator. The medical benefit liability is based on estimated losses for claims incurred, but not paid at the end of the period. Funding is made directly to the providers and/or claimants by the insurance company. At September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 20112012, the Company's total reserve of $1,9101,752 and $1,7201,510, respectively, was included in accrued expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Note 15. Business Segment and Geographic Area Information

23


The Company reports the following four operating segments: U.S. Wholesale, U.S. Retail, Canada, and International. The Company believes this method of segment reporting reflects both the way its business segments are managed and the way the performance of each segment is evaluated. The U.S. Wholesale segment consists of the Company's wholesale operations of sales of imprintableundecorated apparel products to distributors and third party screen printers in the United States, as well as the Company's online consumer sales to U.S. customers. The U.S. Retail segment consists of the Company's retail operations in the United States, which was comprised of 140139 retail stores operating in the United States, as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013. The Canada segment includes retail, wholesale and online consumer operations in Canada. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the retail operations in the Canada segment were comprised of 3534 retail stores. The International segment includes retail, wholesale and online consumer operations outside of the United States and Canada. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the retail operations in the International segment were comprised of 76 retail stores operating in 18 countries outside the United States and Canada. All of the Company's retail stores sell the Company's apparel products directly to consumers.
The Company's management evaluates performance based on a number of factors; however, the primary measures of performance are net sales and income or loss from operations of each business segment, as these are the key performance indicators reviewed by management. Operating income or loss for each segment does not include unallocated corporate general and administrative expenses, interest expense and other miscellaneous income/expense items. Corporate general and administrative expenses include, but are not limited to: human resources, legal, finance, information technology, accounting, executive compensation and various other corporate level expenses.

2422


The following tables representsrepresent key financial information of the Company's reportable segments before unallocated corporate expenses:  
 Three Months Ended September 30, 2012
 
U.S. Wholesale 
 U.S. Retail Canada International Consolidated
Wholesale net sales$39,862
 $
 $3,215
 $2,113
 $45,190
Retail net sales
 52,714
 13,086
 39,256
 105,056
Online consumer net sales6,985
 
 416
 4,513
 11,914
Total net sales to external customers46,847
 52,714
 16,717
 45,882
 162,160
Gross profit12,873
 34,361
 10,166
 27,800
 85,200
Income from segment operations5,811
 3,116
 721
 4,192
 13,840
Depreciation and amortization1,446
 2,747
 394
 951
 5,538
Capital expenditures3,300
 2,136
 328
 894
 6,658
Deferred rent expense (benefit)297
 (349) (58) (122) (232)
  
 Three Months Ended September 30, 2011
 U.S. Wholesale U.S. Retail Canada International Consolidated
Wholesale net sales$36,780
 $
 $2,958
 $2,825
 $42,563
Retail net sales
 43,104
 11,944
 33,244
 88,292
Online consumer net sales5,625
 
 362 4,047
 10,034
Total net sales to external customers42,405
 43,104
 15,264
 40,116
 140,889
Gross profit8,897
 29,607
 9,432
 27,055
 74,991
Income (loss) from segment operations4,465
 (622) (527) 5,339
 8,655
Depreciation and amortization1,833
 2,599
 404
 1,290
 6,126
Capital expenditures838
 1,169
 77
 473
 2,557
Retail store impairment
 119
 640
 25
 784
Deferred rent expense (benefit)59
 (294) (30) (219) (484)


25


Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012Three Months Ended March 31, 2013
U.S. Wholesale 
 U.S. Retail Canada International Consolidated
U.S. Wholesale 
 U.S. Retail Canada International Consolidated
Wholesale net sales$110,380
 $
 $9,449
 $7,183
 $127,012
$34,708
 $
 $2,579
 $1,941
 $39,228
Retail net sales
 143,444
 34,181
 102,859
 280,484

 44,344
 9,112
 30,452
 83,908
Online consumer net sales21,232
 
 1,466
 14,088
 36,786
9,118
 
 666
 5,140
 14,924
Total net sales to external customers131,612
 143,444
 45,096
 124,130
 444,282
43,826
 44,344
 12,357
 37,533
 138,060
Gross profit36,582
 93,977
 26,627
 77,106
 234,292
12,021
 29,191
 7,420
 24,236
 72,868
Income (loss) from segment operations18,324
 449
 (1,888) 8,339
 25,224
5,165
 (2,447) (652) 1,031
 3,097
Depreciation and amortization4,795
 8,074
 1,107
 3,064
 17,040
1,603
 2,970
 433
 1,025
 6,031
Capital expenditures6,502
 3,990
 1,144
 2,621
 14,257
3,076
 2,900
 183
 1,195
 7,354
Retail store impairment
 
 129
 
 129

 78
 
 
 78
Deferred rent expense (benefit)393
 (509) (156) (377) (649)20
 (212) (131) (125) (448)
  
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011Three Months Ended March 31, 2012
U.S. Wholesale U.S. Retail Canada International ConsolidatedU.S. Wholesale U.S. Retail Canada International Consolidated
Wholesale net sales$98,840
 $
 $8,711
 $7,479
 $115,030
$33,920
 $
 $2,855
 $2,222
 $38,997
Retail net sales
 120,483
 32,246
 92,059
 244,788

 42,609
 9,920
 28,703
 81,232
Online consumer net sales16,353
 
 1,299 12,290
 29,942
7,415
 
 563 4,453
 12,431
Total net sales to external customers115,193
 120,483
 42,256
 111,828
 389,760
41,335
 42,609
 13,338
 35,378
 132,660
Gross profit30,518
 82,031
 25,463
 73,043
 211,055
11,758
 28,288
 7,068
 22,942
 70,056
Income (loss) from segment operations16,002
 (7,126) (1,954) 7,618
 14,540
6,526
 (3,104) (2,714) 597
 1,305
Depreciation and amortization6,015
 7,887
 1,246
 3,961
 19,109
1,738
 2,645
 339
 1,130
 5,852
Capital expenditures2,179
 3,848
 209
 1,048
 7,284
1,093
 1,444
 512
 641
 3,690
Retail store impairment
 296
 642
 1,498
 2,436
Deferred rent expense (benefit)211
 (1,341) (78) (654) (1,862)49
 117
 (48) (126) (8)
Reconciliation of reportable segments combined income from operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012 to the consolidated (loss) incomeloss before income taxes is as follows:  
Three Months Ended September 30, Nine Months Ended September 30,Three Months Ended March 31,
2012 2011 2012 20112013 2012
Consolidated income from operations of reportable segments$13,840
 $8,655
 $25,224
 $14,540
$3,097
 $1,305
Unallocated corporate expenses(9,223) (11,283) (31,111) (35,482)(13,574) (11,100)
Interest expense(10,454) (8,832) (30,274) (23,715)(11,214) (9,553)
Foreign currency transaction gain (loss)685
 (1,855) (141) (780)
Unrealized (loss) gain on change in fair value of warrants and purchase rights(13,312) 6,101
 (15,340) 21,201
Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt
 
 11,588
 (3,114)
Other (expense) income(36) 186
 (188) 240
Foreign currency transaction (loss) gain(713) 950
Unrealized loss on change in fair value of warrants(23,645) (651)
Gain on extinguishment of debt
 11,588
Other income (expense)5
 (128)
Consolidated loss before income taxes$(18,500) $(7,028) $(40,242) $(27,110)$(46,044) $(7,589)
 

2623


Net sales by geographic location of customercustomers for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012, are as follows:
Three Months Ended September 30, Nine Months Ended September 30,Three Months Ended March 31,
2012 2011 2012 20112013 2012
United States$99,562
 $85,509
 $275,056
 $235,676
$88,170
 $83,944
Canada16,717
 15,264
 45,096
 42,256
12,357
 13,338
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)17,311
 17,292
 48,901
 50,194
15,069
 14,767
United Kingdom12,060
 9,888
 32,811
 27,299
9,595
 9,274
South Korea3,451
 3,098
 8,371
 7,836
2,169
 1,961
China1,549
 1,118
 3,791
 2,896
1,494
 906
Japan6,151
 4,240
 15,190
 10,189
4,438
 3,960
Australia3,629
 2,851
 10,116
 8,572
3,171
 2,959
Other foreign countries1,730
 1,629
 4,950
 4,842
1,597
 1,551
Total consolidated net sales$162,160
 $140,889
 $444,282
 $389,760
$138,060
 $132,660

Note 16. Litigation
The Company is subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of business, including those related to litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes, and others. When the Company is aware of a claim or potential claim, the Companyit assesses the likelihood of any loss or exposure. If it is probable that a loss will result and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, the Company will record a liability for the loss. In addition to the estimated loss, the recorded liability includes probable and estimable legal costs associated with the claim or potential claim. There is no assurance that such matters will not materially and adversely affect the Company's business, financial position, and results of operations or cash flows.
Individual Actions
On February 7, 2006, Sylvia Hsu, a former employee of American Apparel, filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Los Angeles District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) (Hsu v. American Apparel: Charge No. 480- 2006-00418), alleging that she was subjected to sexual harassment by a co-worker and constructively discharged as a result of the sexual harassment and a hostile working environment. On March 9, 2007, the EEOC expanded the scope of its investigation to other employees of American Apparel who may have been sexually harassed. On August 9, 2010, the EEOC issued a written determination finding that reasonable cause exists to believe the Company discriminated against Ms. Hsu and women, as a class, on the basis of their female gender, by subjecting them to sexual harassment. No finding was made on the issue of Ms. Hsu's alleged constructive discharge. In its August 19, 2010 written determination, the EEOC has invited the parties to engage in informal conciliation. If the parties are unable to reach a settlement which is acceptable to the EEOC, the EEOC will advise the parties of the court enforcement alternatives available to Ms. Hsu, aggrieved persons, and the EEOC. The insurance carrier for the Company has asserted that it is not obligated to provide coverage for this proceeding.  The Company has not recorded a provision for this matter and intends to workis working cooperatively with the EEOC to resolve the claim in a manner acceptable to all parties. Should the matter be decided against the Company, the Company could experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm. The Company does not believe at this time believe that any settlement will involve thea payment of damages in an amount that would be material to and adversely affect the Company's business, financial position, and results of operations andor cash flows.
On November 5, 2009, Guillermo Ruiz, a former employee of American Apparel, filed suit against the Company on behalf of putative classes of all current and former non-exempt California employees (Guillermo Ruiz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. American Apparel, Inc., Case Number BC425487) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, alleging the Company failed to pay certain wages due for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof and to pay wages due upon termination to certain of the Company's employees. The complaint further alleges that the Company failed to comply with certain itemized employee wage statement provisions and violations of unfair competition law.  The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages and economic and/or special damages in an unspecified amount, premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement for attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. The Company does not have insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against the Company, the Company could not only incur substantial liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm. The Company has accrued an estimate for this loss contingency in its accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2012.  The Company may have an exposure to loss in excess of the amounts accrued, however, an estimate of such potential loss cannot be made at this time. Moreover, no assurance can be made that this matter either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and

27


reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, larger than the Company's estimate, which could have a material adverse effect upon its financial condition and results of operations.
On June 21, 2010, Antonio Partida, a former employee of American Apparel, filed suit against the Company on behalf of putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees (Antonio Partida, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. American Apparel (USA), LLC, Case No. 30-2010-00382719-CU-OE-CXC) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Orange, alleging the Company failed to pay certain wages for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof, and to pay wages due upon separation. The complaint further alleges that the Company failed to timely pay wages, unlawfully deducted wages and failed to comply with certain itemized employee wage

24


statement provisions and violations of unfair competition law. The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages and economic and/or special damages in an unspecified amount, premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. There is no known insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against the Company, the Company could not only incur substantial liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm. The Company has accrued an estimate for this loss contingency in its accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2012.  The Company may have an exposure to loss in excess of the amounts accrued, however, an estimate of such potential loss cannot be made at this time.  Moreover, no assurance can be made that this matter either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, larger than its estimate, which could have a material adverse effect upon the Company's financial condition and results of operations.
On or about December 2, 2010, Emilie Truong, a former employee of American Apparel, filed suit against the Company on behalf of putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees (Emilie Truong, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. American Apparel, Inc. and American Apparel LLC, Case No. BC450505) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, alleging the Company failed to timely provide final paychecks upon separation.  Plaintiff is seeking unspecified premium wages, attorneys' fees and costs, disgorgement of profits, and an injunction against the alleged unlawful practices. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. There is no known insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against the Company, the Company could not only incur substantial liability, but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.  The Company is unable to predict the financial outcome of these matters at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure which could result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However, no assurance can be made that these matters, either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, which could have a material adverse effect upon its financial condition and results of operations.
On or about February 9, 2011, Jessica Heupel, a former retail employee filed suit on behalf of putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees (Jessica Heupel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. American Apparel Retail, Inc., Case No. 37-2011-00085578-CU-OE-CTL) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego, alleging the Company failed to pay certain wages for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof, and to pay wages due upon separation.  The plaintiff is seeking monetary damages as follows: (1) for alleged meal and rest period violations; (2) for alleged failure to timely pay final wages, as well as for punitive damages for the same; and (3) unspecified damages for unpaid minimum wage and overtime.  In addition, Plaintiff seeks premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. There is no known insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against the Company, the Company could not only incur substantial liability, but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.  The Company is unable to predict the financial outcome of these matters at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure, which result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However, no assurance can be made that these matters, either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, which could have a material adverse effect upon its financial condition and results of operations.
On or about September 9, 2011, Anthony Heupel, a former retail employee initiated arbitration proceedings on behalf of putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees, alleging the Company failed to pay certain wages for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof, and to pay wages due upon separation.  The plaintiff is seeking monetary damages in an amount in excess of $3,600,$3,600, as follows: (1) for alleged meal and rest period violations; (2) for alleged failure to timely pay final wages, as well as for punitive damages for the same; and (3) unspecified damages for unpaid minimum wage and overtime.  In addition, Plaintiff seeks premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. ThereThis matter is no knownnow proceeding in arbitration.
The Company does not have insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against the Company, the Company could not only incur a substantial liability, but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.above matters. The Company is unablehas accrued an estimate for the loss contingency for each of the above matters (excluding the Hsu case as noted above) in the Company's accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2013. The Company may have an exposure to predictloss in excess of the financial outcomeamounts accrued, however, an estimate of these matterssuch potential loss cannot be made at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure which could result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However,time. Moreover, no assurance

28


can be made that these matters either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, larger than the Company's estimate, which could have a material adverse effect upon itsthe Company's financial condition and results of operations.
Additionally, the Company is currently engaged in other employment-related claims and other matters incidental to the Company's business.  The Company believes that all such claims against the Company are without merit or not material, and the Company intends to vigorously dispute the validity of the plaintiffs' claims. While the ultimate resolution of such claims cannot be determined, based on information at this time, the Company believes, but the Company cannot provide assurance that, the amount, and ultimate liability, if any, with respect to these actions will not materially affect the Company's business, financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Should any of these matters be decided against the Company, the Company could not only incur liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.
Derivative Matters
Two shareholder derivative lawsuits entitled Nikolai Grigoriev v. Dov Charney, et al., Case(Case No. CV106576 GAF (JCx) (the “Grigoriev Action”) and Andrew Smukler v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. CV107518 RSWL (FFMx) (the “Smukler Action”), were filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on September 2, 2010 and October 7, 2010, respectively, and four shareholder derivative lawsuits, entitled John L. Smith v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 443763 (the "Smith Action"), Lisa Kim v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 443902 (the "Kim Action"), Teresa Lankford v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 445094 (the "Lankford Action"), and Wesley Norris v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 447890 (the "Norris Action")which were filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles on August 16, 2010, September 3, 2010, September 7, 2010, and October 21, 2010, respectively, by persons identifying themselves as American Apparel shareholders and purporting to act on behalf of American Apparel, naming American Apparel as a nominal defendant and certain current and former officers, directors, and executives of the Company as defendants.
Plaintiffs in the Smith Action, Kim Action, and Norris Action allege causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of (i) the Company's alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; and (ii) the Company's alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection.  The Lankford Action alleges seven causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets also arising out of (i) the Company's alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; and (ii) the Company's alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection.  On November 4, 2010, the four lawsuits filed in the Superior Court of the State of California were consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. BC 443763 (the "State Derivative Action").  On April 12, 2011, the Court issued an order staying the State Derivative Action on the grounds that the case is duplicative of the Federal Derivative Action, as well as the Federal Securities Action currently pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (see below).
On November 12, 2010, the Grigoriev Action and Smukler Action weresubsequently consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. CV106576 (the “Federal Derivative Action”).  Plaintiffs in the Federal Derivative Action filed a Consolidated Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint on June 13, 2011.  The amended complaint allegesallege a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of (i) the Company's alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; (ii) the Company's alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection; and (iii) the Company's alleged failure to implement controls sufficient to prevent a sexually hostile and discriminatory work environment.  Plaintiffs in each of the derivative cases seek damages on behalf of American Apparel in an unspecified amount, as well as equitable and injunctive relief. The Company does not maintain any direct exposure to loss in connection with these shareholder derivative lawsuits. The lawsuits do not assert any claims against the Company. The Company's status as a “Nominal Defendant” in the actions reflects the fact that the lawsuits are maintained by the named plaintiffs on behalf of American Apparel and that plaintiffs seek damages on the Company's behalf. On August 29, 2011, defendantsThe Company filed a motion to dismiss the Federal Derivative Action.  A hearing on the motionAction which was held on December 12, 2011.  On July 31, 2012, the Court dismissed the Federal Derivative Action,granted with leave to amend.amend on July 31, 2012. Plaintiffs indid not amend the Federal Derivative Actioncomplaint and subsequently filed a motion to dismiss each of their claims, with prejudice, for the stated purpose of taking an immediate appeal of the Court's July 31, 2012 order. On October 16, 2012, the Court granted the Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss the consolidated derivative complaint and entered

