Fair Value Measurements | Fair Value Measurements Fair value measurements and disclosures require the use of valuation techniques to measure fair value that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize use of unobservable inputs. These inputs are prioritized as follows: • Level 1: Observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. • Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable, either directly or indirectly, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities or market corroborated inputs. • Level 3: Unobservable inputs for which there is little or no market data and which require us to develop our own assumptions about how market participants price the asset or liability. The valuation techniques that may be used to measure fair value are as follows: • The market approach uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. • The income approach uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present amount based on current market expectation about those future amounts. • The cost approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (replacement cost). The following tables set forth our financial assets and liabilities as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 that we measured at fair value on a recurring basis by level within the fair value hierarchy. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to their fair value measurement. Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2016 Using Fair Value Hierarchy Fair Value as of September 30, 2016 Quoted Prices In Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2) Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) Valuation Technique Assets: Cash and cash equivalents $ 656,247 $ 656,247 $ — $ — Market Restricted cash and cash equivalents 54,000 54,000 — — Market Derivative assets 2,073 — 2,073 — Market Total $ 712,320 $ 710,247 $ 2,073 $ — Liabilities: Derivative liabilities $ — $ — $ — $ — Income Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2015 Using Fair Value Hierarchy Fair Value as of December 31, 2015 Quoted Prices In Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2) Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) Valuation Technique Assets: Cash and cash equivalents $ 155,904 $ 155,904 $ — $ — Market Restricted cash and cash equivalents 98,137 98,137 — — Market Derivative assets — — — — Market Total $ 254,041 $ 254,041 $ — $ — Liabilities: Derivative liabilities $ 1,283 $ — $ 1,283 $ — Income Our cash and cash equivalents, along with our restricted cash and cash equivalents balances, consist largely of money market securities that are considered to be highly liquid and easily tradable. These securities are valued using inputs observable in active markets for identical securities and are therefore classified as Level 1 within our fair value hierarchy. Our interest rate derivative included in Level 2 consists of United States dollar-denominated interest rate cap, and the fair value is based on market comparisons for similar instruments. We also considered the credit rating and risk of the counterparty providing the interest rate cap based on quantitative and qualitative factors. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 and the year ended December 31, 2015 , we had no transfers into or out of Level 3. We measure the fair value of certain assets and liabilities on a non-recurring basis, when U.S. GAAP requires the application of fair value, including events or changes in circumstances that indicate that the carrying amounts of assets may not be recoverable. Assets subject to these measurements include our investment in an unconsolidated joint venture and aircraft. We account for our investment in an unconsolidated joint venture under the equity method of accounting and record impairment when its fair value is less than its carrying value. We record aircraft at fair value when we determine the carrying value may not be recoverable. Fair value measurements for aircraft in impairment tests are based on an income approach which uses Level 3 inputs, which include the Company’s assumptions and appraisal data as to future cash proceeds from leasing and selling aircraft. Aircraft Valuation Recoverability Assessment We completed our annual recoverability assessment of narrow-body aircraft fleet during the third quarter. We also performed aircraft-specific analyses where there were changes in circumstances, such as approaching lease expirations. The recoverability assessment is a comparison of the carrying value of each aircraft to its undiscounted expected future cash flows. We develop the assumptions used in the recoverability assessment, including those relating to current and future demand for each aircraft type, based on management’s experience in the aircraft leasing industry, as well as information received from third-party sources. Estimates of the undiscounted cash flows for each aircraft type are impacted by changes in contracted and future expected lease rates, residual values, expected scrap values, economic conditions and other factors. In our third quarter 2016 assessment, we reduced economic lives and residuals for all six older Boeing 757-200 aircraft as we intend to sell these aircraft at lease end. As a result, during the three months ended September 30, 2016 , we recorded impairment charges totaling $2,167 relating to two of these aircraft held as operating leases and impairment losses totaling $2,618 relating to three of these aircraft held as finance leases. During the second quarter of 2016, we completed our annual recoverability assessment of wide-body and freighter aircraft. As a result of this assessment, we reduced forecasted cash flows for older Airbus A330 aircraft to reflect lower rental expectations given weak demand