Table of Contents

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

​

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

​

​

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2022

​

or

​

​

For the transition period from                        to

​

Commission File Number: 001-38528

​

​

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Indicate by check mark 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.

​

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted 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 such files).

​

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," "smaller reporting company," and "emerging growth company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

​

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. [ ]

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

​

​

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date April 29, 2022.

Class A Common Stock, $0.01 par value: 35,359,162

Class B Common Stock, $0.01 par value: 15,777,083

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

Page 2

Table of Contents

U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021

​

​

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

​

Page 3

Table of Contents

U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Three Months Ended March 31, 2022 and 2021

​

​

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

​

​

​

Page 4

Table of Contents

​

U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

Three Months Ended March 31, 2022 and 2021

​

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

​

Page 5

Table of Contents

U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statement of Stockholders' Equity

Three Months Ended March 31, 2022 and 2021

​

​

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Page 6

Table of Contents

U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.

Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

March 31, 2022

1.        Organization and Operations

U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”, “we”, “us”, “our”, and similar expressions) provide transportation services throughout the United States, with a focus in the densely populated and economically diverse eastern half of the United States. The Company offers its customers a broad portfolio of services using its own asset-based truckload fleet and third-party carriers through our non-asset-based freight brokerage network. The Company has two reportable segments, Truckload and Brokerage. Our Truckload segment offers asset-based truckload services, including over-the-road (“OTR”) trucking and dedicated contract services. Our Brokerage segment is principally engaged in non-asset-based freight brokerage services, where loads are contracted to third-party carriers.

Under our Articles of Incorporation, our authorized capital stock consists of 140,000,000 shares of Class A common stock, par value $0.01 per share, 35,000,000 shares of Class B common stock, par value $0.01 per share, and 9,333,333 shares of preferred stock, the rights and preferences of which may be designated by the Board of Directors.

​

​

2.        Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly owned and majority owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions and accounts have been eliminated.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with Article 10 of Regulation S-X promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates, and such differences could be material. In the opinion of management, the accompanying financial statements include all adjustments that are necessary for a fair statement of the results of the interim periods presented, such adjustments being of a normal recurring nature.

Certain information and footnote disclosures have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. The December 31, 2021 balance sheet was derived from our audited balance sheet as of that date. The Company’s operating results are subject to seasonal trends when measured on a quarterly basis; therefore operating results for the three months ended March 31, 2022 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2022. These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and notes thereto should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Impairment of Long Lived Assets

The Company reviews its long-lived assets, including property and equipment, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Expected future cash flows are used to analyze whether an impairment has occurred. If the sum of the expected undiscounted cash flows is less than the carrying value of the long-lived asset, then an impairment loss is recognized. We measure the impairment loss by comparing the fair value of the asset to its carrying value. Fair value is determined based on a discounted cash flow analysis or the appraised value of the assets, as appropriate. During the three months ended

Page 7

Table of Contents

March 31, 2022, we incurred a non-cash adjustment of $2.2 million due to an obsolete technology write off and recognized $2.2 million in amortization expense.

​

​

3.        Income Taxes

The Company’s provision for income taxes for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021 is based on the estimated annual effective tax rate, plus discrete items. The following table presents the provision for income taxes and the effective tax rates for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021 (in thousands):

​

​

The difference between the Company’s effective tax rate for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021 and the US statutory rate of 21% primarily relates to nondeductible expenses, federal income tax credits, state income taxes (net of federal benefit), adjustments to valuation allowances, and certain discrete items.

​

4.        Investments

At March 31, 2021, we held a $5.0 million investment consisting of 353,604 shares in TuSimple, a self-driving technology company. Effective April 15, 2021, TuSimple completed their initial public offering at a closing price of $40.00 per share. As we now have a readily determinable fair value based on quoted market prices, which makes this a Level 1 fair value measurement, we adjust the investment to fair value at each reporting period. During the three months ended March 31, 2022 we recognized an unrealized loss of $8.4 million in other expense, within the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive income (loss). The fair value of the investment is $4.3 million and is included in other noncurrent assets on the accompanying unaudited consolidated balance sheets.