25


judgment accordingly. On November 12, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.Appeals where the case is currently pending.
Four shareholder derivative lawsuits (Case No. BC 443763, Case No. BC 443902, Case No. BC 445094, and Case No. BC 447890) were filed in fall of 2010 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles which were subsequently consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. BC 443763 (the "State Derivative Action"). 
Three of the matters comprising the State Derivative Action allege causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of (i) the Company's alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; and (ii) the Company's alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection.  The fourth matter alleges seven causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets also arising out of the same allegations.  On April 12, 2011, the Court issued an order granting a stay (which currently remains in place) of the State Derivative Action on the grounds that the case is duplicative of the Federal Derivative Action, as well as the Federal Securities Action currently pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (see below).
Both the Federal Derivative Action and State Derivative Actions are covered under the Company's Directors and Officers Liability insurance policy, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
Other Proceedings
Four putative class action lawsuits, entitled Anthony Andrade v. American Apparel, et al., Case(Case No. CV106352 MMM (RCx), Douglas Ormsby v. American Apparel, et al., Case No. CV106513 MMM (RCx), James Costa v. American Apparel, et al., Case No. CV106516 MMM (RCx), and Wesley Childs v. American Apparel, et al., Case No. CV106680 GW (JCGx),) were filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on August 25,in the Fall of 2010 August 31, 2010, August 31, 2010, and September 8, 2010, respectively, against American Apparel and certain of the Company's officers and executives on behalf of American Apparel shareholders who purchased the Company's common stock between December 19, 2006 and August 17, 2010. On December 3, 2010, the four lawsuits were consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Lead Case No. CV106352 MMM (JCGx) (the “Federal Securities Action”). On March 14, 2011, the Court appointed the firm of Barroway Topaz, LLP (now Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP) to serve asThe lead counsel and Mr. Charles Rendelman to serve as lead plaintiff. On April 29, 2011, Mr. Rendelman filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint against American Apparel, certain of the Company's officers, and Lion, allegingplaintiff alleges two causes of action for violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act, and RulesRule 10b-5 promulgated under Section 10(b), arising out of alleged

29


misrepresentations contained in the Company's press releases, public filings with the SEC, and other public statements relating to (i) the adequacy of the Company's internal and financial control policies and procedures; (ii) the Company's employment practices; and (iii) the effect that the dismissal of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection would have on the Company. Plaintiff seeks damages in an unspecified amount, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and equitable relief as the Court may deem proper.  On May 31, 2011, defendantsThe Company filed two motions to dismiss the Federal Securities Action which the court granted with leave to amend. Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint on February 15, 2013. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the Federal Securities Action. On January 13, 2012, the Court dismissed the Federal Securities Action, with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on February 27, 2012. The Company moved to dismiss the amended complaint on March 30, 2012. A15, 2013. The hearing on the motion was heard on May 21, 2012.will be held June 3, 2013. The Court took the matter under submission. Discovery is stayed in the Federal Securities Action as well as inis covered under the Company's Directors and Officers Liability insurance policy, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
Should any of the above matters (i.e., the Federal Derivative Action, pending resolution of motions to dismissthe State Derivative Action, or the Federal Securities Action.
Action) be decided against the Company in an amount that exceeds the Company's insurance coverage, or if liability is imposed on grounds which fall outside the scope of the Company's insurance coverage, the Company could not only incur a substantial liability, but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.  The Company is unable to predict the financial outcome of these matters at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure which could result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However, no assurance can be made that these matters, either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, which could have a material adverse effect upon the Company's financial condition and results of operations.
OnThe Company has previously disclosed an arbitration filed by the Company on February 17, 2011, the Companyrelated to cases filed complaints in arbitration against five former employees seeking: (1) declaratory relief that the arbitration, confidentiality, severance and bonus agreements signed by the former employees are valid and enforceable; (2) damages in the eventSupreme Court of New York, County of Kings (Case No. 5018-1) and Superior Court of the former employees or anyoneState of them breaches their confidentiality agreements, as threatened; (3) attorneys' fees and costs incurred to compel the suit into arbitration; (4) declaratory relief that the former employees' claims of sexual harassment and sexual assault are false and without merit; and (5) declaratory relief that the former employees have attempted to engage in abuse of processCalifornia for the purposeCounty of extorting from the CompanyLos Angeles (Case Nos. BC457920 and Dov Charney money solely to avoid public shame and economic loss. On March 4, 2011, one such former employee filed suitBC460331) against American Apparel, Dov Charney and certain members of the Board of Directors asserting claims of American Apparel in the Supreme Court of New York, County of Kings, Case No. 5018-11.  The suit alleges sexual harassment, gender discrimination, retaliation, negligent hiring and supervision, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, fraud and unpaid wages, and seeks, among other things, an award of compensatory damages, exemplary damages, attorneys' fees and costs, all in an amount of at least $250,000 (the "New York Suit"). In March 2012, the court ordered this case into arbitration. On March 23, 2011, three of the other former employees filed a consolidated suit against American Apparel and Dov Charney in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC457920 (the "Los Angeles Suit"). Such action alleges sexual harassment, failure to prevent harassment and discrimination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery, impersonation through the internet, defamation and a declaratory judgment that the confidentiality and arbitration agreements signed by plaintiffs are unenforceable. Such action seeks monetary damages, various forms of injunctive relief, and attorneys' fees and costs. On July 28, 2011, the court ordered this case into arbitration.  The Company's insurance carrier has acknowledged coverage of the New York Suit and Los Angeles Suit, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
On April 27, 2011, three of the former employees filed suit against the Company, Dov Charney and a Company employee in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC460331, asserting claims for Impersonation through Internet or Electronic Means, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Defamation, Invasion of Privacy/False Light, and Invasion of Privacy/Appropriation of Likeness. Such action seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief and attorneys' fees and costs.  The Court has ordered this case into arbitration.  The Company's insurance carrier has acknowledged coverage of this suit, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
other related claims.  The Company is currently engaged in other employment-related claims and other matters incidentalrecently settled one of these cases with no monetary liability to its business.the Company.  The Company believes that all suchrecently prevailed on the sexual harassment claims against the Company are without merit or not material, and the Company intends to vigorously dispute the validityin another of the plaintiffs' claims.  Should these matters be decided against the Company, the Company could not only incur substantial liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.cases.  While the ultimate resolution of suchthe remaining claims cannot be determined, in light of the favorable ruling in one of these cases, the amount of settlement in the other of these cases, and based on information available at this time regarding the remaining cases, the Company believes, but the Company cannot provide assurances that, the amount and ultimate liability, if any, with respect to these remaining actions will not materially affect the Company's business, financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. The Company cannot assure you, however, that such actions will not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows.



3026


Item 2.    Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

(All dollar and share amounts in the Item 2 are presented in thousands, except for per share items and unless otherwise specified.)
Overview
We are a vertically-integrated manufacturer, distributor, and retailer of branded fashion basic apparel. We design, manufactureapparel and sell clothing, accessories and personal care products for women, men, children and babies through retail, wholesale and online distribution channels.babies. We are based in downtown Los Angeles, California. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, we had approximately 10,000 employees and operated a total of 251249 retail stores in 20 countries: the United States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, United Kingdom, Ireland, Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Israel, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and 18 other countries. OurChina. We also operate a global e-commerce site that serves over 60 countries worldwide at www.americanapparel.com. In addition, American Apparel operates a leading wholesale business is a leading supplier of that supplies high qualityT-shirts and other casual wear to screen printersdistributors and distributors. In addition, we operate an online retail e-commerce website at www.americanapparel.com where we sell our clothing and accessories directly to consumers.the imprintable industry.
We conduct our primary apparel manufacturing operations out of an 800,000 square foot facility in the warehouse district of downtown Los Angeles, California. The facility houses our executive offices, as well as cutting, sewing, warehousing, and distribution operations. We conduct knitting operations at our facilities in Los Angeles and Garden Grove, California, which produce a majority of the fabric we use in our products. We also operate dye houses that currently provide dyeing and finishing services for nearly all of the raw fabric used in production. We operate a fabric dyeing and finishing facility in Hawthorne, California, which provides fabric dyeing and finishing services.California. We also operate a cutting, sewing and garment dyeing and finishing facility located in South Gate, California, which is used in cutting, sewing, dyeing and finishing garments.California. We operate a fabric dyeing and finishing facility, located in Garden Grove, California, which has been expandedalso includes cutting, sewing and knitting operations. We are in the process of transitioning our distribution operations to include knitting, cutting and sewing operations. a new distribution center in La Mirada, California.
Because we manufacture domestically and are vertically integrated, we believe this enables us to more quickly respond to customer demand and to changing fashion trends and to closely monitor product quality. Our products are recognizednoted for their quality and fit, and together with our distinctive branding these attributes have differentiated our products in the marketplace. “American Apparel®” is a registered trademark of American Apparel (USA), LLC.
The results of the respective business segments exclude unallocated corporate expenses, which consist of our shared overhead costs. These costs are presented separately and generally include corporate costs such as human resources, legal, finance, information technology, accounting, and executive compensation.management.
The following sets forthtable details, by segment, the change in retail store count during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012.
 
 U.S. Retail Canada International Total
Three Months Ended September 30, 2012       
Open at June 30, 2012140
 36
 76
 252
Opened
 
 
 
Closed
 (1) 
 (1)
Open at September 30, 2012140
 35
 76
 251
        
Three Months Ended September 30, 2011       
Open at June 30, 2011146
 38
 70
 254
Opened
 
 
 
Closed(3) 
 (4) (7)
Open at September 30, 2011143
 38
 66
 247
 U.S. Retail Canada International Total
Three Months Ended March 31, 2013       
Open at January 1, 2013140
 35
 76
 251
Opened1
 
 1
 2
Closed(2) (1) (1) (4)
Open at March 31, 2013139
 34
 76
 249
        
Three Months Ended March 31, 2012       
Open at January 1, 2012143
 37
 69
 249
Opened
 
 2
 2
Closed(2) 
 
 (2)
Open at March 31, 2012141
 37
 71
 249
 
 U.S. Retail Canada International Total
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012       
Open at January 1, 2012143
 37
 69
 249
Opened
 
 8
 8
Closed(3) (2) (1) (6)
Open at September 30, 2012140
 35
 76
 251
        
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011       
Open at January 1, 2011157
 40
 76
 273
Opened
 
 
 
Closed(14) (2) (10) (26)
Open at September 30, 2011143
 38
 66
 247


31




Comparable Store Sales
The table below shows the increase in comparable store sales for our retail and online stores, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 20112012, and the number of retail stores included in the comparison at the end of each period. Comparable store sales are defined as the percentage change in sales for stores that have been open for more than twelve full months. Remodeled and expanded stores are excluded from the determination of comparable stores for the following twelve month period if the remodel or expansion results in a change of greater than 20% of selling square footage. Closed stores are excluded from the base of comparable stores following their last full month of operation. 

27




In calculating constant currency amounts, we convert the results of our foreign operations both in the current periodthree months ended March 31, 2013 and the prior year comparable period using the weighted-average foreign exchange rate for the prior comparable period to achieve a consistent basis for comparison.
Three Months Ended September 30, Nine Months Ended September 30,Three Months Ended March 31,
2012 2011 2012 20112013 2012
Comparable store sales (1)
20% 3% 17% %8% 14%
Number of stores in comparison242
 244
 242
 244
238
 243
(1) Comparable store sales results include the impact of online store sales.sales and has been adjusted
to exclude impact of extra leap-year day in 2012.

Executive Summary
Results of Operations
Net sales for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 increased $54.5 million5,400, or 14.0%4.1%, to $444.3 million138,060 from $389.8 million132,660 reported ninefor the three months ended September 30, 2011March 31, 2012 due to higher sales across all ofat our U.S. Wholesale, U.S. Retail and International segments.
Net sales at our U.S. Wholesale segment increased by $16.4 million2,491, or 14.3%6.0%, drivenin part due to the transfer of certain wholesale customers from our U.K. wholesale business to our U.S. Wholesale business. Net sales growth was also generated by higher sales order volume from a significant number of newmen's and existing customers. Our ability to service orders reliably helped facilitate new account generation, as well as the maintenance of our existing client roster. The launch of a new wholesale catalogwomen's tank tops, poly-cotton and the addition of new products to our wholesale offering attracted a more diversified customer base.tri-blend styles. We continue our focus on increasing our customer base by targeting direct sales, particularly sales to third party screen printers. OnlineOur online consumer net sales increased primarily as a result of targeted promotion efforts, improved merchandising and content differentiation by region, as well as functional improvements to our website and fulfillment process, and as well as a targeted online advertising and promotion effort.process.
Net sales at ourfor the U.S. Retail Canada and International segmentssegment increased by $38.1 million1,735, or 13.9%4.1%, to $44,344 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $42,609 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, primarily due to stronghigher comparable store sales. This increase was generated by a stronger performance across categories, particularly women's fashionbottoms, including disco pants and easy jeans and accessories, as well as better inventory composition and our promotional strategy for key volume drivers.
Gross marginNet sales for the International segment increased nine months ended September 30, 2012$2,155 was, or 52.7%6.1% compared, to 54.1%$37,533 for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2011March 31, 2013. as compared to $35,378 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, due to higher sales in both the retail and online sales channels. The decreaseincrease in gross marginthe retail sales channel was due to higher comparable store sales, particularly in Asia, as well as the netaddition of new stores in this segment. The increase in online sales impact of planned promotional activitieswas due to greater brand awareness, particularly in the U.K., Continental Europe and Japan.
Net sales for the effect of warehouse type clearanceCanada segment decreased $981, or 7.4%, mainly due to a colder than average winter, resulting in lower comparable store sales.
Gross margin remained unchanged at 52.8% for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012. Higher margins due to improved sales as part of our overall inventory reduction strategy. This decrease was partiallymix were offset by shift towards higher margin retail sales.freight costs, particularly in the International segment.
Operating expenses include selling, general and administrative costs, and retail store impairment charges, and as a percentage of sales decreased from 59.5% to 54.1%. Operating expenses were $240.2 million as compared to $232.0 millionwas approximately 60% for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 2011, respectively.2012. Excluding the effects of share-based compensation, depreciation, amortization and impairment charges, between the two periods, operating expenses as a percentage of sales decreased from 54.0%55% to 50.2%. The decrease as a percentage54% from the first quarter of sales was2012 to the same period in 2013. Operating expenses increased $3,494 to $83,345 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 from $79,851 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, due primarily due to a reduction$1,680 higher share-based compensation expense recorded in corporate overheadoperating expenses and higher expenses associated with RFID-related supplies and other store refurbishment activities. Additionally, we incurred additional rent expense for the fixed cost leverage as a result of increased sales.new distribution center in La Mirada, California.
Loss from operations was $5.9 million10,477 for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 as compared to $9,795 for the three months ended March 31, 2012.
Net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2013 was $46,511 as compared to $20.9 million7,891 for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2011.
Net loss for the nine months ended September 30,March 31, 2012 was $42.2 million as compared to $28.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011 due primarily to a net increase in non-operating expenses of $28.2 million$37,773, primarily as well as higher income tax provision expensea result of $0.9 million.  Thean increase in non-operating expenses was primarily due to the increase in market value of our outstanding warrants: the unrealized losses on our warrants at September 30,were $23,645 and $651 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, as compared with September 30, 2011, resulting inrespectively. Additionally, for the three months ended March 31, 2012, we recognized a net change in unrealized loss of $36.5 million. Additionally, we incurred higher interest expense due to a higher average balance of debt outstanding and higher interest rates related to the Crystal Credit Agreement.  These were offset by a net $14.7 million gain on extinguishment of debt.debt of $11,588. See Results of Operations for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 for further details.

