UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

————————

 Form 10-K

(Mark One)

Commission File Number: 001-37509

DASEKE, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code

(972) 248-0412

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

————————

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ☐        No    ☑

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.    Yes  ☐        No  ☑

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.    Yes  ☑        No  ☐

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  ☑        No  ☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§232.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    ☑

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or 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 financing 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).

Yes  ☐        No  ☑

The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant, computed by reference to the last sales price as reported on the NASDAQ Capital Market as of June 30, 2017, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was $198,140,423.

57,169,408 shares of common stock were outstanding as of March 14, 2018.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Certain information required by Part III of this report is incorporated by reference from the registrant’s proxy statement for the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

DASEKE, INC.

2017 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

INDEX

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this Form 10-K) may contain forward-looking statements (within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) with respect to the financial condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance and business of Daseke, Inc. (Daseke or the Company). Statements preceded by, followed by or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “continue,” “estimate,” “project,” “believe,” “plan,” “should,” “could,” “would,” “goals” or similar expressions are intended to identify some of the forward-looking statements. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements may include statements about the Company’s goals; the Company’s business strategy; the Company’s financial strategy, liquidity and capital required for its business strategy and plans; the Company’s competition and government regulations; general economic conditions; and the Company’s future operating results.

Forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s management’s current expectations and assumptions about future events and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events. As such, forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Company’s control. These risks include, but are not limited to, general economic and business risks, driver shortages and increases in driver compensation or owner-operator contracted rates, loss of senior management or key operating personnel, the Company’s ability to recognize the anticipated benefits of recent acquisitions, the Company’s ability to identify and execute future acquisitions successfully, seasonality and the impact of weather and other catastrophic events, fluctuations in the price or availability of diesel fuel, increased prices for, or decreases in the availability of, new revenue equipment and decreases in the value of used revenue equipment, the Company’s ability to generate sufficient cash to service all of its indebtedness, restrictions in the Company’s existing and future debt agreements, increases in interest rates, changes in existing laws or regulations, including environmental and worker health and safety laws and regulations and those relating to tax rates or taxes in general, the impact of governmental regulations and other governmental actions related to the Company and its operations, litigation and governmental proceedings, and insurance and claims expenses. Other factors described herein, or factors that are unknown or unpredictable, could also have a material adverse effect on future results. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors,” “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” for a description of various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which such statements are made. The Company undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements for any reason, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by federal securities law. Accordingly, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements.

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

The Company files annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC). The Company’s SEC filings are available to the public through the Internet at the SEC's website at http://www.sec.gov. You may also read and copy any document we file with the SEC at the SEC's public reference room at 100 F Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information about its public reference facilities and their copy charges.

The Company also makes available free of charge on its Internet website at http://investor.daseke.com all of the documents that the Company files with the SEC as soon as reasonably practicable after it electronically files those documents with the SEC. Information contained on the Company’s website is not incorporated by reference into and does not otherwise form a part of this Form 10-K.

PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

Daseke, Inc. is a leading provider of transportation and logistics solutions focused exclusively on flatbed and specialized freight in North America. The Company is the 16th largest truckload carrier in North America,1 and of the 50 largest United States trucking companies, Daseke was one of the fastest-growing companies in 2015.2 From 2009 to 2017, the Company has grown revenue from $30 million to $846 million at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 52%. The Company was incorporated in Delaware in 2008.

Daseke believes that it provides one of the most comprehensive transportation and logistics solutions offerings in the open deck industry. The Company delivers a diverse offering of transportation and logistics solutions to approximately 5,400 customers across the continental United States, Canada and Mexico. In 2017, Daseke’s company and owner-operator drivers drove approximately 291 million miles.

The Company has two reportable segments: Flatbed Solutions and Specialized Solutions. The Flatbed Solutions segment focuses on delivering transportation and logistics solutions that principally require the use of flatbed and retractable-sided transportation equipment, and the Specialized Solutions segment focuses on delivering transportation and logistics solutions that principally include super heavy haul, high-value customized, over-dimensional, commercial glass and high security cargo solutions. The Flatbed Solutions segment generated approximately 41% of total revenue in 2017, and the Specialized Solutions segment generated approximately 59% of total revenue in 2017. As of December 31, 2017, the Flatbed Solutions segment operated 2,547 tractors and 4,573 trailers, and the Specialized Solutions segment operated 2,727 tractors and 6,664 trailers. For more information on the Company’s reportable segments, see Note 18 of the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Both of the Company’s reportable segments operate highly flexible business models comprised of company-owned tractors and asset-light operations (which consist of owner-operator transportation, freight brokerage and logistics). The Company’s asset-based operations have the benefit of providing shippers with certainty of delivery and continuity of operations. Alternatively, the Company’s asset-light operations offer flexibility and scalability to meet customers’ dynamic needs and have lower capital expenditure requirements and fixed costs. In 2017, approximately 59% of the Company’s freight, logistics and brokerage revenue was derived from company-owned equipment and approximately 41% was derived from asset-light services.

Business Combination

On February 27, 2017, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hennessy Capital Acquisition Corp. II, a special purpose acquisition company with no operations (Hennessy), merged with and into Daseke, Inc., with Daseke, Inc. surviving as a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of Hennessy (the Business Combination), in accordance with the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated December 22, 2016 (the Merger Agreement), by and among Hennessy, HCAC Merger Sub, Inc., Daseke, Inc. and Don R. Daseke, solely in his capacity as the Stockholder Representative (as defined therein). Subsequent to the closing of the Business Combination, Daseke, Inc. changed its name to “Daseke Companies, Inc.” and Hennessy Capital changed its name to “Daseke, Inc.” Unless expressly stated otherwise, references to the Company or Daseke refers to Daseke, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Hennessy refers to the registrant prior to the closing of the Business Combination, and Private Daseke refers to Daseke, Inc. and its subsidiaries prior to the closing of the Business Combination. See Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information regarding the Business Combination.