and increased competition from newer units. As a result, during the three months ended June 30, 2016, we recorded impairment charges totaling $11,670 and maintenance revenue of $4,000 relating to one sixteen year old Airbus A330-200 approaching lease expiry. In our 2015 assessment, we reduced forecasted future cash flows for our six Boeing 747-400 converted freighter aircraft not subject to sales agreements, all of which were more than twenty years old. Our new forecast reflected the persisting glut of supply in the air cargo market resulting from weak growth in demand combined with the growth in capacity arising from new production air freighters and higher belly capacity in latest generation wide-body passenger aircraft. In addition to these market-wide impacts, our older freighters were affected specifically by the imposition of age limits in certain countries and by lower utilization levels. As a result, we determined that each of our older converted freighter aircraft was on its last lease, and we reduced our residual value assumptions for these aircraft and expected to scrap them following lease expiry. During the third quarter of 2015, we therefore impaired four of these aircraft, which had an aggregate net book value as of August 31, 2015 of $115,888 , writing down their book values by a total of $34,575 , with a fair value date of September 1, 2015. For one of these aircraft, we recorded maintenance revenue of $5,858 , as we no longer planned to reinvest these funds. Other Impairments During the three months ended September 30, 2016 , we reduced forecasted cash flows for three Boeing 747-400 freighter aircraft due to a change in planned engine maintenance events. These three aircraft are nearing the end of their economic lives and leases. As a result, we recorded impairment charges totaling $5,450 , maintenance revenue of $5,596 and reversed lease incentives of $2,361 . Also during the three months ended September 30, 2016 , we impaired one Airbus A321-200 aircraft for which we had a sales agreement, resulting in an impairment charge of $1,712 . This aircraft was classified as Held for sale in Other assets at September 30, 2016 and sold for its recorded value in October 2016. During the three months ended June 30, 2016, we entered into an agreement to sell two older Boeing 747-400 freighter aircraft to the lessee resulting in an impairment charge of $5,053 . These two aircraft were classified as Held for sale at June 30, 2016 in Other assets and were subsequently sold in July 2016. In September 2015, Malaysian Airline System (“MAS”) informed us that it was effectively rejecting the lease on our Boeing 777-200ER aircraft as part of its restructuring. This aircraft, which was manufactured in 1998, was the only one of its type in our fleet and the only aircraft we had on lease to MAS. We repossessed it in October 2015. We reduced the carrying value of this aircraft to our best estimate of scrap value. This write-down resulted in an impairment charge of $37,770 , partially offset by $1,200 of other revenue from a letter of credit we drew following the lease rejection. This aircraft was sold during the second quarter of 2016. Also in September 2015, we modified the lease agreement with respect to one Airbus A321-200 aircraft. We elected not to reinvest in certain major maintenance events during the lease term, and the lessee agreed to release its rights to certain maintenance payments. As a result, we recorded an impairment charge of $6,058 and maintenance revenue of $7,109 for this aircraft. In the second quarter of 2015, we impaired two McDonnell Douglas MD-11 freighter aircraft and one Boeing 737-800 aircraft and recorded impairment charges totaling $23,955 and maintenance revenue of $18,234 . Other than the aircraft discussed above, management believes that the net book value of each of our wide-body and freighter aircraft is currently supported by the estimated future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by that aircraft, and accordingly, no other aircraft were impaired as a consequence of this recoverability assessment. However, if our estimates or assumptions change, we may revise our cash flow assumptions and record future impairment charges. While we believe that the estimates and related assumptions used in the recoverability assessment are appropriate, actual results could differ from those estimates. Financial Instruments Our financial instruments, other than cash, consist principally of cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, amounts borrowed under financings and interest rate derivatives. The fair value of cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable approximates the carrying value of these financial instruments because of their short-term nature. The fair values of our ECA Financings (as described in Note 6 - Variable Interest Entities below) and Bank Financings are estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis, based on our current incremental borrowing rates for similar types of borrowing arrangements. The fair value of our Senior Notes is estimated using quoted market prices. The carrying amounts and fair values of our financial instruments at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 are as follows: September 30, 2016 December 31, 2015 Carrying Amount of Liability Fair Value of Liability Carrying Amount of Liability Fair Value of Liability Securitizations $ — $ — $ 125,366 $ 123,696 Credit Facilities 120,000 120,000 225,000 225,000 ECA Financings 315,687 333,224 404,491 422,640 Bank Financings 967,519 985,085 636,970 653,699 Senior Notes 3,200,000 3,417,500 2,700,000 2,832,125 All of our financial instruments are classified as Level 2 with the exception of our Senior Notes, which are classified as Level 1. |