3228




Liquidity Trends
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, we had approximately $7.25,688 million in cash and $3.5$2,417 million of availability for additional borrowings under the Crystal Credit Agreement and Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement. Additionally, we had $35.637,594 million outstanding on a $50.050,000 million revolving credit facility under the Crystal Credit Agreement, $30.030,000 million of term loan outstanding under the Crystal Credit Agreement, $5.9477 million outstanding on a C$11.011,000 million(Canadian dollars) revolving credit facility under the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement, and $103.6118,039 million of term loans outstanding under the Lion CreditLoan Agreement. See Notes 6 and 7 to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
On March 13, 2012,April 4, 2013, we replacedclosed a private offering of $206,000 aggregate principal amount of our $75.0 million senior secured13% Senior Secured Notes due 2020 at 97% of par and entered into a new $35,000 asset-backed revolving credit facility with BankCapital One Leverage Finance Corp. maturing on April 4, 2018, subject to a January 15, 2018 maturity under certain circumstances. We used the net proceeds from the offering of America ("BofA")the notes, together with a $80.0 million seniorborrowings under the new credit facility, to repay and terminate our credit agreement with Crystal Financial LLC ("Crystal" and "Crystal Credit Agreement").our loan agreement with Lion Capital LLP. The Crystal Credit Agreement calls fornotes and the $80.0 million to be allocated between an asset-based revolvingnew credit facility of $50.0 millionare our senior secured obligations and term loan of $30.0 million. Proceeds from the Crystal Credit Agreement were usedare guaranteed, on a senior secured basis, by our domestic subsidiaries, subject to repay our existing credit facility with BofA, fees and expenses related to the transaction and for general working capital purposes. See Note 6 to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
The Crystal Credit Agreement matures on March 13, 2015 and is collateralized by substantially all of our U.S. and U.K. assets and equity interests in certain of our foreign subsidiaries. Interest under the agreement is at the 90-day LIBOR plus 9.0% and also includes an unused facility fee ranging from 0.375% to 1.00% on the unused portion of the revolving credit facility, as well as an early termination fee if prepaid within the first two years.
In connection with the financing from Crystal, we also entered into an amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement to, among other things: (i) consent to the Crystal Credit Agreement, (ii) fix the maturity date at December 31, 2015, and (iii) modify certain financial covenants, including covenants related to minimum quarterly EBITDA and capital expenditures. In addition, the amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement modifies the Lion Credit Agreement to provide for a minimum of 5% of each interest payment on the outstanding principal in cash commencing on September 1, 2012.
On August 30, 2012, we entered into a second amendment to the Crystal Agreement ("Crystal Second Amendment") and an eighth amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement ("Lion Eighth Amendment"). The Crystal Second Amendment extended until December 31, 2012 the period during which loans under the Crystal Credit Agreement based on the American Apparel brand name may remain outstanding, added a minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant for the remainder of 2012 and a minimum excess availability covenant for the period of December 17, 2012 through February 1, 2013. In connection with the Crystal Second Amendment, the Lion Eighth Amendment added a second minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant that conforms to the Crystal minimum consolidated EBITDA covenant.some exceptions. See Notes 6 and 7 to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
We entered into a ninth amendment and waiver to the Lion Credit Agreement (the "Lion Ninth Amendment") effective as of September 30, 2012, which among other things, waived our obligation to maintain the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenants specified in the Lion Credit Agreement, as amended, for the twelve month period ended September 30, 2012. As a result, we were in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Lion Credit Agreement on September 30, 2012.
Our C$11.0 million credit agreement with Bank of Montreal ("Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement") matures in December 2012. There can be no assurances that we will be able to negotiate a renewal or extension of this credit agreement with our existing lender or enter into a replacement credit agreement with new lenders on commercially reasonably terms or at all and we may be required to repay this loan. If we are not able to enter into a renewal, extension or replacement of the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement prior to its maturity, we would no longer have access to liquidity from such revolving credit facility after its maturity date. While we intend to negotiate an extension of this credit agreement, we do not believe that this credit agreement represents a material component of our current or future capital requirements.
Management Plan
We are in the process of executingcontinue to execute a plan, which we commenced in late 2010, to improve theour operating performance and our financial position. This plan includes optimizing production levels atAmong other things, in 2013, we intend to complete the installation of RFID tracking systems in all of our manufacturing facilities including raw material purchasesstores, complete the opening of our new distribution facility in La Mirada, California, continue with expansion of our selling square footage in our stores, continue with our inventory productivity improvement program, further reduce operating expenses, and labor; streamlining our logistics operations; web platform refinement; reducing corporate expenses; merchandise price rationalization inimprove online sales performance with the wholesale and retail channels; store renovation; and improving merchandise distribution and allocation procedures.
In September 2012, we implemented a new online store platform for our U.S. online store that resulted in functional improvements to our website and fulfillment processes and will allow us to tailor the look and feelimplementation of the Oracle ATG back-end online system for international store fronts. In addition, we continue to enhance the customer online shopping experience. The newseek improvements in store platform will also enable faster deployment of online storeslabor productivity and workers' compensation exposure. We continue to new international regions. We believe that these improvements will contributedevelop other initiatives intended to our continued financial growth as our website has the potential to not onlyeither increase online sales, but also in-store sales.

33

Table of Contentsreduce costs or improve liquidity.



In September 2012Continued RFID implementation - For 2013, we implemented a new production forecasting and inventory allocation system that integrates our sales forecasts with our retail inventory tracking system and therefore allows us to better manage our production schedule so that inventory is maintained at the right amount for the right season. It also gives us greater visibility into seasonal and new trends, which will enable a faster reaction to changes in demand.
The second and the third quarter of 2012 benefited from an adjustment to the global promotional strategy and improvements to our in-stock position at stores.  We migrated to targeted promotions, which established pricing incentives for customers to buy multiple items in volume driving categories.  Unit sales increased as a result of this change and that increase in selling volume was facilitated by improvements to our allocation and logistics processes.  During this period, we also ran successful markdowns on aged and seasonal merchandises.  We believe this helped decrease inventory levels in slower turning goods, increase foot traffic, and improve sales to both items on markdown, as well as the full price assortment.   
Throughout 2012, we continuedcontinue to enhance our stores by installing sales conversion tracking device and radio frequency identification (RFID) tracking systems. To date,As of March 31, 2013, we have implemented RFID systems at 126approximately 222 stores worldwide. We believe that these systems will enhance sales and contribute to store productivity through improvements in stock positions and replenishment activities.
New distribution center - In June 2012 we entered into a new operating lease agreement for a new distribution center located in La Mirada, California and expect to fully transition our distribution operations into this new facility in the first half of 2013. We believe that the new distribution center will contribute to processing efficiencies and effectiveness and will reduce operating expenses and cost of sales.
We continue to develop other initiatives intended to either increase sales, reduce costs or improve liquidity.
Although we have made significant improvements under this plan, there can be no assurance that further planned improvement will be successful.




29




Results of Operations

The results of operations of the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results for the entire year.

Three Months EndedMarch 31, 2013 Compared to the Three Months EndedMarch 31, 2012
The following table sets forth our results of operations from our unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations by dollar and as a percentage of net sales for the periods indicated (dollars in thousands):
 Three Months Ended March 31,
 2013 % of net sales 2012 % of net sales
U.S. Wholesale$43,826
 31.7 % $41,335
 31.2 %
U.S. Retail44,344
 32.1 % 42,609
 32.1 %
Canada12,357
 9.0 % 13,338
 10.1 %
International37,533
 27.2 % 35,378
 26.7 %
Total net sales138,060
 100.0 % 132,660
 100.0 %
Cost of sales65,192
 47.2 % 62,604
 47.2 %
Gross profit72,868
 52.8 % 70,056
 52.8 %
        
Selling expenses55,463
 40.2 % 54,929
 41.4 %
General and administrative expenses27,804
 20.1 % 24,922
 18.8 %
Retail store impairment78
 0.1 % 
  %
        
Loss from operations(10,477) (7.6)% (9,795) (7.4)%
        
        
Interest expense11,214
 

 9,553
  
Foreign currency transaction loss (gain)713
 

 (950)  
Unrealized loss on change in fair value of warrants23,645
 

 651
  
Gain on extinguishment of debt
   (11,588)  
Other (income) expense(5) 

 128
  
Loss before income tax(46,044) 

 (7,589)  
Income tax provision467
 

 302
  
Net loss$(46,511) 

 $(7,891)  
U.S. Wholesale: Total net sales for the U.S. Wholesale segment increased $2,491, or 6.0%, to $43,826 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $41,335 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. Wholesale net sales, excluding online consumer net sales, increased $788, or 2.3%, to $34,708 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $33,920 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, due to the transfer of certain wholesale customers from our U.K. wholesale business to the U.S. wholesale business, as well as higher sales order volume of men's and women's tank tops, poly-cotton and tri-blend styles. We continue our focus on increasing our customer base by targeting direct sales, particularly sales to third party screen printers.
Online consumer net sales increased $1,703, or 23.0%, to $9,118 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $7,415 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, primarily as a result of certain targeted promotions and functional improvements to our website and fulfillment process.
U.S. Retail: Net sales for the U.S. Retail segment increased $1,735, or 4.1%, to $44,344 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $42,609 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, due primarily to an increase in comparable store sales.
Comparable store sales for the three months ended March 31, 2013 grew by $2,590, or 6.5%, as a result of stronger performance across categories, particularly women's bottoms, in particular, disco pants and easy jeans, and accessories. This increase was partially offset by $291 lower warehouse and flea market sales in 2013 as compared to 2012 and $126 lower sales as a result of a reduction in the number of stores in operations from 141 at March 31, 2012 to 139 stores at March 31, 2013.

30




Canada:Total net sales for the Canada segment decreased $981, or 7.4%, to $12,357 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $13,338 for the three months ended March 31, 2012 due to lower sales in the retail and wholesale channel, partially offset by higher sales in our online channel. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, total revenue for the current period would have been approximately $12,425, or 6.8% lower when compared to the same period last year.
Retail sales decreased by $808, or 8.1%, to $9,112 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $9,920 for the three months ended March 31, 2012 due to a $227, or 2%, decrease in comparable store sales as a result of a colder than average winter and store closures. Since March 31, 2012, the number of retail stores in the Canada segment in operation decreased from 37 to 34. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, retail sales for the current period would have been approximately $9,162, or 7.6% lower when compared to the same period last year.
Wholesale net sales decreased by $276, or 9.7%, to $2,579 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $2,855 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, in part, due to the timing of orders from a large wholesale customer. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, total wholesale net sales for the current period would have been approximately $2,593, or 9.2% lower when compared to the same period last year.
Online consumer net sales increased by $103, or 18.3%, to $666 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $563 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. The increase was primarily a result of targeted promotion efforts resulting in greater brand awareness. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, total online consumer net sales for the current period would have been approximately $669, or 18.9% higher when compared to the same period last year.
International: Total net sales for the International segment increased $2,155, or 6.1%, to $37,533 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $35,378 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. The increase was due to higher sales in the retail sale and online channels, partially offset by lower sales in the wholesale channel. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, total revenue for the current period would have been approximately $38,208, or 8.0% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Retail net sales increased $1,749, or 6.1%, to $30,452 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $28,703 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. The increase was primarily due to a $1,522 or 5% increase in comparable store sales (of which approximately $1,200 is from the Asia-Pacific region) as well as new store openings. Since March 31, 2012, the number of retail stores in the International segment increased from 71 to 76 at March 31, 2013. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, retail sales for the current period would have been approximately $30,958, or 7.9% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Wholesale net sales decreased $281, or 12.6%, to $1,941 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $2,222 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, primarily due to a transfer of certain customers from our U.K. wholesale business to the U.S. wholesale business. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, sales for the current period would have been approximately $1,937, or 12.8% lower when compared to the same period last year.
Online consumer net sales increased $687, or 15.4%, to $5,140 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $4,453 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, due primarily to higher sales in the U.K of $324 and Japan of $148 relating to targeted promotion efforts resulting in greater brand awareness. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2012, sales for the current period would have been approximately $5,313, or 19.3% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Gross margin: Gross margin as a percentage of net sales remained unchanged at 52.8% for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012. Higher margins due to improved sales mix were offset by higher freight costs, particularly in the International segment.
Selling expenses: Selling expenses increased $534, or 1%, to $55,463 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $54,929 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. The increase was primarily due to higher rent expenses of $1,622 related to higher CAM charges and lease termination costs, as well as rent for the new distribution center and $771 higher expenses primarily associated with RFID-related supplies and travel for other store refurbishment activities. This increase was offset by lower salaries, wages and benefits of $1,146 due to a decrease in store hours, and lower advertising expenses of $1,060. As a percentage of sales, selling expenses decreased to 40.2% in the three months ended March 31, 2013 from 41.4% in the three months ended March 31, 2012.

31




General and administrative expenses: General and administrative expenses increased $2,882 to $27,804 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $24,922 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. As a percentage of sales, general and administrative expenses increased to 20.1% during the three months ended March 31, 2013 from 18.8% during the three months ended March 31, 2012. The increase was primarily due to higher share-based compensation expense of $1,753.
Retail store impairment: For the three months ended March 31, 2013, we recorded impairment charges relating to retail stores leasehold improvements of $78 at the U.S. Retail segment. There was no such charge in the corresponding quarter of the prior year.
Interest expense: Interest expense increased $1,661 to $11,214 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 from $9,553 for the three months ended March 31, 2012, primarily due to a higher average balance of debt outstanding and higher interest rates related to the Crystal Credit Agreement. Interest rates on our various debt facilities and capital leases ranged from 0.4% to 19.3% for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 5.0% to 18.0% for the three months ended March 31, 2012. Interest expense for the three months ended March 31, 2013 mainly consisted of interest on the Lion Loan Agreement of $6,329, interest on the Crystal Credit Agreement of $1,609, and amortization of debt discount and deferred financing cost of $2,610. Interest paid in cash was $4,040.
Foreign currency transaction loss (gain): For the three months ended March 31, 2013, foreign currency transaction loss totaled $713 as compared to a gain of $950 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. The change related to the strengthening of the U.S. Dollar relative to the functional currencies used by our subsidiaries.
Unrealized loss on change in fair value of warrants: We recorded a $23,645 loss in the fair value of warrants for the three months ended March 31, 2013 associated with the fair value measurements of the Lion and SOF warrants. We recorded a $651 loss in the fair value of warrants for the three months ended March 31, 2012.
Income tax provision: The provision for income tax increased to $467 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 as compared to $302 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. Although we incurred a loss before income taxes on a consolidated basis for the three months ended March 31, 2013, some of our foreign domiciled subsidiaries reported income before income taxes and will be taxable on a stand-alone reporting basis in their respective foreign jurisdictions. As a result, we recorded a provision for income tax expense for the three months ended March 31, 2013. There were no charges or benefits recorded to income tax expense for valuation allowances.



32




Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of March 31, 2013, we had approximately $5,688 in cash and $2,417 of availability for additional borrowings under the Crystal Credit Agreement and Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement. Additionally, we had (i) $37,594 outstanding on a $50,000 revolving credit facility under the Crystal Credit Agreement, (ii) $30,000 of term loan outstanding under the Crystal Credit Agreement, (iii) $477 outstanding on a C$11,000 (Canadian dollars) revolving credit facility under the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement, and (iv) $118,039, net of discount of $25,899 and including paid-in-kind interest of $22,798 of term loan outstanding under the Lion Loan Agreement. See Notes 6 and 7 to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
On April 4, 2013, we closed a private offering of $206,000 aggregate principal amount of our 13% Senior Secured Notes (the "Notes") at 97% of par due 2020 and we entered into a new $35,000 asset-backed revolving credit facility (the "Capital One Credit Facility") with Capital One Leverage Finance Corp. ("Capital One") maturing on April 4, 2018, subject to a January 15, 2018 maturity under certain circumstances. We used the net proceeds from the offering of the Notes, together with borrowings under the Capital One Credit Facility to repay and terminate our credit facility with Crystal and our loan agreement with Lion. The notes and the new credit facility are our senior secured obligations and are guaranteed, on a senior secured basis, by our domestic subsidiaries, subject to some exceptions. See Notes 6 and 7 to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
Over the past years, our growth has been funded through a combination of borrowings from related and unrelated parties, bank debt, lease financing, proceeds from the exercise of purchase rights and issuance of common stock. Our principal liquidity requirements are for working capital, interest payments, capital expenditures and to fund operations. We fund our liquidity requirements primarily through cash on hand, cash flow from operations and borrowings under our credit facilities. Our credit agreements have from time to time contained covenants requiring us to meet specified targets for minimum fixed charge coverage ratios and maximum leverage ratios, and our inability to achieve such targets or to obtain a waiver of compliance would negatively impact the availability of credit under those credit facilities or result in an event of default.
We believe that we have sufficient financing commitments to meet funding requirements for the next twelve months.
We are in the process of executing a plan, which was commenced in late 2010, to improve our operating performance and financial position. Among other things, in 2013, we intend to complete the installation of RFID tracking systems in all of our stores, complete the opening of our new distribution facility in La Mirada, California, continue increasing our selling square footage in our stores, continue with our inventory productivity improvement program, further reduce operating expenses, improve online sales performance with the implementation of the Oracle ATG back-end online system for international store fronts. In addition, we continue to seek improvements in store labor productivity and workers' compensation exposure. As noted above, in June 2012 we entered into a new operating lease agreement for a new distribution center located in California and expect to fully transition our distribution operations into this new facility in earlythe first half of 2013. We believe that the new distribution center will contribute to processing efficiencies and effectiveness and will reduce operating expenses and cost of sales.
We continue to develop other initiatives intended to either increase sales, reduce costs or improve liquidity.
Although our plan reflects improvements in these trends, there can be no assurance that our plan to improve the operating performance and our financial position will be successful.