1. Logistics Management Magazine, 2017

2. Journal of Commerce, April 2016

Acquisitions

Daseke is a leading consolidator of the flatbed and specialized freight market in North America, having successfully acquired more than 16 companies since beginning operations in 2009. The Company has a robust pipeline of potential acquisition candidates, and negotiations and discussions with potential target companies are an integral part of the Company’s day-to-day operations.

In 2017, the Company’s acquisitions included the following:

Industry and Competition

The open deck freight market is expected to represent an approximately $150 billion subset of the broader transportation and logistics market in 2017-2018 and is expected to grow to $174 billion in 2019.3 Open deck freight is defined as loads secured atop trailer decks without sides or a roof and is generally both complex and time-sensitive, which separates it from regular dry-van freight. The open deck industry requires highly trained drivers and specialized equipment with the ability to handle uniquely shaped and overweight cargo. Specialized loads often require specific expertise to address the additional administrative paperwork, proper licenses and hauling permits, extensive coordination with local officials and escort vehicles. In addition, open deck freight is often high-value, which demands increased liability insurance.

Open deck routes are frequently more irregular than dry-van routes due to the nature of the freight. Open deck lanes stretch

across the country, with particular density around corridors of significant lumber, steel and machinery production, notably in the Southeast, Midwest and West Coast regions of the United States.

The open deck industry is highly competitive and fragmented. The Company competes primarily with other flatbed carriers and to a lesser extent, logistics companies, as well as railroads. The Company competes with other motor carriers for the services of drivers, independent contractors and management employees and with logistics companies for the services of third-party capacity providers and management employees. A number of the Company’s competitors have greater financial resources than it does. The Company believes that the principal differentiating factors in its business, relative to competition, are service, efficiency, pricing, the availability and configuration of equipment that satisfies customers’ needs, and its ability to provide comprehensive transportation solutions to customers.

____________________________

3 FTR Associates, Inc. (FTR)

Customers

The Company’s customers, many of whom are Fortune 500 companies, rely on it to transport mission-critical loads, making it an integral part of their supply chains. As of December 31, 2017, the Company has over 5,400 customers. The Company’s ability to dependably transport high-value, complex and time-sensitive loads as well as provide the value-added logistics services required to plan, transport and deliver loads has resulted in longstanding and established customer relationships. In 2016 and 2017 customer relationships with top ten customers, based on revenue, span more than 20 years on average at the Company’s operating divisions.

The Company’s customers represent a broad and attractive range of end markets. Examples of the freight the Company regularly transports include aircraft parts, manufacturing equipment, structural steel, pressure vessels, wind turbine blades, heavy machinery, commercial glass, high security cargo, arms, ammunition and explosives, lumber and building and construction materials. Because the Company’s customers are generally in the industrial and manufacturing sector, as is typical for open deck services providers, the Company is not subject to the same consumer-related issues as dry van trucking companies, whose freight typically include consumer goods.

In 2017, the Company’s Flatbed Solutions segment provided transportation and logistics solutions to more than 2,200 customers, and the Company’s Specialized Solutions segment provided unique, value-added transportation and logistics solutions to more than 3,200 customers. See Note 18 of the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K for information on its two reportable segments.

A material portion of the Company’s revenue is generated from its major customers, the loss of one or more of which could have a material adverse effect on its business. In 2016 and 2017, the Company’s top ten customers accounted for approximately 36% and 31%, respectively, of its revenue; however, in 2016 and 2017, no single customer represented more than 8% and 6%, respectively, of the Company’s revenue. In 2016 and 2017, no customer of the Flatbed Solutions segment or the Specialized Solutions segment accounted for 10% or more of the Company’s consolidated total revenue.

Revenue Equipment

As of December 31, 2017, the Company operated 3,218 company-owned tractors. The Company also had under contract 2,056 tractors owned and operated by independent contractors as of December 31, 2017. The Company also operated 11,237 trailers as of December 31, 2017. Growth of its tractor and trailer fleet is determined by market conditions and its experience and expectations regarding equipment utilization and driver recruitment and retention. In acquiring revenue equipment (tractors, trailers and trailer accessories), the Company considers a number of factors, including economy, price, rate, economic environment, technology, warranty terms, manufacturer support, driver comfort and resale value. The Company maintains strong relationships with its equipment vendors and the financial flexibility to react as market conditions dictate. The Company’s acquisitions have provided a significant increase in its tractor and trailer fleets.

Employees and Independent Contractors

As of December 31, 2017, there were approximately 4,798 full-time employees in the Company’s total employee headcount of 4,813, which includes approximately 3,044 drivers. The Company is not a party to any collective bargaining agreements.

The Company also contracts with owner-operator drivers to provide and operate tractors, which provide additional revenue equipment capacity. Independent contractors own their own tractors and are responsible for all associated expenses, including financing costs, fuel, maintenance, insurance and highway use taxes. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had 2,056 independent contractors, who accounted for approximately 27% of total miles in 2017.

The Company’s strategy for both company and owner-operator drivers is to (i) hire safe and experienced drivers (the majority of driver positions hired require twelve months of over-the-road experience); (ii) promote retention with a competitive compensation package in the case of company drivers and contracted rates in the case of owner-operator drivers and positive working conditions; and (iii) minimize safety problems through careful screening, mandatory drug testing, continuous training, electronic logging system and rewards for accident-free driving. The Company also seeks to minimize turnover of company drivers by providing highly attractive tractors, deploying satellite televisions inside the cabs, instituting a rewards program that allows drivers to redeem points for merchandise, and focusing on providing upgraded nationwide facilities. As a result, at least one of the Company’s operating companies has been named to the Truckload Carriers Association’s 20 Best Fleets to Drive For ® in North America each year since 2010, and the Company has achieved driver retention rates that it believes is superior to the trucking industry average.