​

​

5.        Long-Term Debt

Long-term debt at March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021 consists of the following (in thousands):

​

​

Page 8

Table of Contents

Credit Facility

On January 28, 2020, we entered into a new credit facility (the “Credit Facility”) and contemporaneously with the funding of the Credit Facility paid off obligations under our then existing credit facility and terminated such facility. The Credit Facility is a $250.0 million revolving credit facility, with an uncommitted accordion feature that, so long as no event of default exists, allows the Company to request an increase in the revolving credit facility of up to $75.0 million.

The Credit Facility is a five-year facility scheduled to terminate on January 28, 2025. Borrowings under the Credit Facility are classified as either “base rate loans” or “eurodollar rate loans”. Base rate loans accrue interest at a base rate equal to the highest of (A) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50%, (B) the Agent’s prime rate, and (C) LIBOR plus 1.00% plus an applicable margin that was set at 0.50% through June 30, 2020 and adjusted quarterly thereafter between 0.25% and 0.75% based on the ratio of the daily average availability under the Credit Facility to the daily average of the lesser of the borrowing base or the revolving credit facility. Eurodollar rate loans accrue interest at LIBOR plus an applicable margin that was set at 1.50% through June 30, 2020 and adjusted quarterly thereafter between 1.25% and 1.75% based on the ratio of the daily average availability under the Credit Facility to the daily average of the lesser of the borrowing base or the revolving credit facility. The Credit Facility includes, within its $250.0 million revolving credit facility, a letter of credit sub-facility in an aggregate amount of $75.0 million and a swingline sub-facility in an aggregate amount of $25.0 million. An unused line fee of 0.25% is applied to the average daily amount by which the lenders’ aggregate revolving commitments exceed the outstanding principal amount of revolver loans and aggregate undrawn amount of all outstanding letters of credit issued under the Credit Facility. The Credit Facility is secured by a pledge of substantially all of the Company’s assets, excluding, among other things, any real estate or revenue equipment financed outside the Credit Facility.

Borrowings under the new Credit Facility are subject to a borrowing base limited to the lesser of (A) $250.0 million; or (B) the sum of (i) 87.5% of eligible billed accounts receivable, plus (ii) 85.0% of eligible unbilled accounts receivable (less than 30 days), plus (iii) 85.0% of the net orderly liquidation value percentage applied to the net book value of eligible revenue equipment, plus (iv) the lesser of (a) 80.0% the fair market value of eligible real estate or (b) $25.0 million. The Credit Facility contains a single springing financial covenant, which requires a consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio of at least 1.0 to 1.0. The financial covenant is tested only in the event excess availability under the Credit Facility is less than the greater of (A) 10.0% of the lesser of the borrowing base or revolving credit facility or (B) $20.0 million. Based on excess availability as of March 31, 2022, there was no fixed charge coverage ratio requirement.

The Credit Facility includes usual and customary events of default for a facility of this nature and provides that, upon the occurrence and continuation of an event of default, payment of all amounts payable under the Credit Facility may be accelerated, and the lenders’ commitments may be terminated. The Credit Facility contains certain restrictions and covenants relating to, among other things, dividends, liens, acquisitions and dispositions, affiliate transactions, and other indebtedness.

At March 31, 2022, the Credit Facility had issued collateralized letters of credit in the face amount of $28.3 million, with $65.1 million in borrowings outstanding and $155.0 million available to borrow.

​

6.        Leases

We have operating and finance leases with terms of 1 year to 16 years for certain revenue and service equipment and office and terminal facilities.