3433




Results of OperationsCash Flow Overview

The results of operations of the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results for the entire year.

 Three Months Ended March 31, 2013
2013 2012
Net cash (used in) provided by:   
Operating activities$(6,008) $(8,646)
Investing activities(7,964) (10,458)
Financing activities7,107
 15,808
Effect of foreign exchange rate on cash(300) 305
Net decrease in cash$(7,165) $(2,991)
Three Months EndedSeptember 30, 2012 March 31, 2013 Compared to the Three Months EndedSeptember 30, 2011 March 31, 2012
The following table sets forth our results of operationsCash used in operating activities improved by $2,638 from our unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations by dollar and as a percentage of net sales$8,646 for the periods indicated (dollars in thousands):
 Three Months Ended September 30,
 2012 % of net sales 2011 % of net sales
U.S. Wholesale$46,847
 28.9% $42,405
 30.1 %
U.S. Retail52,714
 32.5% 43,104
 30.6 %
Canada16,717
 10.3% 15,264
 10.8 %
International45,882
 28.3% 40,116
 28.5 %
Total net sales162,160
 100.0% 140,889
 100.0 %
Cost of sales76,960
 47.5% 65,898
 46.8 %
Gross profit85,200
 52.5% 74,991
 53.2 %
        
Selling expenses58,017
 35.8% 52,283
 37.1 %
General and administrative expenses22,566
 13.9% 24,552
 17.4 %
Retail store impairment
 % 784
 0.6 %
        
Income (loss) from operations4,617
 2.8% (2,628) (1.9)%
        
        
Interest expense10,454
 

 8,832
  
Foreign currency transaction (gain) loss(685) 

 1,855
  
Unrealized loss (gain) on change in fair value of warrants and purchase rights13,312
 

 (6,101)  
Other expense (income)36
 

 (186)  
Loss before income tax(18,500) 

 (7,028)  
Income tax provision512
 

 166
  
Net loss$(19,012) 

 $(7,194)  
U.S. Wholesale: Total net sales for the U.S. Wholesale segment increased $4.4 million, or 10.5%, to $46.8 million for the three months ended September 30,March 31, 2012 as compared to $42.4 million$6,008 for the comparable period in 2013.
three months ended September 30, 2011. Wholesale net sales, excluding online consumer net sales, increasedThe improvement was due to higher gross profits of $3.1 million, or 8.4%, to $39.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $36.8 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011 driven by higher sales order volume from a significant number of new and existing customers. Our ability to service orders reliably by keeping appropriate levels of inventory to support any fluctuations in customer demand, helped facilitate new account generation, as well as the maintenance of our existing client roster. The launch of a new wholesale catalog and the addition of new products to our wholesale offering attracted a more diversified customer base. We continue our focus on increasing our customer base by targeting direct sales, particularly sales to third party screen printers.
Online consumer net sales increased $1.4 million, or 24.2%, to $7.0 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $5.6 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily as a result of improved merchandising, segmented and refined email marketing, extensive email list growth and offering of faster shipping options.
U.S. Retail: Net sales for the U.S. Retail segment increased $9.6 million, or 22.3%, to $52.7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $43.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Net sales growth was generated by a stronger inventory position in high volume categories, effectively timed seasonal promotions, success in new women's and unisex fashion and an overall improved presentation of our floor sets. Throughout the period, improvements to logistics and the speed of allocation helped to support a buying strategy that is faster and more proactive.
Comparable store sales for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $8.8 million, or 20.9%, while warehouse

35




sales consisting primarily of slower moving merchandise contributed an incremental $1.9 million increase from 2011 to 2012. The sales increase was partially offset by a $1.1 million sales decrease as a result of a reduction in the number of stores in operations from 143 at September 30, 2011 to 140 stores at September 30, 2012.
Canada:Total net sales for the Canada segment increased $1.5 million, or 9.5%, to $16.7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $15.3 million for the three months ended September 30, 20112,812 as a result of improved performance across all sales channels. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, total revenue for the current period would have been approximately $17.0 million, or $1.8 million higher when compared to the same period last year.
Retail sales increased by $1.1 million, or 9.6%, to $13.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $11.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011 due primarily to a $1.5 million, or 13%, increase in comparable store sales. Since September 30, 2011, the number of retail stores in the Canada segment in operation decreased from 38 to 35. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, retail sales for 2012 would have been approximately $13.3 million, or 17.0% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Wholesale net sales increased by $0.2 million, or 8.7%, to $3.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $3.0 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, total wholesale net sales for the Canada segment for 2012 would have been approximately $3.5 million, or 7.0% lower when compared to the same period last year.
Online consumer net sales for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 were $0.4 million. Foreign currency effects were minimal.
International: Total net sales for the International segment increased $5.8 million, or 14.4%, to $45.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $40.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. The increase was due to higher sales and a decrease in the retail sale channel. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, total revenue for the current period would have been approximatelyworking capital requirements of $48.9 million4,268, or $8.8 million higher when compared to the same period last year.
Retail net sales increased $6.0 million, or 18.1%, to $39.3 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $33.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. The change is mainly attributed to higher sales in the U.K. of $2.2 million, Japan of $1.8 million and Australia of $0.7 million. Comparable store sales for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased $6.2 million, or 20% as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. Since September 30, 2011, the number of retail stores in the International segment increased from 66 to 76 at September 30, 2012. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, retail sales for 2012 would have been approximately $41.9 million, or 25.9% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Wholesale net sales decreased $0.7 million, or 25.2%, to $2.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $2.8 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, sales for the current period would have been approximately $2.3 million, or 18.5% lower when compared to the same period last year.
Online consumer net sales increased $0.5 million, or 11.5%, to $4.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $4.0 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011, due primarily to higher sales in the U.K and Australia. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, sales for the current period would have been approximately $4.7 million, or 16.8% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Gross margin: Gross margin as a percentage of net sales was 52.5% and 53.2% for the three months ended September 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The decrease in gross margin was due to the net sales impacttiming of planned promotional activitiesvendor payments. Increases in trade payables and the effect of warehouse type clearance sales as part of our overall inventory reduction strategy as well as the negative impact of foreign currency exchange rates on the cost of sales at our International segment. This decrease wasaccrued expenses were partially offset by higher inventory levels as a shift towards higher margin retail sales, lower inventory shrink reserves reflecting the benefitsresult of our RFID implementation and lower costs ofincreased production in our manufacturing operations.volume.
Selling expenses:These increases were offset by higher operating expenses (excluding depreciation & amortization, stock compensation and impairment charges) of $1,532 as a result of store rent increases and other operating costs related to store improvement activities. We also paid $2,664 Selling expenses increased $5.7 million, or 11.0%, to $58.0 million formore cash interest during the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $52.3 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. The increase is consistent with improving sales. Additionally, we increased our spending on print, outdoor and online advertising to $5.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 from $3.9 million for the comparable period in 2011 in order to continue the sales momentum. As a percentagefirst quarter of sales, selling expenses decreased to 35.8% in the three months ended September 30, 2012 from

36




37.1% in the three months ended September 30, 2011.2013.
General and administrative expenses:Cash used in investing activities General and administrative expenses decreased $2.0 million to $22.6 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $24.6 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. As a percentage of sales, general and administrative expenses decreased to 13.9% during the three months ended September 30, 2012 from 17.4% during the three months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease in general and administrative expenses was primarily due to rent and occupancy related expenses of $1.5 million, a decrease of $0.9 million in professional fees (primarily accounting and outside services related fees) and a reduction to our reserves related to a legal contingency of $0.9 million offset by an increase in bonus expense of $1.0 million and share-based compensation expense of $0.7 million.
Retail store impairment: For the three months ended September 30, 2012, we evaluated our retail stores for impairment indicators and determined that no additional impairment charges were required$7,964 for the three months ended September 30, 2012. ForMarch 31, 2013 as compared with $10,458 for the three months ended September 30, 2011, we recorded impairment charges relating to retail stores leasehold improvements of $0.8 million.March 31, 2012.
Capital expenditures in the first quarter of 2013 increased by $3,664 as we neared completion of our RFID implementation activities. In addition, we continued to make other improvements to our stores and make additional investments in manufacturing equipment and computer hardware and related software.
Use of restricted cash in 2012 was related to cash collateral used to secure our standby letters of credit with the worker's compensation self-insurance policy and other liabilities.
Interest expense:Cash provided by financing activities Interest expense increased $1.6 million to $10.5 million fordecreased from $15,808 during the three months ended September 30,March 31, 2012 from $8.8 million to $7,107 for the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to a higher average balance of debt outstanding and higher interest rates related to the Crystal Credit Agreement. Interest rates on our various debt facilities and capital leases ranged from 5.0% to 19.8% for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 4.7% to 18.0% for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Interest expense for the three months ended September 30, 2012 mainly consisted of interest on the Lion Credit Agreement of $5.6 million, interest on the Crystal Credit Agreement of $1.7 million, and amortization of debt discount and deferred financing cost of $2.4 million. Interest paidsame period in cash was $2.8 million.
Foreign currency transaction gain: For the three months ended September 30, 2012, foreign currency transaction gain totaled $0.7 million as compared to a loss of $1.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. The change related to the weakening of the U.S. Dollar relative to the functional currencies used by our subsidiaries.
Unrealized loss (gain) on change in fair value of warrants and purchase rights: We recorded a $13.3 million loss in the fair value of warrants for the three months ended September 30, 2012 associated with the fair value measurements of the Lion and SOF warrants. We recorded a $6.1 million gain in the fair value of warrants and purchase rights for the three months ended September 30, 2011 associated with the fair value measurement of purchase rights to an investor group and Mr. Charney, and additional warrants to Lion at September 30, 2011.
Income tax provision: The provision for income tax increased to $0.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $0.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Although we incurred a loss before income taxes on a consolidated basis for the three months ended September 30, 2012, some of our foreign domiciled subsidiaries reported income before income taxes and will be taxable on a stand-alone reporting basis in their respective foreign jurisdictions. As a result, we recorded a provision for income tax expense for the three months ended September 30, 2012. There were no charges or benefits recorded to income tax expense for valuation allowances.



37




Nine Months EndedSeptember 30, 2012 Compared to the Nine Months EndedSeptember 30, 2011
The following table sets forth our results of operations from our unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations by dollar and as a percentage of net sales for the periods indicated (dollars in thousands):
 Nine Months Ended September 30,
 2012 % of net sales 2011 % of net sales
U.S. Wholesale$131,612
 29.6 % $115,193
 29.6 %
U.S. Retail143,444
 32.3 % 120,483
 30.9 %
Canada45,096
 10.2 % 42,256
 10.8 %
International124,130
 27.9 % 111,828
 28.7 %
Total net sales444,282
 100.0 % 389,760
 100.0 %
Cost of sales209,990
 47.3 % 178,705
 45.9 %
Gross profit234,292
 52.7 % 211,055
 54.1 %
        
Selling expenses168,258
 37.9 % 152,536
 39.1 %
General and administrative expenses71,792
 16.2 % 77,025
 19.8 %
Retail store impairment129
  % 2,436
 0.6 %
        
Loss from operations(5,887) (1.3)% (20,942) (5.4)%
        
        
Interest expense30,274
 

 23,715
 

Foreign currency transaction loss141
 

 780
 

Unrealized loss (gain) on change in fair value of warrants and purchase rights15,340
 

 (21,201) 

(Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt(11,588) 

 3,114
 

Other expense (income)188
 

 (240) 

Loss before income tax(40,242) 

 (27,110) 

Income tax provision1,933
 

 1,042
 

Net loss$(42,175) 

 $(28,152) 

U.S. Wholesale: Total net sales for the U.S. Wholesale segment increased $16.4 million, or 14.3%, to $131.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $115.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Wholesale net sales, excluding online consumer net sales, increased $11.5 million, or 11.7%, to $110.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $98.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, driven by higher sales order volume from a significant number of new and existing customers. Our ability to service orders reliably by keeping appropriate levels of inventory to support any fluctuations in customer demand, helped facilitate new account generation, as well as the maintenance of our existing client roster. The launch of a new wholesale catalog and the addition of new products to our wholesale offering attracted a more diversified customer base. We continue our focus on increasing our customer base by targeting direct sales, particularly sales to third party screen printers.
Online consumer net sales increased $4.9 million, or 29.8%, to $21.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $16.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011, primarily2013 as a result of functional improvements tolower net borrowing requirements.
Debt Agreements and Other Capital Resources
Capital One Credit Facility - On April 4, 2013, we replaced our websiteborrowings from Crystal and fulfillment process,Lion with the Capital One Credit Facility and as well as targeted online advertising, and promotion efforts.the Notes.
U.S. Retail: Net sales forOur new Capital One Credit Facility permits us to increase commitments to up to $50,000 in the U.S. Retail segment increased $23.0aggregate, subject to obtaining additional commitments and other customary conditions. The Capital One Credit Facility matures on April 4, 2018, subject to a January 15, 2018 maturity if excess availability is less than $15 million, at the time of notice to Capital One of a determination by the Company that an Applicable High Yield Discount Obligation ("AHYDO") redemption will be required pursuant to Section 3.01(e) of the indenture governing the Senior Secured Notes due 2020 (the "Notes"). Borrowings under the facility bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5% or 19.1%,the bank's prime rate plus 2.5% (at our option) and are subject to $143.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $120.5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Net sales growth was generatedmaintenance of specified borrowing base requirements and covenants. The Capital One Credit Facility is secured by a stronger inventory position in high volume categories, strategic promotions to drive volume in key basics, success in new women's and unisex fashion and improved presentationlien on substantially all of the assets of our floor sets. Throughout the period, improvements to logisticsdomestic subsidiaries and the speed of allocation helped to support a buying strategy that is faster and more proactive.
Comparable store sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $20.9 million, or 18%, while warehouse sales consisting primarily of slower moving merchandise contributed an incremental $5.8 million increase from 2011 to 2012, respectively. The sales increase was partially offset by a $3.5 million sales decrease as a result of a reductionequity interests in the number of stores in operations from 143 at September 30, 2011 to 140 stores at September 30, 2012.