Safety and Risk Management

The Company takes pride in its safety-focused culture and conducts mandatory intensive orientation for all of its drivers. The Department of Transportation (DOT) requires that the Company perform drug and alcohol testing that meets DOT regulations, and its safety program includes pre-employment, random and post-accident drug testing and all other testing required by the DOT. The Company also equips its company tractors with critical-event recorders to help continually train drivers, so that the Company can prevent or reduce the severity of accidents.

The primary safety-related risks associated with the Company’s business include damage to cargo hauled, physical damage to company equipment, damage to buildings and personal property, third party personal injury and property damage and workers’ compensation. The Company regularly reviews insurance limits and retentions. The Company’s historic and current retention ranges from $0 to $1.5 million per occurrence. In addition, the Company has secured excess liability coverage of up to $100.0 million per occurrence.

To the extent under dispatch and in furtherance of the Company’s business, its owner-operators are covered by the Company’s liability coverage. However, each such owner-operator is responsible for physical damage to his or her own equipment, occupational accident coverage, liability exposure while the truck is used for non-company purposes, and, in the case of fleet operators, any applicable workers’ compensation requirements for their employees.

Fuel

The Company actively manages its fuel purchasing network in an effort to maintain adequate fuel supplies and reduce its fuel costs. The Company purchases its fuel through a network of retail truck stops with which it has negotiated volume purchasing discounts. The Company seeks to reduce its fuel costs by routing its drivers to truck stops with which the Company has negotiated volume purchase discounts when fuel prices at such stops are lower than the bulk rate paid for fuel at the Company’s terminals. The Company stores fuel in aboveground and underground storage tanks at some of its facilities.

To help offset increases in fuel prices, the Company utilizes a fuel surcharge program designed to compensate the Company for fuel costs above a certain cost per gallon base. Generally, the Company receives fuel surcharges on the miles for which it is compensated by customers. In addition to its fuel surcharge program, the Company believes the most

effective protection against fuel cost increases is to maintain a fuel-efficient fleet by incorporating fuel efficiency measures. The Company has not used derivatives as a hedge against higher fuel costs in the past but continue to evaluate this possibility. Shortages of fuel, increases in fuel prices or rationing of petroleum products could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operations and profitability.

Seasonality

In the transportation industry, results of operations generally show a seasonal pattern. The Company’s tractor productivity decreases during the winter season because inclement weather impedes operations and some shippers reduce their shipments during winter. At the same time, operating expenses increase and fuel efficiency declines because of engine idling and harsh weather creating higher accident frequency, increased claims and higher equipment repair expenditures. The Company also may suffer from weather-related or other events such as tornadoes, hurricanes, blizzards, ice storms, floods, fires, earthquakes and explosions. These events may disrupt fuel supplies, increase fuel costs, disrupt freight shipments or routes, affect regional economies, destroy the Company’s assets or adversely affect the business or financial condition of customers, any of which could adversely affect the Company’s results or make the Company’s results more volatile.

Regulation

The Company’s operations are regulated and licensed by various federal, provincial, state, local and foreign government agencies in the United States and Canada. In the United States, the Company and its drivers must comply with the safety and fitness regulations of the DOT and the agencies within the states that regulate transportation, including those regulations relating to drug- and alcohol-testing and hours-of-service. Weight and equipment dimensions also are subject to government regulations. The Company also may become subject to new or more restrictive regulations relating to fuel emissions, environmental protection, drivers’ hours-of-service, driver eligibility requirements, on-board reporting of operations, collective bargaining, ergonomics and other matters affecting safety, insurance and operating methods. Other agencies, such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), also regulate the Company’s equipment, operations, drivers and the environment. To the extent that the Company conducts operations outside of the United States, it is subject to analogous governmental safety, fitness, weight and equipment regulations and environmental protection and operating standards, as well as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which generally prohibits United States companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining favorable treatment. For example, in Canada, Daseke must conduct its operations in various provinces pursuant to operating authority granted by the Ministries of Transportation and Communications in those provinces.

The DOT, through the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), imposes safety and fitness regulations on the Company and its drivers, including rules that restrict driver hours-of-service. In December 2011, the FMCSA published its 2011 Hours-of-Service Final Rule (the 2011 Rule), requiring drivers to take 30-minute breaks after eight hours of consecutive driving and reducing the total number of hours a driver is permitted to work during each week from 82 to 70 hours. The 2011 Rule provided that a driver may restart calculation of the weekly time limits after taking 34 or more consecutive hours off duty, including two rest periods between one a.m. and five a.m., which restrictions are referred to as the 2011 Restart Restrictions. These 2011 rule changes, including the 2011 Restart Restrictions, became effective on July 1, 2013. However, on December 13, 2014, Congress passed the 2015 Omnibus Appropriations bill, which was signed into law on December 16, 2014. Among other things, the legislation provided relief from the 2011 Restart Restrictions, which essentially reverts back to the more straight forward 34-hour restart period, without need for two rest periods between one a.m. and five a.m., which was in effect before the 2011 Rule became effective. On December 22, 2014, the FMCSA published a Notice of Suspension summarizing this suspension of enforcement of the 2011 Restart Restrictions.

The FMCSA has adopted a data-driven Compliance, Safety and Accountability (the CSA) program as its safety enforcement and compliance model. The CSA program holds motor carries and drivers accountable for their role in safety by evaluating and ranking fleets and individual drivers on certain safety-related standards. The CSA program affects drivers because their safety performance and compliance impact their safety records and, while working for a carrier, will impact their carrier’s safety record. The methodology for determining a carrier’s DOT safety rating relies upon

implementation of Behavioral Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASIC) applicable to the on-road safety performance of the carrier’s drivers and certain of those rating results are provided on the FMCSA’s Carrier Safety Measurement System website. As a result, certain current and potential drivers may no longer be eligible to drive for the Company, the Company’s fleet could be ranked poorly as compared to its peer firms, and the Company’s safety rating could be adversely impacted. The occurrence of future deficiencies could affect driver recruiting and retention by causing high-quality drivers to seek employment (in the case of company drivers) or contracts (in the case of owner-operator drivers) with other carriers, or could cause the Company’s customers to direct their business away from the Company and to carriers with better fleet safety rankings, either of which would adversely affect the Company’s results of operations and productivity. Additionally, the Company may incur greater than expected expenses in its attempts to improve its scores as a result of such poor rankings. Those carriers and drivers identified under the CSA program as exhibiting poor BASIC scores are prioritized for interventions, such as warning letters and roadside investigations, either of which may adversely affect the Company’s results of operations. To promote improvement in all CSA categories, including those both over and under the established scoring threshold, the Company has procedures in place to address areas where it has exceeded the thresholds and the Company continually reviews all safety-related policies, programs and procedures for their effectiveness and revises them, as necessary, to establish positive improvement. However, the Company cannot assure you these measures will be effective.