Page 9

Table of Contents

The table below presents the lease-related assets and liabilities recorded on the balance sheet (in thousands):

​

​

The table below presents certain information related to the lease costs for finance and operating leases (in thousands):

​

​

Page 10

Table of Contents

​

Noncash lease expense was $26.8 million and $23.5 million during the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

​

​

As of March 31, 2022, future maturities of lease liabilities were as follows (in thousands):

​

​

​

We lease tractors to independent contractors under operating leases and recognized lease income under these leases of $4.6 million and $8.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

​

​

7.        Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is party to certain legal proceedings incidental to its business. The ultimate disposition of these matters, in the opinion of management, based in part on the advice of legal counsel, is not expected to have a materially adverse effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

For the cases described below, management is unable to provide a meaningful estimate of the possible loss or range of loss because, among other reasons, (1) the proceedings are in various stages; (2) damages have not been sought; (3) damages are unsupported and/or exaggerated; (4) there is uncertainty as to the outcome of the proceedings, including pending appeals; and/or (5) there are significant factual issues to be resolved. For these cases, however, management does not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcomes of these proceedings

Page 11

Table of Contents

will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, though the outcomes could be material to our operating results for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the operating results for such period.

California Wage and Hour Class Action Litigation

On December 23, 2015, a former driver filed a class action lawsuit against the Company and its subsidiary U.S. Xpress, Inc. in the Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino. The Company removed the case from state court to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The district court denied plaintiff’s initial motion for class certification of a class comprised of any employee driver who has driven in California at any time since December 23, 2011, without prejudice, under Rule 23 due to lack of commonality amongst the putative class members. The Court granted the plaintiff’s revised Motion for Class Certification, and the certified class consists of all employee drivers who resided in California and who have driven in the State of California on behalf of U.S. Xpress, Inc. at any time since December 23, 2011. The case alleges that class members were not paid for off-the-clock work, were not provided duty free meal or rest breaks, and were not paid premium pay in their absence, were not paid the California minimum wage for all hours worked in that state, were not provided accurate and complete itemized wage statements and were not paid all accrued wages at the end of their employment, all in violation of California law. The class seeks a judgment for compensatory damages, penalties, injunctive relief, attorney fees, costs and pre- and post-judgment interest. On May 2, 2019, the district court dismissed the claims alleging failure to provide duty free meal and rest breaks or premium pay for failure to provide such breaks under California law on grounds of preemption. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the administrative ruling that formed the basis for the district court’s ruling. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the remaining claims, and the Company filed a motion to decertify the class. The court issued its ruling on the pending cross-motions: (1) the court denied the Company’s motion to decertify the class; (2) the court granted the Company’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s minimum wage claim for non-driving duties such as pre-trip and post-trip inspection, fueling, receiving dispatches, waiting to load or unload, and handling paperwork for the loads for January 1, 2013 forward (leaving the minimum wage claim only for the approximate one-year time period from December 23, 2011 to December 31, 2012); (3) the court granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment for the time spent taking U.S. Department of Transportation-required 10-hour breaks while hauling high value loads in California for solo drivers and for the designated team driver responsible for the load during those breaks; and (4) the court denied the balance of cross-motions. The plaintiff filed a petition for permission to file an interlocutory appeal of the court’s decision on the minimum wage claim, which the district court and the Ninth Circuit both granted. On June 22, 2021, the Ninth Circuit issued its memorandum decision upholding the district court’s ruling in favor of the Company on the plaintiff’s claim for payment of the minimum wage for certain non-driving work they claim was left uncompensated by the Company’s piece rate pay plan after January 1, 2013. The district court held a status conference on June 15, 2021 and set a trial date for March 1, 2022. Discovery has been completed. On January 20, 2022, the court vacated the trial date and all associated deadlines due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. On March 10, 2022, the court reset the trial for September 6, 2022. We are currently not able to predict the probable outcome or to reasonably estimate a range of potential losses, if any. The Company intends to vigorously defend the merits of these claims.