38




Canada:Total net sales for the Canada segment increased $2.8 million, or 6.7%, to $45.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $42.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011 as a result of improved performance across all sales channels. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, total revenue for the current period would have been approximately $46.3 million, or $4.0 million higher when compared to the same period last year.
Retail sales increased by $1.9 million, or 6.0%, to $34.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $32.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011 due primarily to a $2.9 million, or 10%, increase in comparable store sales. Since September 30, 2011, the number of retail stores in the Canada segment in operation decreased from 38 to 35. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, retail sales for 2012 would have been approximately $35.1 million, or 10.6% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Wholesale net sales increased $0.7 million, or 8.5%, to $9.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $8.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increase in net sales is due to better focus on key customers and an improved pricing strategy. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, total wholesale net sales for the Canada segment for 2012 would have been approximately $9.7 million, or 4.5% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Online consumer net sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 were $1.5 million as compared to $1.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Foreign currency effects were minimal.
International: Total net sales for the International segment increased $12.3 million, or 11.0%, to $124.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $111.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increase is due to higher sales across all sales channels. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, total revenue for the current period would have been approximately $130.2 million, or $18.4 million higher when compared to the same period last year.
Retail net sales increased $10.8 million, or 11.7%, to $102.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $92.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The change is mainly attributed to higher sales in Japan of $4.6 million and the U.K. of $3.9 million. Comparable store sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $13.4 million, or 16%, as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Since September 30, 2011, the number retail stores in the International segment increased from 66 to 76 at September 30, 2012. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, retail sales for 2012 would have been approximately $108.0 million, or 17.3% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Wholesale net sales decreased $0.3 million, or 4.0%, to $7.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $7.5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease is due to unfavorable exchange rates. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, sales for the current period would have been approximately $7.7 million, or 2.3% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Online consumer net sales increased $1.8 million, or 14.6%, to $14.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $12.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Holding foreign currency exchange rates constant to those prevailing in the comparable period in 2011, sales for the current period would have been approximately $14.6 million, or 18.9% higher when compared to the same period last year.
Gross margin: Gross margin as a percentage of net sales was 52.7% and 54.1% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The decrease in gross margin was due to the net sales impact of planned promotional activities and the effect of warehouse type clearance sales as partcertain of our overall inventory reduction strategy. This decrease was partially offset by shift towards higher margin retail sales.foreign subsidiaries, subject to some exceptions. See
Selling expenses:Financial Covenants Selling expenses increasedbelow and Note 6, $15.7 million, or 10.3%, to $168.3 millionRevolving Credit Facilities and Current Portion of Long-Term Debt for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $152.5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increase is consistent with improving sales. Additionally, we increased our spending on print, outdoor and online advertising to $16.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 from $11.2 million for the comparable period in 2011 in order to continue the sales momentum. As a percentage of sales, selling expenses decreased to 37.9% in the nine months ended September 30, 2012 from 39.1% in the nine months ended September 30, 2011.
General and administrative expenses: General and administrative expenses decreased $5.2 million to $71.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $77.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. As a percentage of sales, general and administrative expenses decreased to 16.2% during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 from 19.8% during the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease in general and administrative expenses was

39




primarily due to a $5.6 million reduction in professional fees (primarily consulting, legal and accounting related fees), a decrease of $1.8 million of depreciation and amortization expenses and a reduction to our reserves related to a legal contingency, offset by an increase of $1.9 million of bonus expense and $2.6 million in higher share-based compensation expense.
Retail store impairment: For the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we recorded an impairment charge of $0.1 million primarily as a result of a store closure. For the nine months ended September 30, 2011, we recorded impairment charges relating to retail stores leasehold improvements of $2.4 million.
Interest expense: Interest expense increased $6.6 million to $30.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 from $23.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to a higher average balance of debt outstanding and higher interest rates related to the Crystal Credit Agreement. Interest rates on our various debt facilities and capital leases ranged from 5.0% to 19.8% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 4.7% to 18.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Interest expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 mainly consisted of interest on the Lion Credit Agreement of $16.3 million, interest on the Crystal Credit Agreement of $3.7 million, interest on the BofA Credit Agreement of $0.5 million, and amortization of debt discount and deferred financing cost of $7.7 million. Interest paid in cash was $6.6 million.
Foreign currency transaction loss: For the nine months ended September 30, 2012, foreign currency transaction loss totaled $0.1 million as compared to a loss of $0.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The change related to strengthening of the U.S. Dollar relative to functional currencies used by our subsidiaries.
Unrealized loss (gain) on change in fair value of warrants and purchase rights: We recorded a $15.3 million loss in fair value of warrants for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 associated with the fair value measurements of Lion and SOF warrants. We recorded a $21.2 million gain in the fair value of warrants and purchase rights for the nine months ended September 30, 2011 associated with the fair value measurement of purchase rights to an investor group and Mr. Charney, and additional warrants to Lion at September 30, 2011.
(Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt: During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we recorded a gain on extinguishment of debt relating to the amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement terms of approximately $11.6 million. During the nine months ended September 30, 2011, we recorded a loss on extinguishment of debt pertaining to the amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement terms of approximately $3.1 million. See Note 7, Long-Term Debt to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
Income tax provision:Crystal Credit Facility - The provision for income tax increased to $1.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to $1.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Although we incurred a loss before income taxes on a consolidated basis for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, some of our foreign domiciled subsidiaries reported income before income taxes and will be taxable on a stand-alone reporting basis in their respective foreign jurisdictions. As a result, we recorded a provision for income tax expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2012. There were no charges or benefits recorded to income tax expense for valuation allowances.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, we had approximately $7.2 million in cash and $3.5 million of availability for additional borrowings under the Crystal Credit Agreement and Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement. Additionally, we had (i) $35.6 million outstanding on a $50.0 million revolving credit facility under the Crystal Credit Agreement, (ii) $30.0 million of term loan outstanding under the Crystal Credit Agreement, (iii) $5.9 million outstanding on a C$11.0 million revolving credit facility under the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement, and (iv) $103.6 million, net of discount of $30.0 million and including paid-in-kind interest of $12.4 million of term loan outstanding under the Lion Credit Agreement. See Notes 6 and 7 to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
On March 13, 2012, we replaced our $75.0 million80,000 senior secured revolving credit facility with BofA with the Crystal Credit Agreement, a $80.0 million senior secured credit facility with Crystal and other lenders. The Crystal Credit Agreement callslenders, and maturing on March 13, 2015 that called for the $80.0 million80,000 to be allocated between an asset-based revolving credit facility of $50.0 million50,000 and term loan of $30.0 million30,000 and matures on . Our available borrowing capacity at March 13, 2015. In addition, the initial borrowing base under the revolving credit facility was increased by $12.5 million for the value associated with the American Apparel brand name. This initial increase will be ratably reduced to $0 during the period from April 13, 2012 through January 1, 2013.
Over the past years, our growth has been funded through a combination of borrowings from related and unrelated parties, bank debt and lease financing, proceeds from the exercise of purchase rights and issuance of common stock. Our principal liquidity requirements are for working capital and capital expenditures and to fund operating losses. We fund our liquidity requirements

40




primarily through cash on hand, cash flow from operations, borrowings from revolving credit facilities and term loans under the Crystal and Lion Credit Agreements. Those credit agreements contain covenants requiring us to meet specified targets for minimum consolidated EBITDA and our inability to achieve such targets or to obtain a waiver of compliance would negatively impact the availability of credit under those credit facilities or result in an event of default.
We generate cash primarily through the sale of products manufactured by us at our retail stores and through our wholesale operations. Primary uses of cash are for the purchase of raw materials, payroll payments to our manufacturing employees and retail employees, retail store opening costs and the payment of rent for retail stores.
We are in the process of executing a plan, which we commenced in late 2010, to improve the operating performance and our financial position. This plan includes optimizing production levels at our manufacturing facilities including raw material purchases and labor; streamlining our logistics operations; reducing corporate expenses; merchandise price rationalization in our wholesale and retail channels; improving merchandise distribution and allocation procedures and rationalizing staffing levels. We continue to develop other initiatives intended to either increase sales, reduce costs or improve liquidity.
Although our plan reflects improvements in these trends, there can be no assurance that our plan to improve the operating performance and our financial position will be successful. We continue to evaluate other alternative sources of capital for ongoing cash needs, however, there can be no assurance we will be successful in those efforts.
Cash Flow Overview
 Nine Months Ended September 30,
2012 2011
Net cash provided by (used in):   
Operating activities$1,570
 $(9,953)
Investing activities(20,113) (7,212)
Financing activities15,984
 18,321
Effect of foreign exchange rate on cash(548) (844)
Net (decrease) increase in cash$(3,107) $312
Nine Months EndedSeptember 30, 2012
Cash provided by operating activities31, 2013 was $1.6 million1,761. This was a result of non-cash expenses of $51.2 million offset by net losses of $42.2 million and a decrease in working capital requirements of $7.4 million. Non-cash expenses include depreciation, amortization, loss on disposal of property and equipment, impairment charges, foreign currency exchange transaction gain, allowance for inventory shrinkage and obsolescence, change in fair value of warrant liability, gain on extinguishment of debt, accrued interest-in-kind, stock based compensation, bad debt expense, deferred income taxes, and deferred rent. Cash was used for working capital primarily due to an increase in other assets of $5.8 million, increase in prepaid and other current assets of $3.3 million and increase in trade receivables of $4.7 million, partially offset by a decrease in inventories of $6.2 million and a decrease in income taxes receivable/payable of $2.4 million and a decrease in accrued expenses and other liabilities of $4.8 million. Improvements in liquidity from new equity financing in 2011 as well as higher sales have allowed us to gradually reduce accrued expenses and other liabilities. The decrease in inventory levels is due to the gradual improvements in our sales as well as the effects of stabilizing raw material costs.
Cash used in investing activities was $20.1 million. This consisted primarily of $14.3 million in capital expenditures and $5.9 million in restricted cash used as collateral to secure our standby letters of credit associated with the worker's compensation self-insurance policy and other liabilities. Net investments in property and equipment in the U.S. Wholesale segment consisted mostly of expenditures for manufacturing equipment and computer hardware and software. We upgraded our production forecasting and allocation systems and significantly enhanced our on-line web store capabilities with a new back office web platform. We also invested in our new distribution center in California. Net investments in the U.S. Retail segment were primarily to upgrade and remodel certain existing stores. Additionally, we continued implementing radio frequency identification (RFID) tracking systems at our stores.
Cash provided by financing activities was $16.0 million. This consisted primarily of proceeds from borrowings of $39.3 million under the new revolving credit facility and $30.0 million for a term loan, bothAll amounts owed under the Crystal Credit Agreement, partially offset bycredit facility were repaid with the repaymentnet proceeds from the offering of the previous revolvingNotes and the new credit facility for $48.3 million with BofA. Borrowings are primarily used to fund our operating and working capital needs.


41




Nine Months EndedSeptember 30, 2011facility.
Cash used in operating activities was $10.0 million. This was a resultAs of net losses of $28.2 million, cash used in working capital of $10.6 million, partially offset by non-cash expenses of $28.8 million. Non-cash expenses primarily include depreciation, amortization, gain on disposal of property and equipment, foreign exchange transaction loss, allowance for inventory shrinkage and obsolescence, change in fair value of warrant liability, loss on extinguishment of debt, accrued interest-in-kind, impairment charges, share-based compensation, bad debt expense, deferred income taxes, and deferred rent. Cash was used for working capital primarily due to an increase in inventory of $8.7 million, an increase in income taxes receivable of $1.2 million, an increase in other long-term assets of $2.9 million and an increase in trade receivables of $2.5 million, an increase in prepaid expenses, and other current assets of $0.2 million, partially offset by a net increase in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities of $4.7 million. Inventory increased in part due toMarch 31, 2013, interest under the effect of a historically high cost of yarn and related increase in fabric costs. The increase in accounts payable was as a result of higher inventory and reduced liquidity. The new equity investments in the second and third quarter of 2011 and improving sales have resulted in the reduction of the accounts payable balance in 2012.
Cash used in investing activities was $7.2 million. This consisted of increased net investment in property and equipment of $2.2 million for the U.S. Wholesale segment, $3.8 million for the U.S. Retail segment, $0.2 million for the Canada segment and $1.0 million for the International segment. We did not open any new stores during the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Investments in the U.S. Wholesale segment consisted mostly of expenditures for manufacturing equipment and computer hardware and software. Investments in the U.S. Retail segment, were primarily to make maintenance replacements and other minor upgrades for existing stores.
Cash provided by financing activities was $18.3 million. This consisted primarily of proceeds of $21.7 million from the sale of common stock and purchase rights, and $3.1 million in proceeds from a sale-leaseback financing transaction for manufacturing equipment, partially offset by repayment of $1.3 million under our revolving credit facilities and repayment other net borrowings.
Debt Agreements and Other Capital Resources
Revolving Credit Facilities
Crystal Credit Facility - On March 13, 2012, we replaced our $75.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility with BofA with a $80.0 million senior credit facility with Crystal and other lenders. On August 30, 2012, we entered into the Crystal Second Amendment. The Crystal Credit Agreement calls for thewas $80.0 million9.78% to be allocated between an asset-based revolving credit facility of $50.0 million and term loan of $30.0 million. The Crystal Credit Agreement matures on March 13, 2015. Borrowings under the Crystal Credit Agreement are subject to certain borrowing reserves based on eligible inventory and accounts receivable as established by Crystal and are collateralized by substantially all of our U.S. and U.K. assets and equity interests in certain of our foreign subsidiaries. In addition, the initial borrowing base under the revolving credit facility was increased by $12.5 million for the value associated with the American Apparel brand name. This initial increase will be ratably reduced to $0 during the period April 13, 2012 through January 1, 2013. Interest under the agreement was at the(the 90-day LIBOR at 0.28%plus 9.0%9.5%), and also included an unused facility fee ranging from 0.375% to 1.00% on the unused portion of the revolving credit facility. Beginning August 30, 2012, based on the Crystal Second Amendment,facility, payable monthly. Additionally, the interest rate relatingwith respect to the brand name portion of the outstanding principal amount of the revolving credit facility of $5.0 million as September 30, 2012 was the19.28% (the 90-day LIBOR at 0.28%plus 19.75% and the interest rate19.0%).

34




The Crystal Credit Agreement also includesincluded an early termination fee if the term loan iswas prepaid or if the commitments under the revolving credit facility iswere permanently reduced, of (a)such fee being 3.00% if such payment or reduction occurs in, for $2,400, at the first year, (b) time of repayment on April 4, 2013.
2.00% if such payment or reduction occurs inThe difference between the second year,net carrying amount of the Crystal loans of $60,533 (which includes the outstanding balance, accrued but unpaid interest, and (c) 0.00% thereafter. Our available borrowing capacity at September 30, 2012 was $1.4 million.
In connection with theunamortized financing from Crystal, we also entered into an amendmentcost immediately prior to the Lion Credit Agreementdate of the extinguishment) and the cash paid to among other things: (i) consent to the Crystal Credit Agreement, (ii) fix the maturity date at December 31, 2015, and (iii) modify certain financial covenants, including covenants related to minimum quarterly EBITDA and capital expenditures. In addition, the amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement modifies the Lion Credit Agreement to provide forof $66,468 will be recorded as a minimum$5,935 loss on early extinguishment of 5%debt in our statement of each interest payment on the outstanding principal in cash starting on September 1, 2012.
Additionally, the Crystal Second Amendment includes, among other things, a minimum EBITDA covenantoperations for the remainder of 2012, and a $5.0 million minimum excess availability for the period of December 17, 2012 through February 1,quarter ended June 30, 2013.
Proceeds from the Crystal Credit Agreement were used to repay our existing BofA Credit Facility, fees and expenses related to the transaction, and for general working capital purposes. SeeFinancial Covenants below and Note 6, Revolving Credit