The methodology used to determine a carrier’s safety rating is subject to possible change by the FMCSA and, as a result, the Company’s acceptable safety rating could be impaired. In particular, in January 2016, the FMCSA published a proposed rulemaking that would amend the methodology used by the agency for determining a carrier’s safety fitness. Under the proposed rulemaking, the FMCSA would update the current safety fitness rating methodology by integrating on-road safety data from inspections, along with the results of carrier investigations and crash reports, to determine a motor carrier’s overall safety fitness on a monthly basis. However, in March 2017, FMCSA published a notice of withdrawal that removed the January 2016 proposed rulemaking from further regulatory consideration. Consequently, the FMCSA continues to utilize the three safety fitness rating scale—“satisfactory,” “conditional,” and “unsatisfactory”—to assess the safety fitness of motor carries. The Company currently has a “satisfactory” FMCSA rating on 97% of it’s fleet, the remaining 3% has a “conditional” rating which we anticipate to become “satisfactory” in 2018. Nonetheless, should the FMCSA adopt rulemakings in the future that revise the methodology used to determine a carrier’s safety rating in a manner that incorporates more stringent standards, then it is possible that the Company and other motor carriers could be adversely affected, as compared to consideration of the current standards. If the Company were to receive an unsatisfactory DOT safety rating as a result of any changes to the methodology, it could adversely affect the Company’s business as some of its existing customer contracts require a satisfactory DOT safety rating, and an unsatisfactory rating could negatively impact or restrict the Company’s operations.

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, federal, state and municipal authorities implemented and continue to implement various security measures, including checkpoints and travel restrictions on large trucks. This could reduce the pool of qualified drivers, which could require the Company to increase driver compensation or owner-operator contracted rates, limit fleet growth or allow trucks to be non-productive. Consequently, it is possible that the Company may fail to meet the needs of customers or may incur increased expenses.

The FMCSA published a final rule on December 16, 2015 mandating the use of Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) for commercial motor vehicle drivers to measure their compliance with hours-of-service requirements by December 18, 2017. The 2015 ELD final rule generally applies to most motor carriers and drivers who are required to keep records of duty status, unless they qualify for an exception to the rule, and the rule also applies to drivers domiciled in Canada and Mexico. Under the 2015 final rule, motor carriers and drivers subject to the rule must use either an ELD or an automatic onboard recording device (AOBRD) compliant with existing regulations by December 18, 2017. The AOBRDs may be used until December 16, 2019, if the devices were put into use before December 18, 2017. Starting December 16, 2019, all carriers and drivers subject to the 2015 final rule must use ELDs. Commencing with the December 18, 2017 effective date, the Company and other motor carriers subject to the 2015 rule are required to use ELDs or AOBRDs in their operations.

The Company is subject to various environmental laws and regulations governing, among other matters, the operation of fuel storage tanks, release of emissions from its vehicles (including engine idling) and facilities, and adverse impacts to the environment, including to the soil, groundwater and surface water. The Company has implemented programs designed

to monitor and address identified environmental risks. Historically, the Company’s environmental compliance costs have not had a material adverse effect on its results of operations; however, there can be no assurance that such costs will not be material in the future or that such future compliance will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business and operating results. Additionally, the Company is a Charter Partner in the EPA’s SmartWay Transport Partnership, a voluntary program promoting energy efficiency and air quality. If the Company fails to comply with applicable environmental laws or regulations, the Company could be subject to costs and liabilities. Those costs and liabilities may include the assessment of sanctions, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, the imposition of investigatory, remedial or corrective action obligations, the occurrence of delays in permitting or performance of projects and the issuance of orders enjoining performance of some or all of its operations in a particular area. The occurrence of any one or more of such developments could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business and operating results.

The Company maintains bulk fuel storage and fuel islands at some of its terminals. The Company also has vehicle maintenance operations at certain of its facilities. The Company’s operations involve the risks of fuel spillage or seepage into the environment, discharge of contaminants, environmental damage, and unauthorized hazardous material spills, releases or disposal actions, among others. Some of the Company’s operations are at facilities where soil and groundwater contamination have occurred, and the Company or its predecessors have been responsible for remediating environmental contamination at some locations. In the past, the Company has also been responsible for the costs of cleanup of cargo and diesel fuel spills caused during its transportation operations, including as a result of traffic accidents or other events. If the Company is found to be responsible for such contamination or spills, the Company could be subject to costs and liabilities, including costs for remediation, environmental natural resource damages and penalties.

The EPA regulations limiting exhaust emissions became more restrictive in 2010. In 2010, a presidential executive memorandum was signed directing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the EPA to develop new, stricter fuel efficiency standards for, among other vehicles, heavy-duty trucks. In 2011, the NHTSA and the EPA adopted final Phase 1 rules that established the first-ever fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for medium-and heavy-duty vehicles. These standards apply to certain combination tractors’ model years 2014 to 2018 and require them to achieve an approximate 20 percent reduction in fuel consumption by model year 2018 which equates to approximately four gallons of fuel for every 100 miles traveled. Additionally, in October 2016, the EPA and NHTSA jointly published final Phase 2 standards for improving fuel efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from new on-road medium- and heavy-duty vehicles beginning for model year 2019 and extending through model year 2027. The Phase 2 standards build upon the Phase 1 standards, encouraging wider application of currently available technologies and the development of new and advanced cost-effective technologies through model year 2027. In addition, for the first time, greenhouse gas emissions limits and fuel efficiency standards will be imposed on new trailers. The Company expects that these Phase 2 standards will result in its incurrence of increased costs for acquiring new tractors and for additional parts and maintenance activities to retrofit its tractors with technology to achieve compliance with such standards. Such increased costs could adversely affect the Company’s operating results and profitability, particularly if such costs are not offset by potential fuel savings. The Company cannot predict, however, the extent to which its operations and productivity will be adversely impacted.