Stockholder Claims

As set forth below, between November 2018 and April 2019, eight substantially similar putative securities class action complaints were filed against the Company and certain other defendants: five in the Circuit Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee (“Tennessee State Court Cases”), two in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee (“Federal Court Cases”), and one in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (“New York State Court Case”). We are currently not able to predict the probable outcome or to reasonably estimate a range of potential losses, if any for these matters. We believe the allegations made in the complaints are without merit and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in these matters.

As to the Tennessee State Court Cases, two of five complaints were voluntarily dismissed and the remaining three were consolidated with a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Consolidated State Court Complaint”) filed on May 10, 2019 in the Circuit Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee against the Company, five of our current and former officers or directors, and the seven underwriters who participated in our June 2018 initial

Page 12

Table of Contents

public offering (“IPO”), alleging violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2)  and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”). The putative class action lawsuit is based on allegations that the Company made false and/or misleading statements in the registration statement and prospectus filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in connection with the IPO. The lawsuit is purportedly brought on behalf of a putative class of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s Class A common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the IPO, and seeks, among other things, compensatory damages, costs and expenses (including attorneys’ fees) on behalf of the putative class.

On June 28, 2019, the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Tennessee State Court Cases for failure to allege facts sufficient to support a violation of Section 11, 12 or 15 of the Securities Act. On November 13, 2020, the court presiding over the Tennessee State Court Cases entered an order, granting in part and denying in part the defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the Consolidated State Court Complaint. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for violation of the Securities Act with respect to the majority of statements challenged as false or misleading in the Consolidated State Court Complaint. The court, however, held that the Consolidated State Court Complaint sufficiently alleged violations of the Securities Act with respect to one statement from the June 2018 IPO registration statement and prospectus that the plaintiffs alleged to be false or misleading, both on theories of alleged misrepresentations and material omissions. Accordingly, the court allowed this action to proceed beyond the pleading stage, but only with respect to the statement deemed sufficient to support a Securities Act claim when assuming the truth of the plaintiffs’ allegations. On April 29, 2021, plaintiffs filed a Motion for Class Certification, which is currently pending. The Tennessee State Court Cases are currently in discovery.

As to the Federal Court Cases, the operative amended complaint was filed on October 8, 2019 (“Amended Federal Complaint”), which named the same defendants as the Tennessee State Court Cases. The Amended Federal Complaint is made on behalf of a putative class. In addition to claims for alleged violations of Section 11 and 15 of the Securities Act, the Amended Federal Complaint alleges violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and its Chief Financial Officer. On December 23, 2019, the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Federal Complaint in its entirety for failure to allege facts sufficient to state a claim under either the Securities Act or the Exchange Act. The plaintiffs filed their Opposition to that Motion on March 9, 2020, and the defendants filed their Reply brief on April 23, 2020.

On June 30, 2020, the court presiding over the Federal Court Cases issued its ruling granting in part and denying in part the defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the Amended Federal Complaint. The court dismissed entirely the plaintiffs’ claims for alleged violations of the Exchange Act and further held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for violation of the Securities Act with respect to the majority of statements challenged as false or misleading in the Amended Federal Complaint. The court, however, held that the Federal Amended Complaint sufficiently alleged violations of the Securities Act with respect to two statements from the June 2018 IPO registration statement and prospectus that the plaintiffs alleged to be false or misleading, both on theories of alleged misrepresentations and material omissions. Accordingly, the court allowed this action to proceed beyond the pleading stage, but only with respect to the statements deemed sufficient to support a Securities Act claim when assuming the truth of the plaintiffs’ allegations. On February 12, 2021, the Court granted plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and certified a class consisting of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired USX stock pursuant to and/or traceable to the IPO and who were damaged thereby. The Federal Court Cases are currently in discovery.

As to the New York State Case, on March 14, 2019, a substantially similar putative class action complaint was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, by a different plaintiff alleging claims under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act against the same defendants as in the Tennessee State Court Cases. On December 18, 2020, defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss or Stay the New York State Case both on the merits and in deference to the pending actions in Tennessee. On March 5, 2021, the court presiding over the New York State Case dismissed the case, and on January 13, 2022, the court entered a motion denying plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration.