42




Facilities and Current Portion of Long-Term Debt to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
Bank of Montreal Credit Facility - We also have aOn December 29, 2012, we entered into an amendment to our C$11,000 (Canadian dollars) revolving credit facility with Bank of Montreal (the “Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement”) of
C$11.0 million from Bank of Montreal (BofM). The revolving credit facility is secured by liens on personal property on all present and future movable property of our Canadian operations. Borrowings underthat extended the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement are subjectmaturity date to certain advance provisions established by BofM.December 31, 2013. Interest under the agreement is at the bank’s prime rate (3.0% at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013) plus 4.0%. per annum payable monthly. This line of credit is secured by a lien on the accounts receivable, inventory and certain other tangible assets owned by American Apparel Canada Wholesale, Inc. and American Apparel Canada Retail, Inc. Our available borrowing capacity at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 was $2.1 million656. See Financial Covenants below and Note 6, Revolving Credit Facilities and Current Portion of Long-Term Debt to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
The BankLion Loan Agreement - As of Montreal Credit Agreement matures in December 2012. There can be no assurances thatMarch 31, 2013, we will be able to negotiate a renewal or extension of this credit agreement with our existing lender or enter into a replacement credit agreement with new lenders on commercially reasonably terms or at all and we may be required to repay this loan. While we intend to negotiate an extension of this credit agreement, we do not believe that this credit agreement represents a material component of our current or future capital requirements.
Lion Credit Agreement
Term Loan - We havehad a loan agreement, maturing on December 31, 2015, with Lion Capital LLCLLP (“Lion” and the “Lion CreditLoan Agreement”, respectively) that provided us with term loans in an aggregate principal amount equal to $80.0 million. The term loan under the Lion Credit Agreement matures on December 31, 2015 and bearsbearing interest at a range between 15% and 18% per annum, depending on certain financial covenants relating to the ratio of Total Debt to Consolidated EBITDA for the trailing four quarters and Consolidated EBITDA for the trailing twelve months, payable quarterly in arrears. Asarrears, on an outstanding amount of September 30, 2012, we had outstanding approximately $103.6 million118,039 of second lien debt, net of discount and including accrued paid-in-kind interest, payable to Lion.
On March 13, 2012, in connectioninterest. All amounts owed under the Lion Loan Agreement were repaid with the net proceeds from the offering of the Notes and the new credit agreementfacility. There were no early termination penalties associated with Crystal Financial, we entered into a seventh amendmentthe termination of the Lion Loan Agreement. The difference between the net carrying amount of the Lion debt of $117,926 (which includes the principal, accrued but unpaid interest, unamortized discount and unamortized financing cost immediately prior to the date of extinguishment) and the cash paid to Lion Credit Agreement, which among other things: (i) consentedof $144,177 will be recorded as a $26,251 loss on early extinguishment of debt in our statement of operations for the quarter ended June 30, 2013. See Note 7, Long-Term Debt to the Crystal Credit Agreement, (ii) extends the maturity date to December 31, 2015, (iii) reduced the minimum Consolidated EBITDA amounts for any twelve consecutive months as determinedour condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
Senior Secured Notes due 2020 - On April 4, 2013, we issued $206,000 aggregate principal amount of our 13% Senior Secured Notes due 2020. The Notes will mature on April 15, 2020. The Notes were issued at the end97% of each fiscal quarterpar value and (iv) modifies certain other financial covenants, including covenants related to capital expenditures. The amendment also required that the Lion Warrant be amended. In addition, the amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement modifies the Lion Credit Agreement to provide forwill bear interest at a rate of 5.0%13% per annum. Interest on the Notes is payable semi-annually, in arrears, on April 15 and October 15 of each year, beginning on October 15, 2013.
A "special interest trigger event" will be deemed to have occurred under the indenture governing the Notes if our net leverage ratio for the year ended December 31, 2013 is greater than 4.50 to 1.00. If a special interest trigger event occurs, interest on the Notes will accrue at the rate of 15% per annum, retroactive to be paidApril 4, 2013, with the interest in cash commencingexcess of 13% per annum payable (i) in the case of any interest payment date prior to April 15, 2018, by adding such excess interest to the principal amount of the Notes on the interest accruing frompayment date, and (ii) for any interest payment date on or after September 1, 2012 (with the remainderApril 15, 2018, in cash.
On or after April 15, 2017, we may redeem some or all of the Notes at a premium decreasing ratably to zero as specified in the indenture, plus accrued and unpaid interest underto, but not including, the Lion Credit Agreement payable in-kind or in cash at our option).
On August 30, 2012, in connectionredemption date. Prior to April 15, 2017, we redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal amount of the Notes with the Crystal Second Amendment, we entered into an eighth amendmentnet cash proceeds of certain equity offerings at a redemption price of 113% of the aggregate principal amount of the redeemed notes plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the Lion Credit Agreement that adds, among other things, a second minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant for the remainder of 2012 conforming to Crystal's EBITDA covenant.
The Lion Credit Agreement is subordinated to the Crystal Credit Agreement and contains customary representations, and warranties, events of default, affirmative covenants, negative covenants (which impose restrictions and limitations on, among other things, dividends, investments, asset sales, capital expenditures, and the ability of us to incur additional debt and liens), and other financial covenants. We are permitted to prepay the loans in whole or in partredemption date. In addition, at any time prior to April 15, 2017 we may redeem some or all of the Notes by paying a premium, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the redemption date. If we experience certain change of control events, the holders of the Notes will have the right to require us to purchase all or a portion of the Notes at a price in cash equal to 101% of the principal amount of such Notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the date of purchase. In addition, we are required to use the net proceeds of certain asset sales, if not used for specified purposes, to purchase some of the Notes at 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the date of purchase. On each interest payment date after April 4, 2018, we will be required to redeem, for cash, a portion of each Note then outstanding equal to the amount necessary to prevent such Note from being treated as an “applicable high yield discount obligation” within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code. The redemption price will be 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon on the date of redemption.
The Notes are guaranteed, jointly and severally, on a senior secured basis by our option, with no prepayment penalty.existing and future domestic restricted subsidiaries. See Financial Covenants below and Note 7, Long-Term Debt to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
WeIn connection with the issuance of the Notes, we entered into a ninth amendment and waiverRegistration Rights Agreement pursuant to the Lion Credit Agreement (the "Lion Ninth Amendment") effective as of September 30, 2012, which we have agreed to, among other things, waivedconduct a registered exchange offer with respect to the Notes. If we fail to fulfill our obligationobligations

35


under the Registration Rights Agreement in a timely manner, we may be required to maintainpay additional interest on the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenants specified in the Lion Credit Agreement, as amended, for the twelve month period ended September 30, 2012. As a result, we were in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Lion Credit Agreement on September 30, 2012.Notes. See Note 7, Long-Term Debt to our condensed consolidated financial statements inunder Part I, Item 1.
Warrants
Lion Warrants - In connection with the Lion Credit Agreement, we issued warrants ("Lion Warrants") to Lion, which may be exercised by Lion by (1) paying the exercise price in cash, (2) pursuant to a “cashless exercise” of the warrant, or (3) by a combination of the two methods. On March 13, 2012, in connection with the new credit agreement with Crystal Financial, LLC, we entered into an amendment to the Lion Credit Agreement, which required that the warrants issued to Lion be amended to, among other things, extend the term of the warrants to February 18, 2022 and add a provision pursuant to which, if American Apparel does not meet a certain quarterly EBITDA ratio, the exercise price of the warrants would be reduced by $0.25 (a one-time adjustment for the first violation of such covenant; subsequent violations would not result in further adjustment). The amendments to the Lion Warrant were approved by the Company's shareholders at the 2012 Annual Meeting. On March 31, 2012, we did not meet the EBITDA requirement and, as a result, the exercise price of the existing Lion warrants

43


was reduced by $0.25 to $0.75 per share.
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, Lion held warrants to purchase 21,606 shares of our common stock, with an exercise price of $0.75 per share. These warrants expire on February 18, 2022. The estimated fair value of $28.2 million40,524 at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 is recorded as a current liability in our condensed consolidated balance sheets under Part I, Item 1.
The Lion Warrants also contain certain anti-dilution protections in favor of Lion providing for proportional adjustment of the warrant price and, under certain circumstances, the number of shares of our common stock issuable upon exercise of the Lion Warrant, in connection with, among other things, stock dividends, subdivisions and combinations and the issuance of additional equity securities at less than fair market value, as well as providing for the issuance of additional warrants to Lion in the event of certain equity sales or debt for equity exchanges. See Note 11, Stockholders' (Deficit) Equity to our condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
SOF Warrants - In connection with the Ninth Amendment withAs of March 31, 2013, SOF Investments, L.P. ("SOF") to extend the maturity date of our credit agreement with SOF from January 18, 2009 to April 20, 2009, we issuedheld warrants ("SOF Warrants") to SOF, to purchase 1,000 shares of our common stock.stock, with an exercise price of $2.148 per share, subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. These warrants expire on December 19, 2013. The exercise price of the SOF Warrants at the time of issuance was $3.00 per share and is subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. As a result of the issuance of warrants to Lion in February and April 2011, and the sale of common stock to the Investors in April and July 2011, the exercise price of the SOF Warrant was reduced to $2.139 per share. As a result of the change in exercise price for the Lion Warrants on September 30, 2012, the exercise price of the SOF Warrant was changed to $2.148 per share. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, the estimated fair value of $0.2 million$362 is recorded as a current liability in our condensed consolidated balance sheets. See Note 11, Stockholders' (Deficit) Equity to our consolidated financial statements under Part I, Item 1.
Summary of Debt
The following is an overview of our total debt as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 (dollars in thousands):
 
Description of Debt Lender Name Interest Rate September 30, 2012 Covenant Violations Lender Name Interest Rate March 31, 2013 Covenant Violations
Revolving credit facility(a) Crystal Financial LLC (a) 90-day LIBOR of 0.47% plus 9.0% plus unused facility fee ranging (0.375% -1.00%) and for the brand name: (b) 90-day LIBOR of 0.47% plus 19.75% $35,576
 No Crystal Financial LLC (1) 90-day LIBOR of 0.28% plus 9.5% plus unused facility fee ranging (0.375% -1.00%) and for the brand name: (2) 90-day LIBOR of 0.28% plus 19.0% $37,594
 No
Term loan from private investment firm Crystal Financial LLC 90-day LIBOR of 0.47% plus 9.0% plus unused facility fee ranging (0.375% -1.00%) 30,000
 No
Term loan (a) Crystal Financial LLC 90-day LIBOR of 0.28% plus 9.5% plus unused facility fee ranging (0.375% -1.00%) 30,000
 No
Revolving credit facility (Canada) Bank of Montreal Bank's prime rate of 3% plus 4% 5,901
 No Bank of Montreal Bank's prime rate of 3% plus 4% 477
 No
Term loan from private investment firm, net of discount and including interest paid-in-kind Lion Capital LLP From 15.0% to 18.0% 103,614
 Yes
Term loan, net of discount and including interest paid-in-kind (a) Lion Capital LLP From 15.0% to 18.0% 118,039
 No
Other     459
 N/A     364
 N/A
Capital lease obligations 23 individual leases ranging between $1-$511 From 5.0% to 18.0% 2,100
 N/A 15 individual leases ranging between $1-$5,217 From 0.4% to 18.0% 4,369
 N/A
Cash overdraft     2,625
 N/A     1,340
 N/A
Total debt including cash overdraft     $180,275
      $192,183
 
(a) Indebtedness repaid and related agreements terminated in connection with April 4, 2013 financing transactions.

Financial Covenants
Our credit agreements imposeand the indenture under which our Notes were issued contain certain restrictions regarding capital expenditures and limit our ability to: incur additional indebtedness, dispose of assets, make repayment of indebtedness or amendments of debt instruments, pay distributions, create liens on assets, and enter into sale and leaseback transactions, investments, loans or advances and acquisitions.restrictive covenants. Significant covenants are summarized below.
Capital One Credit Facility - We are required to maintain a minimum fixed charge coverage ratio of not less than 1.00 to 1.00 and we are also required to not exceed certain maximum leverage ratio thresholds, both determined at the end of each fiscal quarter. Additionally, our domestic subsidiaries are subject to an annual limitation of certain specified capital expenditure amounts as determined at the end of each fiscal year.

4436


LionAmong other provisions, the Capital One Credit Agreement - Significant covenants inFacility requires that we maintain a lockbox arrangement and contains certain subjective acceleration clauses. In addition, Capital One may at its discretion, adjust the Lionadvance restriction and criteria for eligible inventory and accounts receivable. The Capital One Credit Facility contains cross-default provisions whereby an event of default under the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement, includethe indenture governing the Notes or other indebtedness, in each case of an annual limitationamount greater than a specified threshold, would cause an event of our capital expenditures to $30.0 million for fiscal 2012. Our total actual capital expenditures fordefault under the nine months ended September 30, 2012 were $14,257.
Additionally, the LionCapital One Credit Agreement requires a minimum Consolidated EBITDA amount (as specified inFacility. If an event of default occurs and is continuing under the credit agreement) for any twelve consecutive months as determined at the end of each fiscal quarter (Quarterly Minimum Consolidated EBITDA).In addition, the Lion Eighth Amendment includes a second minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant for the remainder of 2012 to be determined at the end of each month (Monthly Minimum Consolidated EBITDA) that conforms to the Crystal's minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant.
We entered into a ninth amendment and waiver to the Lion Credit Agreement (the "Lion Ninth Amendment") effective as of September 30, 2012, whichagreement, Capital One may, among other things, waived our obligation to maintainterminate the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenants specified in the Lion Credit Agreement, as amended, for the twelve month period ended September 30, 2012. As a result, we were in compliance with the required financial covenantsobligations of the Lion Credit Agreement on September 30, 2012. See Note 7, Long-Term Debtlenders to our condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1.
Crystal Credit Agreement - Significant covenants inmake loans, and the Crystal Credit Agreement include a minimum excess availability covenant that requiresobligation of the letter of credit issuer to make letter of credit extensions and require us to maintain minimum excess availability of the greater of (1) $8.0 million, or (2) 10% of the borrowing base. If the excess availability falls below this minimum, then we will be required to maintain a fixed charge coverage ratio of not less than 1.00:1.00 to be calculated monthly on a consolidated trailing twelve-month basis and continuing until the excess availability exceeds this minimum for sixty consecutive days. The second amendment adds (1) a new minimum excess availability covenant that requires us to maintain minimum excess availability to be no less than $5.0 million during the period from December 17, 2012 to February 1, 2012, and, (2) adds a minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenant for the remainder of 2012 to be determined at the end of each month. Furthermore, the Crystal Credit Agreement includes an annual limitation of our capital expenditures at our domestic subsidiaries to no more than $17.0 million for the year ending December 31, 2012 and $25.0 million for each year thereafter.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, our excess availability was below the minimum amount and, as a result, we were required to maintain the fixed charge coverage ratio. As of September 30, 2012, we were in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Crystal Credit Agreement.
On November 12, 2012, we and certain of our subsidiaries entered into amendments to both the Crystal Credit Agreement and the Lion Credit Agreement that, among other things, reduced by $600 the target minimum EBITDA for the twelve months ended October 31, 2012 under the financial covenants of each credit agreement, respectively.
As of September 30, 2012, we were in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Crystal Credit Agreement and the Lion Credit Agreement, as amended.  The Company has obtained a waiver of the minimum Consolidated EBITDA requirements for the twelve months ended October 31, 2012 under the financial covenants of the Crystal Credit Agreement and the Lion Credit Agreement.repay all outstanding amounts.
Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement - Significant covenants in the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement include a restriction on our Canadian subsidiaries from entering into operating leases that would lead to payments under such leases totaling more than C$8.5 million8,500 (Canadian dollars) in any fiscal year. The credit agreement also requires our Canadian subsidiaries to maintain minimum excess availability of 5% of the revolving credit commitment under the facility.
As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, we were in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Bank of Montreal Credit Agreement. Each
Senior Secured Notes due 2020 - The indenture imposes certain limitations on our ability to, among other things and subject to a number of important qualifications and exceptions, incur additional indebtedness or issue disqualified capital stock or preferred stock (with respect to restricted subsidiaries), grant liens, make payments in respect of their capital stock or certain indebtedness, enter into transactions with affiliates, create dividend and other payment restrictions affecting subsidiaries, merge or consolidate with any other person, sell, assign, transfer, lease, convey or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of its assets or adopt a plan of liquidation. We must annually report to the credit agreementstrustee on compliance with Lion Capital, Crystal and Bank of Montreal containsuch limitations. The indenture also contains cross-default provisions whereby a payment default or acceleration of any indebtedness in an event of default occurring under any of the other credit agreementsaggregate amount greater than a specified threshold would cause an event of default.default with respect to the Notes.
Future Capital Requirements
On March 13, 2012,April 4, 2013, we refinancedclosed a private offering of $206,000 aggregate principal amount of our senior credit facility, which extended the maturity13% Senior Secured Notes (the Notes) at 97% of the loan from July 2012 to March 2015. In addition,par due 2020 and we entered into an amendmenta new $35,000 asset-backed revolving credit facility with Capital One maturing on April 4, 2018, subject to extenda January 15, 2018 maturity under a specific circumstance. We used the maturitynet proceeds from the offering of the Notes, together with borrowings under the Capital One Credit Facility to repay and terminate our existing credit facilities with Lion Credit Agreement fromand Crystal, pay fees and expenses related to the transaction, and will use the balance for general corporate purposes.
Our C$11,000 (Canadian dollars) credit agreement with Bank of Montreal matures in December 2013 to December 2015. As a result of these financing transactions, we2013.
We believe that we have sufficient financing commitments to meet our funding requirements for the next twelve months.
Our C$11.0 million credit agreement with Bank of Montreal matures in December 2012. While we intend to attempt to negotiate an extension of this credit agreement, we do not believe that this credit agreement represents a material component of our current or future capital requirements.


45


Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations
Our material off-balance sheet contractual commitments are operating lease obligations and letters of credit.
Operating lease commitments consist principally of leases for our retail stores, manufacturing facilities, main distribution centers and corporate office. These leases frequently include options, which permit us to extend the terms beyond the initial fixed lease term. As appropriate, we intend to negotiate lease renewals as the leases approach expiration.
Issued and outstanding letters of credit were $4.6 million1,880 at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and, related primarily to workers’ compensation insurance and rent deposits. We also have capital lease obligations, which consist principally of leases for our manufacturing equipment.
Seasonality
We experience seasonality in our operations. Historically, sales during the third and fourth fiscal quarters have generally been the highest, with sales during the first fiscal quarter the lowest. This reflects the combined impact of the seasonality of theour wholesale and retail channels. Generally, our retail segment has not experienced the same pronounced sales seasonality as other retailers.

37


Critical Accounting Estimates and Policies
As discussed in Part II, Item 8. Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20112012, we consider our most critical accounting estimates and policies to include:
revenue recognition;
inventory valuation, obsolescence;
fair value calculations, including derivative liabilities such as the Lion warrants;
valuation and recoverability of long-lived assets including the values assigned to acquired intangible assets, goodwill, and property and equipment;
income taxes;
accruals for the outcome of current litigation; and
self-insurance liabilities.
In general, estimates are based on historical experience, on information from third party professionals and on various other sources, and assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the facts and circumstances at the time such estimates are made. On a continual basis, management reviews its estimates utilizing currently available information, changes in facts and circumstances, historical experience, and reasonable assumptions. After such reviews, and if deemed appropriate, those estimates are adjusted accordingly. Actual results may vary from these estimates and assumptions under different and/or future circumstances. Our management considers an accounting estimate to be critical if:
it requires assumptions to be made that were uncertain at the time the estimate was made; and
changes in the estimate, or the use of different estimating methods that could have been selected, could have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial condition.
Inflation
Inflation affects the cost of raw materials, goods and services used in our operations. In 2010, the price of yarn and the cost of certain related fabrics began to increase as a result of the compounding effect of added demand, supply shortages primarily from the effect of severe weather conditions in certain cotton producing countries, and a ban on cotton exports imposed by the government of India. Prices continued to increase throughout 2010 and through the first quarter of 2011. DuringStarting with the second quarter of 2012 and through the first halfquarter of 2012, we experienced lower quoted cost of yarn as opposed to sharply rising cost that took place during the first half of 2011.2013, prices have stabilized. We cannot predict if this decline in the cost of cotton is sustainable. In addition, high oil costs can affect the cost of all raw materials and components. The competitive environment can limit the ability of American Apparel to recover higher costs resulting from inflation by raising prices. Although we cannot precisely determine the effects of inflation on our business, we believe that the

46


effects on revenues and operating results have not been significant. We seek to mitigate the adverse effects of inflation primarily through improved productivity and strategic buying initiatives. We do not believe that inflation has had a material impact on our results of operations for the periods presented. Further, in response to increases in our raw material costs we have implemented price increases of certain products across all Business Segments. We are unable to predict if we will be able to successfully pass on the added cost of any future raw material cost increases by further increasing the price of our products to our wholesale and retail customers.