Notwithstanding the federal standards, a number of states have mandated, and states may continue to individually mandate, additional emission-control requirements for equipment that could increase equipment or other costs for entire fleets. For instance, the California Air Resource Board also has adopted emission control regulations that will be applicable to all heavy-duty tractors that pull 53-foot or longer box-type trailers within the state of California. The tractors and trailers subject to these regulations must be either EPA Smart Way certified or equipped with low-rolling resistance tires and retrofitted with Smart Way-approved aerodynamic technologies. The Company currently purchases Smart Way certified equipment in its new tractor and trailer acquisitions. In order to reduce exhaust emissions, some states and municipalities have also begun to restrict the locations and amount of time where diesel-powered tractors may idle. These restrictions could force the Company to alter its drivers’ behavior, purchase on-board power units that do not require the engine to idle or face a decrease in productivity.

Federal and state lawmakers also have implemented or proposed potential limits on greenhouse gas emissions under a variety of other climate-change initiatives. Compliance with such regulations may increase the cost of new tractors and trailers or require the Company to retrofit its equipment, and could impair equipment productivity and increase its

operating expenses. These adverse effects, combined with the uncertainty as to the reliability of the newly designed diesel engines and the residual value of these vehicles, could materially increase the Company’s operating expenses or otherwise adversely affect its operations.

Since October 2013, any entity acting as a broker or a freight forwarder is required to obtain authority from the FMCSA, and is subject to a minimum $75,000 financial security requirement. Several of the Company’s subsidiaries are licensed by the FMCSA as a property broker and, therefore, they are obligated to satisfy this financial security requirement. This new requirement may limit entry of new brokers into the market or cause current brokers to exit the market. Such persons may seek agent relationships with companies such as the Company to avoid this increased cost. If they do not seek out agent relationships, the number of brokers in the industry could decrease.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Risk Factors

The following risk factors apply to the business and operations of the Company. These risk factors are not exhaustive, and investors are encouraged to perform their own investigation with respect to the business, financial condition and prospects of the Company. The Company may face additional risks and uncertainties that are not presently known to it, or that the Company currently deems immaterial, which may also impair its business. The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes to the financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

The Company’s industry is affected by general economic and business risks that are largely beyond its control.

The Company’s industry is highly cyclical, and its business is dependent on a number of factors, many of which are beyond its control. The Company believes that some of the most significant of these factors are economic changes that affect supply and demand in transportation markets in general, such as:

•changes in customers’ inventory levels and in the availability of funding for their working capital;

•excess tractor capacity in comparison with shipping demand;

•downturns in customers’ business cycles; and

•recessionary economic cycles.

The risks associated with these factors are heightened when the United States and/or global economy is weakened. Some of the principal risks during such times are as follows:

•the Company may experience low overall freight levels, which may impair its asset utilization, because its customers’ demand for its services generally correlate with the strength of the United States and, to a lesser extent, global economy;

•certain of the Company’s customers may face credit issues and cash flow problems, particularly if they encounter increased financing costs or decreased access to the capital markets, and such issues and problems may affect their ability to pay for the Company’s services;

•freight patterns may change as supply chains are redesigned, resulting in an imbalance between the Company’s capacity and the Company’s customers’ demands; and

•customers may bid out freight or select competitors that offer lower rates from among existing choices in an attempt to lower their costs, and the Company might be forced to lower its rates or lose freight.

The Company also is subject to cost increases outside of its control that could materially reduce its profitability if it is unable to increase its rates sufficiently. Such cost increases include, but are not limited to, increases in fuel prices, driver wages, owner-operator contracted rates, interest rates, taxes, tolls, license and registration fees, insurance, revenue equipment and healthcare for its employees.

The Company’s suppliers’ business levels also may be negatively affected by adverse economic conditions or financial constraints, which could lead to disruptions in the supply and availability of equipment, parts and services critical to its operations. A significant interruption in the Company’s normal supply chain could disrupt its operations, increase its costs and negatively impact its ability to serve its customers.

In addition, events outside the Company’s control, such as strikes or other work stoppages at its facilities or at customer, port, border or other shipping locations, or actual or threatened armed conflicts or terrorist attacks, efforts to combat

terrorism, military action against a foreign state or group located in a foreign state, or heightened security requirements could lead to reduced economic demand, reduced availability of credit or temporary closing of the shipping locations or United States borders. Such events or enhanced security measures in connection with such events could impair the Company’s operating efficiency and productivity and result in higher operating costs.

The Company’s industry is highly competitive and fragmented, and its business and results of operations may suffer if it is unable to adequately address downward pricing and other competitive pressures.