Page 13

Table of Contents

Stockholder Derivative Action

On June 7, 2019, a stockholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the District Court for Clark County, Nevada against five of our executives and all five of our independent board members (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”), and naming the Company as a nominal defendant. The complaint alleges that the Company made false and/or misleading statements in the registration statement and prospectus filed with the SEC in connection with the IPO and that the Individual Defendants breached their fiduciary duties by causing or allowing the Company to make such statements. The complaint alleges that the Company has been damaged by the alleged wrongful conduct as a result of, among other things, being subjected to the time and expense of the securities class action lawsuits that have been filed relating to the IPO. In addition to a claim for alleged breach of fiduciary duties, the lawsuit alleges claims against the Individual Defendants for unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets. The parties have stipulated to a stay of this proceeding pending entry of a final judgment in the Tennessee State Court Cases, Federal Court Case, and the New York State Case. This matter is in the preliminary stages of litigation. We are currently not able to predict the probable outcome or to reasonably estimate a range of potential losses, if any. We believe the allegations made in the complaint are without merit and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in this matter.

Independent Contractor Class Action

On March 26, 2019, a putative class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee against the Company and its subsidiaries U.S. Xpress, Inc. and U.S. Xpress Leasing, Inc. The putative class includes all individuals who performed work for U.S. Xpress, Inc. or U.S. Xpress Leasing, Inc. as lease purchase drivers from March 26, 2016 to present. The complaint alleges that independent contractors are improperly designated as such and should be designated as employees and thus subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). The complaint further alleges that U.S. Xpress, Inc.’s pay practices for the putative class members violated the minimum wage provisions of the FLSA for the period from March 26, 2016 to present. The complaint further alleges that the Company violated the requirements of the Truth in Leasing Act with regard to the independent contractor agreements and lease purchase agreements it entered into with the putative class members. The complaint further alleges that the Company failed to comply with the terms of the independent contractor agreements and lease purchase agreements entered into with the putative class members, that it violated the provisions of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act in advertising, describing and marketing the lease purchase program to the putative class members, and that it was unjustly enriched as a result of the foregoing allegations. The Company filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration on October 18, 2019. On January 17, 2020, the court granted that motion, in part, compelling arbitration on all of the plaintiff’s claims and denying the plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification of a collective action. The court further stayed the matter pending arbitration, rather than dismissing it entirely. On March 6, 2020, the plaintiff petitioned the court to certify the decision for an interlocutory appeal. The Company filed an opposition to plaintiff’s motion on March 20, 2020, and plaintiff filed her reply on April 3, 2020, purportedly relying, in part, on a recent case from Massachusetts. In response to that newly cited case, the Company was granted leave to file a surreply, which it filed on April 13, 2020. On September 3, 2020, the district court denied the plaintiff’s petition. The plaintiff initiated arbitration on December 16, 2020. On March 25, 2021, the arbitrator issued a scheduling order, setting a final arbitration hearing for June 6, 2022. On November 23, 2021, the parties reached a nominal settlement. On April 11, 2022, the plaintiff filed a motion to approve the settlement in the district court. We anticipate the district court will approve the settlement in the near future.

On June 25, 2020, a second putative collective and class action complaint was filed against the Company and its subsidiaries U.S. Xpress, Inc. and U.S. Xpress Leasing, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. The putative class and collective action includes all current and former over-the-road truck drivers classified as independent contractors who performed work for the Company during the applicable statute of limitations. The complaint alleges that independent contractors are improperly designated as such and should be designated as employees subject to the FLSA. The complaint alleges that U.S. Xpress, Inc.’s pay practices for the putative collective and class members violated the minimum wage provisions of the FLSA for the period from June 25, 2017 to the present. The complaint further alleges that we failed to pay the plaintiff and members of the class for all miles they drove and breached the contract between the parties and that we were unjustly enriched as a result of the foregoing allegations. The plaintiff agreed to submit his claims to individual arbitration and filed an

Page 14

Table of Contents

arbitration demand on July 31, 2020. The parties agreed to settle the matter for a nominal amount and have finalized the settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval. On February 8, 2022, the Court approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Other

The Company had letters of credit of $28.3 million outstanding as of March 31, 2022. The letters of credit are maintained primarily to support the Company’s insurance program.