4738


Item 3.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk (amounts in thousands)
Our exposure to market risk is limited to interest rate risk associated with our credit facilities and foreign currency exchange risk associated with our foreign operations.
Interest Rate Risk
Based on the interest rate exposure on variable rate borrowings at September 30, 2012, a 1% increase in average interest rates on our borrowings would increase future interest expense by approximately $60 per month. We determined these amounts based on approximately $71,477 of variable rate borrowings at September 30, 2012. We are currently not using any interest rate collars or hedges to manage or reduce interest rate risk. As a result, any increase in interest rates on our variable rate borrowings would increase interest expense and reduce net income.
Foreign Currency Risk
The majority of our operating activities are conducted in U.S. dollars. Approximately 38.1% of our net sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 were denominated in other currencies such as Euros, British Pounds Sterling or Canadian Dollars, among others. Nearly all of our production costs and material costs are denominated in U.S. dollars although the majority of the yarn is sourced from outside the United States. If the U.S. dollar were to appreciate by 10% against other currencies it could have a significant adverse impact on our earnings. Since an appreciated U.S. dollar makes goods produced in the United States relatively more expensive to overseas customers, other things being equal, we would have to lower our retail margin in order to maintain sales volume overseas. A lower retail margin overseas would adversely affect net income assuming sales volume remains the same. The functional currencies of our foreign operations consist of the Canadian dollar for Canadian subsidiaries, the pound Sterling for U.K. subsidiaries, the Euro for subsidiaries in Continental Europe, the Yen for the Japanese subsidiary, the Won for the South Korea subsidiary, and local currencies for any of the foreign subsidiaries not mentioned.

48


Item 4. Controls and Procedures
(a)Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Under the supervision and participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as such term is defined under Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Based upon thisthat evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer have concluded that as of September 30, 2012, our disclosure controls and procedures were ineffective due to a material weakness existing in our internal controls over financial reportingeffective as of DecemberMarch 31, 2011 (described below), which2013.  
There has not been fully remediated as of September 30, 2012.  
A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in Internal Control over Financial Reporting (“ICFR”), such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company's annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. A material weakness would permit information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that it files or submits to not be recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the SEC rules and forms. As of September 30, 2012, the following material weakness existed:  
Material weakness related to financial closing and reporting process.
We concluded that we did not have a sufficient number of trained accounting personnel with expertise in GAAP to ensure that complex material and/or non-routine transactions are properly reflected in our consolidated financial statements. We also noted that we did not perform adequate independent reviews and maintain effective controls related to the preparation of consolidated financial statements, related notes thereto, account analyses, account summaries and account reconciliations prepared in the areas of inventory and related inventory reserves, cost of sales and certain other accounts.
(b) Remediation Activities
During 2012, the Company continued to take measures to remediate the remaining material weakness, described as follows:
Material weakness related to financial close and reporting process.
We identified and implemented additional internal controls to strengthen account analyses related to inventory costing. We transitioned the responsibility for maintaining standard costs from our production planning department to our accounting department and have enhanced production reporting in order to separately record and analyze production variances. In 2011 we fully updated our standard costing systems to reflect the recent trends in raw material costs, labor rates, and manufacturing overhead absorption rates. We enhanced our workforce management system which will enable us to more accurately track direct labor to specific production runs and analyze labor variances specific to our styles. That workforce management system was fully deployed to production process at the end of the first quarter of 2012. During the fourth quarter of 2012 we are completing another assessment of standard cost accuracy for sewing, cutting, overhead and dye/knitting/finishing service. We are continuing the process of reviewing all internal controls related to cost accounting and established procedures for cost data validation and enhanced historical cost reporting. During the third quarter of 2012 we established new procedures to review and validate all information that is pertinent to inventory accounting. These procedures include steps to validate data used in the inventory analysis, formal preparer and reviewer steps, roll-forward and reconciliation of general ledger balances. Such procedures will provide a more robust control environment for all inventory accounts and assure accountability for the analysis and balances being reported. We substantially improved the procedures related to analysis of inventory reserve accounts. We continue to enhance our international cost accounting procedures for intercompany inventory transfers and inventory costing. As we continue to solidify our staffing levels, we expect our internal controls over the financial closing and reporting process to strengthen and continue to work toward remediating this material weakness.
(c) Changes in ICFR
As noted in section (b) above, at the end of the quarter ended September 30, 2012, we fully deployed a new workforce management system to cover substantially all of the sewing direct labor data capture at our main manufacturing facility in Los Angeles. Other than that noted change, there have been no other changeschange in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in RuleRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act)Act of 1934) during the most recent fiscalfirst quarter ended September 30, 2012of 2013 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial reporting.
During 2012, the Company's management continued to implement the steps outlined above under “Remediation Activities” to improve the quality of its ICFR.

4939


PART II-OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.Legal Proceedings
We are subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of business, including those related to litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes, and others. When we are aware of a claim or potential claim, we assess the likelihood of any loss or exposure. If it is probable that a loss will result and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, we will record a liability for the loss. In addition to the estimated loss, the recorded liability includes probable and estimable legal costs associated with the claim or potential claim. There is no assurance that such matters will not materially and adversely affect our business, financial position, and results of operations or cash flows.
Individual Actions
On February 7, 2006, Sylvia Hsu, a former employee of American Apparel, filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Los Angeles District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) (Hsu v. American Apparel: Charge No. 480- 2006-00418), alleging that she was subjected to sexual harassment by a co-worker and constructively discharged as a result of the sexual harassment and a hostile working environment. On March 9, 2007, the EEOC expanded the scope of its investigation to other employees of American Apparel who may have been sexually harassed. On August 9, 2010, the EEOC issued a written determination finding that reasonable cause exists to believe we discriminated against Ms. Hsu and women, as a class, on the basis of their female gender, by subjecting them to sexual harassment. No finding was made on the issue of Ms. Hsu's alleged constructive discharge. In its August 19, 2010 written determination, the EEOC has invited the parties to engage in informal conciliation. If the parties are unable to reach a settlement which is acceptable to the EEOC, the EEOC will advise the parties of the court enforcement alternatives available to Ms. Hsu, aggrieved persons, and the EEOC. The insurance carrier for us has asserted that it is not obligated to provide coverage for this proceeding.  We have not recorded a provision for this matter and intend to workare working cooperatively with the EEOC to resolve the claim in a manner acceptable to all parties. Should the matter be decided against us, we could experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm. We do not believe at this time believe that any settlement will involve thea payment of damages in an amount that would be material to and adversely affect our business, financial position, and results of operations andor cash flows.
On November 5, 2009, Guillermo Ruiz, a former employee of American Apparel, filed suit against us on behalf of putative classes of all current and former non-exempt California employees (Guillermo Ruiz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. American Apparel, Inc., Case Number BC425487) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, alleging we failed to pay certain wages due for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof and to pay wages due upon termination to certain of our employees. The complaint further alleges that we failed to comply with certain itemized employee wage statement provisions and violations of unfair competition law.  The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages and economic and/or special damages in an unspecified amount, premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement for attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. We do not have insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against us, we could not only incur substantial liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm. We have accrued an estimate for this loss contingency in our accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2012.  We may have an exposure to loss in excess of the amounts accrued, however, an estimate of such potential loss cannot be made at this time. Moreover, no assurance can be made that this matter either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, larger than our estimate, which could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
On June 21, 2010, Antonio Partida, a former employee of American Apparel, filed suit against us on behalf of putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees (Antonio Partida, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. American Apparel (USA), LLC, Case No. 30-2010-00382719-CU-OE-CXC) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Orange, alleging we failed to pay certain wages for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof, and to pay wages due upon separation. The complaint further alleges that we failed to timely pay wages, unlawfully deducted wages and failed to comply with certain itemized employee wage statement provisions and violations of unfair competition law. The plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages and economic and/or special damages in an unspecified amount, premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. There is no known insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against us, we could not only incur substantial liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm. We have accrued an estimate for this loss contingency in our accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2012. We may have an exposure to loss in excess of the amounts accrued, however, an estimate of such potential loss cannot be made at this time.  Moreover, no assurance can be made that this matter either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, larger than our estimate, which could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
On or about December 2, 2010, Emilie Truong, a former employee of American Apparel, filed suit against us on behalf of

50


putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees (Emilie Truong, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. American Apparel, Inc. and American Apparel LLC, Case No. BC450505) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, alleging we failed to timely provide final paychecks upon separation.  Plaintiff is seeking unspecified premium wages, attorneys' fees and costs, disgorgement of profits, and an injunction against the alleged unlawful practices. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. There is no known insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against us, we could not only incur substantial liability, but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.  We are unable to predict the financial outcome of these matters at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure which could result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However, no assurance can be made that these matters, either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, which could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
On or about February 9, 2011, Jessica Heupel, a former retail employee filed suit on behalf of putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees (Jessica Heupel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. American Apparel Retail, Inc., Case No. 37-2011-00085578-CU-OE-CTL) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego, alleging we failed to pay certain wages for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof, and to pay wages due upon separation.  The plaintiff is seeking monetary damages as follows: (1) for alleged meal and rest period violations; (2) for alleged failure to timely pay final wages, as well as for punitive damages for the same; and (3) unspecified damages for unpaid minimum wage and overtime.  In addition, Plaintiff seeks premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. There is no known insurance coverage for this matter. Should the matter be decided against us, we could not only incur substantial liability, but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.  We are unable to predict the financial outcome of these matters at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure which could result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However, no assurance can be made that these matters, either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, which could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
On or about September 9, 2011, Anthony Heupel, a former retail employee

40


initiated arbitration proceedings on behalf of putative classes of current and former non-exempt California employees, alleging we failed to pay certain wages for hours worked, to provide meal and rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof, and to pay wages due upon separation.  The plaintiff is seeking monetary damages in an amount in excess of $3,600, as follows: (1) for alleged meal and rest period violations; (2) for alleged failure to timely pay final wages, as well as for punitive damages for the same; and (3) unspecified damages for unpaid minimum wage and overtime.  In addition, Plaintiff seeks premium pay, wages and penalties, injunctive relief and restitution, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees, interest and the costs of the suit. This matter is now proceeding in arbitration. There is no known
We do not have insurance coverage for the above matters. We have accrued an estimate for the loss contingency for each of the above matters (excluding the Hsu case as noted above) in our accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2013. We may have an exposure to loss in excess of the amounts accrued, however, an estimate of such potential loss cannot be made at this matter.time. Moreover, no assurance can be made that these matters either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, larger than our estimate, which could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
Additionally, we are currently engaged in other employment-related claims and other matters incidental to our business.  We believe that all such claims against us are without merit or not material, and we intend to vigorously dispute the validity of the plaintiffs' claims. While the ultimate resolution of such claims cannot be determined, based on information at this time, we believe, but we cannot provide assurance that, the amount, and ultimate liability, if any, with respect to these actions will not materially affect our business, financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Should the matterany of these matters be decided against us, we could not only incur liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.
Derivative Matters
Two shareholder derivative lawsuits (Case No. CV106576 GAF (JCx) and Case No. CV107518 RSWL (FFMx)) were filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California which were subsequently consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. CV106576 (the “Federal Derivative Action”).  Plaintiffs in the Federal Derivative Action allege a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of (i) our alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; (ii) our alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection; and (iii) our alleged failure to implement controls sufficient to prevent a sexually hostile and discriminatory work environment.  We do not maintain any direct exposure to loss in connection with these shareholder derivative lawsuits. Our status as a “Nominal Defendant” in the actions reflects the fact that the lawsuits are maintained by the named plaintiffs on behalf of American Apparel and that plaintiffs seek damages on our behalf. We filed a motion to dismiss the Federal Derivative Action which was granted with leave to amend on July 31, 2012. Plaintiffs did not amend the complaint and subsequently filed a motion to dismiss each of their claims, with prejudice, for the stated purpose of taking an immediate appeal of the Court's July 31, 2012 order. On October 16, 2012, the Court granted the Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss and entered judgment accordingly. On November 12, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals where the case is currently pending.
Four shareholder derivative lawsuits (Case No. BC 443763, Case No. BC 443902, Case No. BC 445094, and Case No. BC 447890) were filed in fall of 2010 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles which were subsequently consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. BC 443763 (the "State Derivative Action"). 
Three of the matters comprising the State Derivative Action allege causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of (i) our alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; and (ii) our alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection.  The fourth matter alleges seven causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets also arising out of the same allegations.  On April 12, 2011, the Court issued an order granting a stay (which currently remains in place) of the State Derivative Action on the grounds that the case is duplicative of the Federal Derivative Action, as well as the Federal Securities Action currently pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (see below).
Both the Federal Derivative Action and State Derivative Actions are covered under our Directors and Officers Liability insurance policy, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
Other Proceedings
Four putative class action lawsuits, (Case No. CV106352 MMM (RCx), Case No. CV106513 MMM (RCx), Case No. CV106516 MMM (RCx), and Case No. CV106680 GW (JCGx)) were filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California in the Fall of 2010 against American Apparel and certain of our officers and executives on behalf of American Apparel shareholders who purchased our common stock between December 19, 2006 and August 17, 2010. On

41


December 3, 2010, the four lawsuits were consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Lead Case No. CV106352 MMM (JCGx) (the “Federal Securities Action”). The lead plaintiff alleges two causes of action for violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated under Section 10(b), arising out of alleged misrepresentations contained in our press releases, public filings with the SEC, and other public statements relating to (i) the adequacy of our internal and financial control policies and procedures; (ii) our employment practices; and (iii) the effect that the dismissal of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection would have on us. Plaintiff seeks damages in an unspecified amount, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and equitable relief as the Court may deem proper.  We filed two motions to dismiss the Federal Securities Action which the court granted with leave to amend. Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint on February 15, 2013. We filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on March 15, 2013. The hearing on the motion will be held June 3, 2013. The Federal Securities Action is covered under our Directors and Officers Liability insurance policy, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
Should any of the above matters (i.e., the Federal Derivative Action, the State Derivative Action, or the Federal Securities Action) be decided against us in an amount that exceeds our insurance coverage, or if liability is imposed on grounds which fall outside the scope of our insurance coverage, we could not only incur a substantial liability, but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.  We are unable to predict the financial outcome of these matters at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure which could result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However, no assurance can be made that these matters, either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, which could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
Two shareholder derivative lawsuits, entitled Nikolai Grigoriev v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. CV106576 GAF (JCx) (the “Grigoriev Action”) and Andrew Smukler v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. CV107518 RSWL (FFMx) (the “Smukler Action”), wereThe Company has previously disclosed an arbitration filed by the Company on February 17, 2011, related to cases filed in the United States DistrictSupreme Court for the Central District of California on September 2, 2010New York, County of Kings (Case No. 5018-1) and October 7, 2010, respectively, and four shareholder derivative lawsuits, entitled John L. Smith v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 443763 (the "Smith Action"), Lisa Kim v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 443902 (the "Kim Action"), Teresa Lankford v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 445094 (the "Lankford Action"), and Wesley Norris v. Dov Charney, et al., Case No. BC 447890 (the "Norris Action") were filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles on August 16, 2010, September 3, 2010, September 7, 2010,(Case Nos. BC457920 and October 21, 2010, respectively, by persons identifying themselves as American Apparel shareholders and purporting to act on behalf of American Apparel, naming American Apparel as a nominal defendant and certain current and former officers, directors, and executives of the Company as defendants.
Plaintiffs in the Smith Action, Kim Action, and Norris Action allege causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of (i) our alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; and (ii) our alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection.  The Lankford Action alleges seven causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets

51


also arising out of (i) our alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; and (ii) our alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection.  On November 4, 2010, the four lawsuits filed in the Superior Court of the State of California were consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. BC 443763 (the "State Derivative Action").  On April 12, 2011, the Court issued an order staying the State Derivative Action on the grounds that the case is duplicative of the Federal Derivative Action, as well as the Federal Securities Action currently pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (see below).
On November 12, 2010, the Grigoriev Action and Smukler Action were consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. CV106576 (the “Federal Derivative Action”).  Plaintiffs in the Federal Derivative Action filed a Consolidated Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint on June 13, 2011.  The amended complaint alleges a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of (i) our alleged failure to maintain adequate accounting and internal control policies and procedures; (ii) our alleged violation of state and federal immigration laws in connection with the previously disclosed termination of over  1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection; and (iii) our alleged failure to implement controls sufficient to prevent a sexually hostile and discriminatory work environment.  Plaintiffs in each of the derivative cases seek damages on behalf of American Apparel in an unspecified amount, as well as equitable and injunctive relief. We do not maintain any exposure to loss in connection with these shareholder derivative lawsuits. The lawsuits do not assert any claims against us. Our status as a “Nominal Defendant” in the actions reflects the fact that the lawsuits are maintained by the named plaintiffs on behalf of American Apparel and that plaintiffs seek damages on our behalf. On August 29, 2011, we filed a motion to dismiss the Federal Derivative Action.  A hearing on the motion was held on December 12, 2011.  On July 31, 2012, the Court dismissed the Federal Derivative Action, with leave to amend. Plaintiffs in the Federal Derivative Action subsequently filed a motion to dismiss each of their claims, with prejudice, for the stated purpose of taking an immediate appeal of the Court's July 31, 2012 order. On October 16, 2012, the Court granted the Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss the consolidated derivative complaint and entered judgment accordingly. On November 12, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Four putative class action lawsuits, entitled Anthony Andrade v. American Apparel, et al., Case No. CV106352 MMM (RCx), Douglas Ormsby v. American Apparel, et al., Case No. CV106513 MMM (RCx), James Costa v. American Apparel, et al., Case No. CV106516 MMM (RCx), and Wesley Childs v. American Apparel, et al., Case No. CV106680 GW (JCGx), were filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on August 25, 2010, August 31, 2010, August 31, 2010, and September 8, 2010, respectively, against American Apparel and certain of our officers and executives on behalf of American Apparel shareholders who purchased the our common stock between December 19, 2006 and August 17, 2010. On December 3, 2010, the four lawsuits were consolidated for all purposes into a case entitled In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Lead Case No. CV106352 MMM (JCGx) (the “Federal Securities Action”). On March 14, 2011, the Court appointed the firm of Barroway Topaz, LLP (now Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP) to serve as lead counsel and Mr. Charles Rendelman to serve as lead plaintiff. On April 29, 2011, Mr. Rendelman filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint against American Apparel, certain of our officers, and Lion, alleging two causes of action for violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act, and Rules 10b-5 promulgated under Section 10(b), arising out of alleged misrepresentations contained in our press releases, public filings with the SEC, and other public statements relating to (i) the adequacy of our internal and financial control policies and procedures; (ii) our employment practices; and (iii) the effect that the dismissal of over 1,500 employees following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspection would have on us. Plaintiff seeks damages in an unspecified amount, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and equitable relief as the Court may deem proper.  On May 31, 2011, we filed a motion to dismiss the Federal Securities Action. On January 13, 2012, the Court dismissed the Federal Securities Action, with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on February 27, 2012. We moved to dismiss the amended complaint on March 30, 2012. A hearing on the motion was heard on May 21, 2012. The Court took this matter under submission. Discovery is stayed in the Federal Securities Action, as well as in the Federal Derivative Action, pending resolution of motions to dismiss the Federal Securities Action.
We are unable to predict the financial outcome of these matters at this time, and any views formed as to the viability of these claims or the financial exposure which could result may change from time to time as the matters proceed through their course. However, no assurance can be made that these matters, either individually or together with the potential for similar suits and reputational harm, will not result in a material financial exposure, which could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
On February 17, 2011, the Company filed complaints in arbitration against five former employees seeking: (1) declaratory relief that the arbitration, confidentiality, severance and bonus agreements signed by the former employees are valid and enforceable; (2) damages in the event the former employees or anyone of them breaches their confidentiality agreements, as threatened; (3) attorneys' fees and costs incurred to compel the suit into arbitration; (4) declaratory relief that the former

52


employees' claims of sexual harassment and sexual assault are false and without merit; and (5) declaratory relief that the former employees have attempted to engage in abuse of process for the purpose of extorting from the Company and Dov Charney money solely to avoid public shame and economic loss. On March 4, 2011, one such former employee filed suitBC460331) against American Apparel, Dov Charney and certain members of the Board of Directors asserting claims of American Apparel in the Supreme Court of New York, County of Kings, Case No. 5018-11.  The suit alleges sexual harassment, gender discrimination, retaliation, negligent hiring and supervision, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, fraud and unpaid wages, and seeks, among other things, an award of compensatory damages, exemplary damages, attorneys' fees and costs, all in an amount of at least $250,000 (the "New York Suit"). In March 2012, the court ordered this case into arbitration. On March 23, 2011, three of the other former employees filed a consolidated suit against American Apparel and Dov Charney in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC457920 (the "Los Angeles Suit"). Such action alleges sexual harassment, failure to prevent harassment and discrimination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery, and a declaratory judgment thatimpersonation through the confidentiality and arbitration agreements signed by plaintiffs are unenforceable. Such action seeks monetary damages, various forms of injunctive relief, and attorneys' fees and costs. On July 28, 2011, the court ordered this case into arbitration.  The Company's insurance carrier has acknowledged coverage of the New York Suit and Los Angeles Suit, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
On April 27, 2011, three of the former employees filed suit against the Company, Dov Charney and a Company employee in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC460331, asserting claims for Impersonation through Internet or Electronic Means, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Defamation, Invasion of Privacy/False Light, and Invasion of Privacy/Appropriation of Likeness. Such action seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief and attorneys' fees and costs.  The Court has ordered this case into arbitration.  The Company's insurance carrier has acknowledged coverage of this suit, subject to a deductible and a reservation of rights.
We are currently engaged in other employment-related claimsinternet, defamation and other matters incidentalrelated claims.  The Company recently settled one of these cases with no monetary liability to our business.  We believe that all suchthe Company.  The Company recently prevailed on the sexual harassment claims against us are without merit or not material, and we intend to vigorously dispute the validityin another of the plaintiffs' claims. Should these matters be decided against us, we could not only incur substantial liability but also experience an increase in similar suits and suffer reputational harm.cases.  While the ultimate resolution of suchthe remaining claims cannot be determined, in light of the favorable ruling in one of these cases, the amount of settlement in the other of these cases, and based on information available at this time regarding the remaining cases, we believe, but we cannot provide assurances that, the amount and ultimate liability, if any, with respect to these remaining actions will not materially affect our business, financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. We cannot assure you, however, that such actions will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows.


    


5342


Item 1A.Risk Factors
Before deciding to invest in us or to maintain or increase your investment, you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described in the "Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" under Part I of this report and our other filings with the SEC. The risks and uncertainties described in this report are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also affect us. If any of these risks actually materialize, our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted. In that event, the market price of our common stock could decline and you may lose all or part of your investment.
During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, there have been no material changes in ourthe risk factors previously disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.2012, except that we are updating the first and second risk factors described therein to reflect the financing transactions that closed on April 4, 2013. Please refer to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K (filed with the SEC on March 14, 2012)5, 2013) for the year ended December 31, 20112012 for a complete list of our risk factors.
We have substantial indebtedness, which could have adverse consequences to us, and we may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow in the future to service our indebtedness.
We currently have substantial indebtedness.Our level of indebtedness has important consequences to us and to you and your investment. For example, our level of indebtedness may:
require us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to pay interest and principal on our debt, which would reduce the funds available to use for operations, investments, future business opportunities and other general corporate purposes; 
make it more difficult for us to satisfy our debt obligations, and any failure to comply with such obligations, including financial and other restrictive covenants, could result in an event of default or an inability to borrow under the agreements governing such indebtedness;
in the case of a default or an event of default, as applicable, lead to, among other things, cross-defaults with our other indebtedness, an acceleration of our indebtedness or foreclosure on the assets securing our indebtedness, which could have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition; 
limit our ability to obtain additional financing, or to sell assets to raise funds, if needed, for working capital, capital expenditures, expansion plans and other investments, which may limit our ability to implement our business strategy; 
result in higher interest expense if interest rates increase on our floating rate borrowings; 
place us at a competitive disadvantage relative to others in the industry as it is not common for companies involved in the retail apparel business to operate with such high leverage;
heighten our vulnerability to downturns in our business, the industry or in the general economy and limit our flexibility in planning for or reacting to changes in our business and the retail industry; or 
reduce our ability to carry out our plans to expand our store base, product offerings and sales channels.
Our ability to service our indebtedness is dependent on our ability to generate cash from internal operations sufficient to make required payments on such indebtedness, which is, to a significant extent, subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control, some of which factors are further described in this “Risk Factors” section. We are permitted by the terms of our indebtedness, including our senior secured notes and the Capital One Credit Facility, to incur additional indebtedness, subject to the restrictions therein. We have experienced negative cash flows from operating activities in the past, and our business may not generate sufficient cash flow from operations to enable us to service our indebtedness or to fund our other liquidity needs. Such event could have a material adverse effect on us and we may need to take various actions which also could have material adverse consequences to us, including seeking to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness, seeking additional debt or equity financing or reducing or delaying capital expenditures, strategic acquisitions or investments, and we may not be able to do so on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
The terms of our indebtedness contain various covenants that may limit our business activities, and our failure to comply with these covenants could have material adverse consequences to us.
The terms of our indebtedness contain, and our future indebtedness may contain, various restrictive covenants that limit our management's discretion in operating our business. In particular, these agreements include, or may include, covenants relating to limitations on:
dividends on, and redemptions and repurchases of, capital stock; 
payments on subordinated debt; 
liens and sale-leaseback transactions; 
loans and investments; 

43


debt and hedging arrangements; 
mergers, acquisitions and asset sales; 
transactions with affiliates; 
disposals of assets; 
changes in business activities conducted by us and our subsidiaries; and 
capital expenditures, including to fund future store openings.
In addition, our credit agreements contain, and any future credit agreements or loan agreements may contain, certain financial and maintenance covenants, including covenants relating to our capital expenditures, fixed charge coverage, borrowing availability and leverage, some of which may be tied to consolidated EBITDA, in each case as defined in the applicable debt agreements.
Such restrictive and other covenants could limit our ability to respond to market conditions, to provide for unanticipated capital requirements or to take advantage of business or acquisition opportunities.
In addition, our failure to comply with the various covenants under our indebtedness could have material adverse consequences to us. Such failure may result in our being unable to borrow under our revolving credit facility, which we utilize to access our working capital, and as a result may adversely affect our ability to finance our operations or pursue our expansion plans. Our debt agreements contain cross-default or cross-acceleration provisions by which non-compliance with covenants, or the acceleration of other indebtedness of at least a specified outstanding principal amount, could also constitute an event of default under such debt agreements. Accordingly, such a failure could result in the acceleration of all of our outstanding debt, and may adversely affect our ability to obtain financing that may be necessary to effectively operate our business and grow the business going forward. In addition, substantially all of our assets are used to secure our indebtedness, including loans under our credit agreements, the senior secured notes and certain equipment leasing agreements. In the event of a default on these agreements, substantially all of our assets could be subject to liquidation by the creditors, which liquidation could result in no assets being left for the stockholders after the creditors receive their required payment.
Item  2.Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
None.

Item  3.Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None.

Item  4.Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable.

Item  5.Other Information
Item 1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
Lion Ninth Amendment
The Company entered into the Lion Ninth Amendment, effective as of September 30, 2012, which among other things waived the Company's obligation to maintain the minimum Consolidated EBITDA covenants for the twelve month period ended September 30, 2012. As a result, the Company was in compliance with the required financial covenants of the Lion Credit Agreement on September 30, 2012.
The foregoing description of the amendment and waiver is not intended to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Exhibit 10.3 filed herewith, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Crystal Third Amendment and Lion Tenth Amendment
On November 12, 2012, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries entered into amendments to both the Crystal Credit Agreement and the Lion Credit Agreement that, among other things, reduced by $600,000 the target minimum EBITDA for the twelve months ended October 31, 2012 under the financial covenants of each credit agreement, respectively.
La Mirada Lease
The Company determined during the third quarter of 2012 that a lease agreement entered into between the Company and PAC Finance 1 LLC, dated June 15, 2012, relating to a distribution center located in La Mirada, CA, was material to the Company.  A copy thereof is filed herewith as Exhibit 10.4.

None.

Item  6.Exhibits
In reviewing the agreements included as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, please remember they are included to provide you with information regarding their terms and are not intended to provide any other factual or disclosure information about the Company or the other parties to the agreements. Some agreements contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement. These representations and warranties have been made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and:
should not in all instances be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate;
have been qualified by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the

54


applicable agreement, which disclosures are not necessarily reflected in the agreement;
may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material to you or other investors; and
were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement and are subject to more recent developments.

44


Accordingly, these representations and warranties may not describe the actual state of affairs as of the date they were made or at any other time. Additional information about the Company may be found elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and in the Company's other public filings, which are available without charge through the SEC's website at http://www.sec.gov.

Exhibit No.
 Description
   
4.1
Indenture, dated as of April 4, 2013, by and among the Company, the Guarantors and U.S. Bank National Association (included as Exhibit 4.1 of the Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-32697) filed April 9, 2013 and incorporated by reference herein).
4.2
Form of Note (included as Exhibit 4.2 of the Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-32697) filed April 9, 2013 and incorporated by reference herein).
4.3
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of April 4, 2013, by and among the Company, the Guarantors and Cowen and Company, LLC and Sea Port Group Securities, LLC, as representatives of the initial purchasers (included as Exhibit 4.3 of the Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-32697) filed April 9, 2013 and incorporated by reference herein).
10.1
 Amendment No. 2,5, dated August 30, 2012,February 6, 2013, among American Apparel, Inc., American Apparel (USA), LLC, the other Borrowers and Credit Parties party thereto, Crystal Financial LLC and other signatories thereto (included as Exhibit 10.1 of the Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-32697) filed SeptemberFebruary 11, 20122013 and incorporated by reference herein).
   
10.2
 EighthEleventh Amendment to Credit Agreement, dated August 30, 2012,February 6, 2013, among American Apparel, Inc. and the other Credit Parties as the facility guarantors from time to time party thereto, Wilmington Trust N.A., as the administrative agent and the collateral agent, Lion Capital (Americas) Inc., as a lender, Lion/Hollywood L.L.C., as a lender, and other lenders from time to time party thereto (included as Exhibit 10.310.2 of the Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-32697) filed SeptemberFebruary 11, 20122013 and incorporated by reference herein).
   
10.3*10.3
 Ninth Amendment and Waiver to Credit Agreement, dated September 28, 2012,as of April 4, 2013, by and among American Apparel, Inc.the Credit Parties, Capital One Leverage Finance Corp., as administrative agent, swing line lender, and lender, Capital One, N.A., as L/C issuer and the other Credit Parties as the facility guarantors from time to timelenders party thereto Wilmington Trust N.A.,(included as Exhibit 10.1 of the administrative agentCurrent Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-32697) filed April 9, 2013 and the collateral agent, Lion Capital (Americas) Inc., as a lender, Lion/Hollywood L.L.C., as a lender, and other lenders from time to time party thereto.incorporated by reference herein).
   
10.4*10.4
 Lease agreement, dated June 15, 2012, between American Apparel, Inc., as the tenant and PAC Finance 1 L.L.C. as the landlord.
10.5*
Tenth Amendment to CreditIntercreditor Agreement, dated November 12, 2012,as of April 4, 2013, by and among American Apparel, Inc.U.S. Bank National Association and Capital One Leverage Finance Corp. (included as Exhibit 10.2 of the other Credit Parties as the facility guarantors from time to time party thereto, Wilmington Trust N.A., as the administrative agentCurrent Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-32697) filed April 9, 2013 and the collateral agent, Lion Capital (Americas) Inc., as a lender, Lion/Hollywood L.L.C., as a lender, and other lenders from time to time party thereto.incorporated by reference herein).
   
31.1*
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
   
31.2*
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
   
32.1*
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
   
32.2*
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
   
101.INS
 XBRL Instance Document
   
101.SCH
 XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
   
101.CAL
 XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document


 
101.DEF
 XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
   
101.LAB
 XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
   
101.PRE
 XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

*Filed herewith.
 

5545


SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date: November 13, 2012May 8, 2013

AMERICAN APPAREL, INC.
Signature Title Date
     
/s/ DOV CHARNEY 
Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
 November 13, 2012May 8, 2013
Dov Charney   
     
/s/ JOHN LUTTRELL  
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
 November 13, 2012May 8, 2013
John Luttrell   
 

5646