The Company competes with many truckload carriers of varying sizes, including some that may have greater access to equipment, a wider range of services, greater capital resources, less indebtedness or other competitive advantages and including smaller, regional service providers that cover specific shipping lanes with specific customers or that offer niche services. The Company also competes, to a lesser extent, with some less-than-truckload carriers, railroads, and third-party logistics, brokerage, freight forwarding and other transportation companies. Numerous competitive factors could impair the Company’s ability to maintain or improve its profitability. These factors include the following:

•many of the Company’s competitors periodically reduce their freight rates to gain business, especially during times of reduced growth in the economy, which may limit the Company’s ability to maintain or increase freight rates, may require the Company to reduce its freight rates or may limit its ability to maintain or expand its business;

•some shippers have reduced or may reduce the number of carriers they use by selecting core carriers as approved service providers and in some instances the Company may not be selected;

•many customers periodically solicit bids from multiple carriers for their shipping needs, which may depress freight rates or result in a loss of business to competitors;

•the continuing trend toward consolidation in the trucking industry may result in more large carriers with greater financial resources and other competitive advantages, and the Company may have difficulty competing with them;

•advances in technology may require the Company to increase investments in order to remain competitive, and its customers may not be willing to accept higher freight rates to cover the cost of these investments;

•higher fuel prices and, in turn, higher fuel surcharges to the Company’s customers may cause some of its customers to consider freight transportation alternatives, including rail transportation;

•competition from freight logistics and brokerage companies may negatively impact the Company’s customer relationships and freight rates;

•the Company may have higher exposure to litigation risks as compared to smaller carriers; and

•smaller carriers may build economies of scale with procurement aggregation providers, which may improve the smaller carriers’ abilities to compete with the Company.

Driver shortages and increases in driver compensation or owner-operator contracted rates could adversely affect the Company’s profitability and ability to maintain or grow its business.

Recent driver shortages in the industry require, and could continue to require, the Company to spend more to attract and retain company and owner-operator drivers. The Company’s challenge with attracting and retaining qualified drivers primarily stems from intense market competition, which may subject it to increased payments for driver compensation and owner-operator contracted rates. Also, because of the intense competition for drivers, the Company may face difficulty maintaining or increasing its number of company and owner-operator drivers. Compliance and enforcement initiatives included in the CSA program implemented by the FMCSA and regulations of the DOT relating to driver time and safety and fitness could also reduce the availability of qualified drivers. In addition, like most in the Company’s industry, the Company suffers from a high turnover rate of drivers, especially, with respect to company drivers, in the first 180 days of

employment. The high turnover rate requires the Company to continually recruit a substantial number of drivers in order to operate existing revenue equipment. Further, with respect to owner-operator drivers, shortages can result from contractual terms or company policies that make contracting with the Company less desirable to certain owner-operator drivers. Due to the absence of long-term contracts, owner-operators can quickly terminate their relationships with the Company. If the Company is unable to continue to attract and retain a sufficient number of company and owner-operator drivers, it could be required to operate with fewer trucks and face difficulty meeting shipper demands or be forced to forego business that would otherwise be available to it, which could adversely affect its profitability and ability to maintain or grow its business.

The loss of senior management or key operating personnel could adversely affect operations.

The Company’s success to date has depended, and will continue to depend, largely on the skills, efforts and motivation of Mr. Daseke, its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and on the other members of its senior management team, who generally have significant experience with the Company and within the transportation industry. Mr. Daseke, age 78, has been the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since its formation. The Company also depends on the continued service of key operating personnel. If for any reason the services of its key personnel, particularly Mr. Daseke, were to become unavailable, there could be a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects.

A key component of the Company’s strategy includes selectively pursuing strategic and complementary acquisitions; however, it may not be able to execute future acquisitions successfully.

Historically, a key component of the Company’s growth strategy has been to pursue acquisitions of strategic and complementary businesses. For example, from 2009 to the date hereof, the Company has acquired more than 16 businesses. The Company expects to continue considering acquisitions in the future and expects that acquisitions will continue to be a key component of its business plan going forward and the value of the Earn-Out Consideration is based in large part on the Company’s ability to complete acquisitions and meet certain Adjusted EBITDA targets. Recent or future acquisitions may negatively impact its business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects because:

•the Company may assume liabilities, including environmental liabilities, or be subject to risks beyond its estimates or what was disclosed to it;

•the acquisition could divert management’s attention and other resources from the Company’s existing business;

•to facilitate such acquisitions, the Company may incur or assume additional indebtedness or issue additional shares of stock; and

•the acquired company may require increases in working capital and capital expenditure investments to fund its growth.

Further, the companies that the Company acquires may not achieve anticipated revenue, earnings or cash flows, including as a result of the loss of any major customers or key employees, and the Company may be unable to fully realize all of the anticipated benefits and synergies from recent and future acquisitions.

Although the Company has an identified pipeline of near- and medium-term acquisition targets as of the date hereof, the consummation of any acquisitions will be dependent on, among other things, the results of its due diligence and the Company may not complete any acquisitions in its pipeline. The Company may not be able to acquire any additional companies at all or on terms favorable to it. Certain of the Company’s larger, better capitalized competitors may seek to acquire some of the companies the Company may be interested in, and competition for acquisitions would likely increase acquisition prices and result in it having fewer acquisition opportunities.

Seasonality and the impact of weather and other catastrophic events adversely affect the Company’s operations and profitability.

The Company’s tractor productivity decreases during the winter season because inclement weather impedes operations and some shippers reduce their shipments during winter. At the same time, operating expenses increase due to, among other things, a decline in fuel efficiency because of engine idling and harsh weather that creates higher accident frequency, increased claims and higher equipment repair expenditures. The Company also may suffer from weather-related or other events, such as tornadoes, hurricanes, blizzards, ice storms, floods, fires, earthquakes and explosions, which may disrupt fuel supplies, increase fuel costs, disrupt freight shipments or routes, affect regional economies, destroy its assets or the assets of its customers or otherwise adversely affect the business or financial condition of its customers, any of which could adversely affect its results or make its results more volatile.

The Company may be adversely affected by fluctuations in the price or availability of diesel fuel.

Fuel is one of the Company’s largest operating expenses. Diesel fuel prices fluctuate greatly due to factors beyond the Company’s control, such as political events, price and supply decisions by oil producing countries and cartels, terrorist activities, environmental laws and regulations, armed conflicts, depreciation of the dollar against other currencies, world supply and demand imbalances, and hurricanes and other natural or man-made disasters, each of which may lead to an increase in the cost of fuel. Such events may lead not only to increases in fuel prices, but also to fuel shortages and disruptions in the fuel supply chain. Because the Company’s operations are dependent upon diesel fuel, significant diesel fuel cost increases, shortages or supply disruptions could materially and adversely affect its results of operations and financial condition. The Company has not used derivatives as a hedge against higher fuel costs in the past but continues to evaluate this possibility.