The Company had cancelable commitments outstanding at March 31, 2022 to acquire revenue equipment and other equipment and terminal improvements for approximately $332.4 million during the remainder of 2022. These purchase commitments are expected to be financed by operating leases, long-term debt and proceeds from sales of existing equipment.

​

​

8.        Share-based Compensation

2018 Omnibus Incentive Plan

In June 2018, the Board approved the 2018 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Incentive Plan”) to become effective in connection with the initial public offering. The Company had reserved an aggregate of 3.2 million shares of its Class A common stock for issuance of awards under the Incentive Plan. In May 2020, the stockholders approved the Amended and Restated Omnibus Plan which, among other things, increased the number of shares remaining to issue to 5.8 million shares. Participants in the Incentive Plan will be selected by the Compensation Committee from the executive officers, directors, employees and consultants of the Company. Awards under the Incentive Plan may be made in the form of stock options, stock appreciation rights, stock awards, restricted stock units, performance awards, performance units, and any other form established by the Compensation Committee pursuant to the Incentive Plan.

The following is a summary of the Incentive Plan restricted stock and restricted stock unit activity for the three months ended March 31, 2022:

​

​

Service based restricted stock grants vest over periods of one to five years and account for 2,938,528 of the unvested shares. Performance based awards account for 260,890 of the unvested shares and vest based upon achievement of certain performance goals, as defined by the Company. The Company recognized compensation expense related to performance based awards of $0.1 million and $0.3 million during the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The Company recognized compensation expense related to service based awards of $1.1 million and $1.5 million during the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. At March 31, 2022, the Company had $14.4 million in unrecognized compensation expense related to the service based restricted stock awards which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 3.2 years.

Page 15

Table of Contents

The following is a summary of the Incentive Plan stock option activity from December 31, 2021 to March 31, 2022:

​

​

The stock options vest over a period of four years and expire ten years from the date of grant. The Company recognized compensation expense of $0.1 million and $0.1 million during the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The fair value of the stock options granted was estimated using the Black-Scholes method as of the grant date.

​

At March 31, 2022, the Company had $0.2 million in unrecognized compensation expense related to the stock option awards which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 9 months. As of March 31, 2022, 236,921 options were exercisable with a weighted average exercise price of $12.17 and a weighted average remaining contractual life of 6.9 years.

The vesting schedule for these restricted unit grants is 7 years. The Company recognized compensation expense of $0.1 million and $0.1 million during the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. At March 31, 2022, the Company had approximately $0.6 million in unrecognized compensation expense related to restricted units, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 1.9 years. The fair value of the restricted units and corresponding compensation expense was determined using the income approach.

​

Employee Stock Purchase Plan

In June 2018, our Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “ESPP”) became effective. The Company has reserved an aggregate of 2.3 million shares of its Class A common stock for issuance under the ESPP. Eligible employees may elect to purchase shares of our Class A common stock through payroll deductions up to 15% of eligible compensation. The purchase price of the shares during each offering period will be 85% of the lower of the fair market value of our Class A common stock on the first trading day of each offering period or the last trading day of the offering period. The common stock will be purchased in January and July of each year. The Company recognized compensation expense of $0.1 million and $0.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, associated with the plan.

​

​

9.      Earnings per Share

Basic earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income (loss) attributable to controlling interest by the weighted average shares of common stock outstanding during the period, without consideration for common stock equivalents. The Company excluded 3,659,464 and 1,055,996 equity awards for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, as inclusion would be anti-dilutive.