Increases in fuel costs, to the extent not offset by rate per mile increases or fuel surcharges, have an adverse effect on the Company’s operations and profitability. The Company incurs certain fuel costs that cannot be recovered even with respect to customers with which it maintains fuel surcharge programs, such as those associated with empty miles or the time when its engines are idling. Because the Company’s fuel surcharge recovery lags behind changes in fuel prices, its fuel surcharge recovery may not capture in any particular period the increased costs it pays for fuel, especially when prices are rising. Further, during periods of low freight volumes, shippers can use their negotiating leverage to impose less compensatory fuel surcharge policies. There can be no assurance that the Company’s fuel surcharge program will be maintained indefinitely or will be sufficiently effective.

Increased prices for, or decreases in the availability of, new revenue equipment and decreases in the value of used revenue equipment could adversely affect the Company’s results of operations and cash flows.

Investment in new equipment is a significant part of the Company’s annual capital expenditures, and the Company requires an available supply of tractors and trailers from equipment manufacturers to operate and grow its business. In recent years, manufacturers have raised the prices of new revenue equipment significantly due to increased costs of materials and, in part, to offset their costs of compliance with new tractor engine and emission system design requirements mandated by the EPA and various state agencies, which are intended to reduce emissions. For example, more restrictive EPA engine and emissions system design requirements became effective for engines built on or after January 1, 2010. In 2011, the EPA and the NHTSA established Phase 1 of a national program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and establish new fuel efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles beginning for model year 2014 and extending through model year 2018. In October 2016, the EPA and NHTSA jointly published final Phase 2 standards for improving fuel efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from new on-road medium- and heavy-duty vehicles beginning for model year 2019 and extending to model year 2027. The Phase 2 standards build upon the Phase 1 standards, encouraging wider application of currently available technologies and the development of new and advanced cost-effective technologies through model year 2027. In addition, for the first time, greenhouse gas emissions limits and fuel efficiency standards will be imposed on new trailers. Greenhouse gas emissions regulations are likely to affect equipment design and cost. Notwithstanding the federal standards, a number of states have mandated, and states may continue to individually mandate, additional emission-control requirements for equipment that could increase equipment or other costs for entire fleets. Further equipment price increases may result from these federal and state requirements. If new equipment prices increase

more than anticipated, the Company could incur higher depreciation and rental expenses than anticipated. If the Company is unable to fully offset any such increases in expenses with freight rate increases and/or improved fuel economy, its results of operations and cash flows could be adversely affected.

The Company may face difficulty in purchasing new equipment due to decreased supply. From time to time, some original equipment manufacturers (OEM) of tractors and trailers may reduce their manufacturing output due to lower demand for their products in economic downturns or a shortage of component parts. Component suppliers may either reduce production or be unable to increase production to meet OEM demand, creating periodic difficulty for OEMs to react in a timely manner to increased demand for new equipment and/or increased demand for replacement components as economic conditions change. At times, market forces may create market situations in which demand outstrips supply. In those situations, the Company may face reduced supply levels and/or increased acquisition costs. An inability to continue to obtain an adequate supply of new tractors or trailers for its operations could have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition.

During prolonged periods of decreased tonnage levels, the Company and other trucking companies may make strategic fleet reductions, which could result in an increase in the supply of used equipment. When the supply exceeds the demand for used revenue equipment, the general market value of used revenue equipment decreases. Used equipment prices are also subject to substantial fluctuations based on availability of financing and commodity prices for scrap metal. A depressed market for used equipment could require the Company to trade its revenue equipment at depressed values or to record losses on disposal or an impairment of the carrying values of its revenue equipment that is not protected by residual value arrangements. Trades at depressed values and decreases in proceeds under equipment disposals and impairment of the carrying values of its revenue equipment could adversely affect its results of operations and financial condition.

The Company may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of its indebtedness and may be forced to take other actions to satisfy its obligations under applicable debt instruments, which may not be successful.

As of December 31, 2017, the Company had $635.0 million of indebtedness outstanding. Its ability to make scheduled payments on or to refinance its indebtedness obligations depends on its financial condition and operating performance, which are subject to prevailing economic and competitive conditions and certain financial, business and other factors beyond its control. The Company may not be able to maintain a level of cash flows from operating activities sufficient to permit it to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on its indebtedness.

If the Company’s cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund debt service obligations, the Company may be forced to reduce or delay investments and capital expenditures, sell assets, seek additional capital or restructure or refinance indebtedness. The Company’s ability to restructure or refinance indebtedness will depend on the condition of the capital markets and its financial condition at such time. Any refinancing of indebtedness could be at higher interest rates and may require the Company to comply with more onerous covenants, which could further restrict business operations. The terms of existing or future debt instruments may restrict the Company from adopting some of these alternatives. In addition, any failure to make payments of interest and principal on outstanding indebtedness on a timely basis would likely result in a reduction of the Company’s credit rating, which could harm its ability to incur additional indebtedness. In the absence of sufficient cash flows and capital resources, the Company could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to dispose of material assets or operations to meet debt service and other obligations. However, the proceeds of any such disposition may not be adequate to meet any debt service obligations then due.

The Company’s credit facilities and the terms of the Series A Preferred Stock contain restrictive covenants that may impair the Company’s ability to conduct business, and to maintain compliance with these covenants in the future, which could lead to default and acceleration under the credit facilities.

The Company’s credit facilities and terms of the Series A Preferred Stock contain operating covenants and financial covenants that limit management’s discretion with respect to certain business matters. Among other things, these covenants, subject to certain limitations and exceptions, restrict the Company’s ability to:

•incur additional indebtedness;

•change the nature of the business;

•merge or consolidate with, or acquire, another entity; and

•sell or otherwise dispose of assets.