Page 16

Table of Contents

The basic and diluted earnings per share calculations for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, are presented below (in thousands, except per share amounts):

​

​

​

10.      Segment Information

The Company’s business is organized into two reportable segments, Truckload and Brokerage. The Truckload segment offers asset-based truckload services, including OTR trucking and dedicated contract services. These services are aggregated because they have similar economic characteristics and meet the aggregation criteria described in the accounting guidance for segment reporting. The Company’s OTR service offering provides solo and expedited team services through one-way movements of freight over routes throughout the United States. The Company’s dedicated contract service offering devotes the use of equipment to specific customers and provides services through long-term contracts. The Company’s dedicated contract service offering provides similar freight transportation services, but does so pursuant to agreements where it makes equipment, drivers and on-site personnel available to a specific customer to address needs for committed capacity and service levels.

The Company’s Brokerage segment is principally engaged in non-asset-based freight brokerage services, where it outsources the transportation of loads to third-party carriers. For this segment, the Company relies on brokerage employees to procure third-party carriers, as well as information systems to match loads and carriers.

Page 17

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes our segment information (in thousands):

​

​

A measure of assets is not applicable, as segment assets are not regularly reviewed by the Chief Operating Decision Maker for evaluating performance or allocating resources.

​

​

Page 18

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Overview

We are one of the largest asset-based truckload carriers in the United States by revenue, generating over $1.9 billion in total operating revenue in 2021. We provide services primarily throughout the United States, with a focus in the densely populated and economically diverse eastern half of the United States. We offer customers a broad portfolio of services using our own truckload fleet and third-party carriers through our non-asset-based freight brokerage network. As of March 31, 2022, our fleet consisted of approximately 6,400 tractors and approximately 14,000 trailers, including approximately 1,100 tractors provided by independent contractors. Our terminal network is established and capable of handling significantly larger volumes without meaningful additional investment.

​

Executive Summary

​

For much of our history, we focused primarily on scaling our fleet and expanding our service offerings to support sustainable, multi-faceted relationships with customers. More recently, we have focused on our core service offerings and refined our network to focus on shorter, more profitable lanes with more density, which we believe are more attractive to drivers. We believe we have the strategy, management team, revenue base, modern fleet, and capital structure that position us very well to execute upon our initiatives, drive further operational gains, and deliver long term value for our stockholders.

We are currently focused on three main priorities. The first is optimizing our Truckload network and resulting average revenue per tractor per week through repositioning equipment and allocating capacity to our Dedicated service offering and Variant, our digital fleet, from certain portions of our Over-the-Road (“OTR”) service offering. The second is improving the experience of our professional truck drivers, including their safety and security. The third is advancing our technology initiatives centered on digitization of our loads and business, automated load acceptance and prioritization. During 2021, we continued to see tangible, financial benefits of our strategic initiatives focused on utilizing technology to improve our processes, accelerate the velocity of our business, reduce the number of our preventable accidents per million miles, improve our customers’ and drivers’ satisfaction, and lower our costs.

We intend to continue successfully developing and implementing these digital initiatives that we believe are re-engineering our Company to be a market leader in growth and profitability over the next decade. We believe the result of these initiatives will provide for a more scalable model with significantly lower costs.

Total revenue for the first quarter of 2022 increased by $66.4 million to $517.2 million as compared to the first quarter of 2021. The increase was primarily the result of a $34.6 million increase in Truckload revenue, a $19.7 million increase in fuel surcharge revenue and a $12.1 million increase in Brokerage revenue. Excluding the impact of fuel surcharge revenue, first quarter revenue increased $46.7 million to $464.3 million, an increase of 11.2% as compared to the prior year quarter.

Operating loss for the first quarter of 2022 was $0.2 million compared to operating income of $8.0 million in the first quarter of 2021. Our profitability decreased as a result of 8.5% fewer revenue miles per tractor per week combined with increases in technology and personnel expenses, higher net fuel costs, a non-cash write off of approximately $3.0 million, partially offset by a 17.4% increase in our average revenue per mile and a 2.4% increase in our available tractors.

We are continuing to focus on our driver centric initiatives, such as increased miles and modern equipment, to both retain the professional drivers who have chosen to partner with us and attract new professional drivers to our team. During the second quarter of 2020 we launched our digital fleet, Variant, which is largely recruited, planned, dispatched and managed using artificial intelligence and digital platforms. Variant is a completely new paradigm for operating trucks in an OTR environment that is provided to the driver through a proprietary app-based driver experience. We developed the concept as a hypothesis in 2018 based in part on the business models of the digital freight brokerages. As digital brokers began to enter the market utilizing cutting edge technology and a new operating model, we believed there was an opportunity to take this approach and apply it to our asset based business in order to drive improved profitability and growth. During 2019, we began building our technology leadership and teams to construct the necessary databases, applications, and processes to launch a pilot fleet with a small number of trucks in the fourth quarter of 2019.  The test

Page 20

Table of Contents

proved successful and we expanded the pilot fleet to approximately 100 trucks in the first quarter of 2020. Given the positive results of the first quarter 2020 pilot we moved to a full production model, scaling the business to approximately 700 trucks at the end of 2020. Variant exited 2021 with 1,555 tractors, achieving our goal of 1,500 tractors by year end. Variant continued to not only scale but outperform the legacy OTR fleet from 2019 in key metrics such as turnover, utilization, preventable accidents per million miles, and average revenue per tractor per week. During the second half of 2021, Variant’s turnover, utilization, and revenue per tractor per week began to deteriorate and those trends accelerated in the fourth quarter. In December 2021, the Variant team began to transition its focus from idea generation to execution and scale the product that was developed. Since December 2021, the operational changes that we have made have translated to improvements in utilization, revenue per truck and overhead per truck. While the conversion will not be linear, we expect our margins to expand further over time as we believe we can improve our operating metrics throughout the year. We believe that we can further scale this platform while maintaining these positive results and continuing to further enhance the capabilities of this new technology. We will continue to focus on implementing and executing our initiatives that we expect will continue to drive sustainable improved performance over time.

​

While we believe our margins will expand as we continue to convert more of our trucks to our Variant platform, we also see tremendous growth opportunity given the highly fragmented nature of the U.S. trucking market. We believe our Variant business model directly addresses our drivers’ frustrations as our model delivers higher utilization and pay which has directly contributed to a significant drop in turnover. We reached a major milestone in 2021 as Variant tractor count growth outpaced attrition in the legacy OTR division, driving total tractor count growth sequentially.

​

During 2020, we purchased a small business with a technology platform and an experienced and talented team. Their approach to the brokerage business is to utilize a digital framework for handling transactions which we expect to be scalable. Importantly, we believe this platform will enable our team to continue scaling the business and drive a high level of growth in the years to come. Our team processed 76.7% of our Brokerage transactions digitally in 2021. We continue to grow revenue, load count, and the percentage of transactions processed on our digital platform in our Brokerage segment in line with our near-term profitability expectations for this business. Our focus remains on capturing market share and growing load count from a more diverse customer base, building out our carrier network density, and delivering purpose built technological products to our customers. We believe these actions will all positively contribute to operating margin improvement in the Brokerage segment at scale.

​

In our Dedicated division, our team successfully addressed pricing in certain Dedicated accounts as a result of driver and capacity cost inflation. As a result, our overall Dedicated rates increased 17.5% in the first quarter of 2022 compared to the first quarter in 2021.

​

We experienced softer volumes towards the end of the first quarter although volumes still remain above historical averages. On the supply side, the market for experienced drivers remains challenging and shortages of new tractors and trailers should limit capacity expansion. These conditions are expected to continue to support increases in our OTR contract rates and lesser in Dedicated, at least the first half of the year.