In addition, the Company’s credit facilities and certain of its other debt agreements require it to maintain certain financial ratios or to reduce its indebtedness if it is unable to comply with such ratios. These restrictions may also limit the Company’s ability to obtain future financings to withstand a future downturn in its business or the economy in general, or to otherwise conduct necessary corporate activities. The Company may also be prevented from taking advantage of business opportunities that arise because of the limitations that its debt agreements impose on it.

A breach of any covenant in the Company’s credit facilities or certain of its other debt agreements would result in a default thereunder after any applicable grace periods expire and, if not waived, could result in acceleration of amounts borrowed thereunder. Further, the Company’s credit facilities and certain of its other debt agreements contain cross-default provisions, such that a default under one agreement would create a default under the other agreements. In the event of acceleration, the Company may not be able to make all of the required payments or borrow sufficient funds to refinance such indebtedness. Even if new financing were available at that time, it may not be on terms that are acceptable to the Company.

The Company’s leverage and debt service obligations may adversely affect its financial condition, results of operations, business prospects and ability to make payments on its debt obligations.

As of December 31, 2017, the Company had $635.0 million of indebtedness outstanding. The Company’s level of indebtedness could adversely affect it in several ways, including the following:

•require the Company to dedicate a substantial portion of its cash flow from operations to service its existing debt, thereby reducing the cash available to finance its operations and other business activities;

•limit management’s discretion in operating its business and its flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in its business and the industry in which it operates;

•increase its vulnerability to downturns and adverse developments in its business and the economy generally;

•limit its ability to access the capital markets to raise capital on favorable terms or to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures or acquisitions or to refinance existing indebtedness;

•place restrictions on its ability to obtain additional financing, make investments, lease equipment, sell assets and engage in business combinations;

•make it more likely that a reduction in its borrowing base following a periodic redetermination could require it to repay a portion of its then-outstanding bank borrowings;

•make it vulnerable to increases in interest rates as indebtedness under the Company’s credit facility may vary with prevailing interest rates;

•place it at a competitive disadvantage relative to competitors with lower levels of indebtedness in relation to their overall size or less restrictive terms governing their indebtedness; and

•make it more difficult for it to satisfy its obligations under its debt instruments and increase the risk that it may default on its debt obligations.

The Company may incur substantial additional indebtedness, which could increase the risks it faces.

While the Company’s credit facility contains restrictions on the Company’s ability to incur additional indebtedness, such restrictions are subject to waiver and a number of significant qualifications and exceptions. Indebtedness incurred in compliance with these restrictions could be substantial. Additional leverage increases the risks described above under “— the Company’s leverage and debt service obligations may adversely affect its financial condition, results of operations, business prospects and ability to make payments on its debt obligations.” Furthermore, any increase in the Company’s level of indebtedness will have several important effects on its future operations, including, without limitation:

•it will have additional cash requirements in order to support the payment of interest on its outstanding indebtedness;

•increases in its outstanding indebtedness and leverage will increase its vulnerability to adverse changes in general economic and industry conditions, as well as to competitive pressure; and

•depending on the levels of its outstanding indebtedness, its ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, general corporate and other purposes may be limited.

The Company has significant ongoing capital expenditure requirements. If the Company is unable to obtain such capital on favorable terms or at all, it may not be able to execute on its business plans and its business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects may be adversely affected.

The Company’s business is capital intensive. Its capital expenditures focus primarily on revenue equipment replacement and, to a lesser extent, facilities, revenue equipment growth and investments in information technology. The Company also expects to devote substantial financial resources to grow its operations and fund its acquisition activities. As a result of the Company’s funding requirements, it likely will need to sell additional equity or debt securities or seek additional financing through other arrangements to increase its cash resources. Any sale of additional equity or debt securities may result in dilution to its stockholders. Public or private financing may not be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to the Company, if at all.

If the Company is unable to obtain additional financing, it may be required to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate future acquisition activities or growth initiatives, which could adversely affect its business, financial condition and operating results. In such case, the Company may also operate its revenue equipment (including tractors and trailers) for longer periods, which would result in increased maintenance costs, which would in turn reduce its operating income.

Increases in interest rates could adversely affect the Company’s business.

The Company’s business and operating results can be harmed by factors such as the availability, terms of and cost of capital, increases in interest rates or a reduction in credit rating. These changes could cause the Company’s cost of doing business to increase and limit its ability to pursue acquisition opportunities. For example, as of December 31, 2017, outstanding borrowings under the Company’s credit facilities were approximately $498.5 million, and a 1.0% increase in interest rates would result in an increase in annual interest expense of approximately $5.0 million, assuming the $498.5 million in debt was outstanding for the full year, before the effects of income taxes. Recent and continuing disruptions and volatility in the global financial markets may lead to a contraction in credit availability impacting its ability to finance its operations. The Company requires continued access to capital. A significant reduction in cash flows from operations or the availability of credit could materially and adversely affect its ability to achieve its planned growth and operating results.

The Company operates in a highly regulated industry, and changes in existing laws or regulations, or liability under existing or future laws or regulations, could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations and profitability.

The Company operates in the United States pursuant to operating authority granted by the DOT and in various Canadian provinces pursuant to operating authority granted by the Ministries of Transportation and Communications in such provinces. The company, as well as its company and owner-operator drivers, must also comply with governmental regulations regarding safety, equipment, environmental protection and operating methods. Examples include regulation of

equipment weight, equipment dimensions, fuel emissions, driver hours-of-service, driver eligibility requirements, on-board reporting of operations and ergonomics. The Company may become subject to new or more restrictive regulations relating to such matters that may require changes in its operating practices, influence the demand for transportation services or require it to incur significant additional costs. Possible changes to laws and regulations include:

•increasingly stringent environmental laws and regulations, including changes intended to address fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions that are attributed to climate change;

•restrictions, taxes or other controls on emissions;

•regulation specific to the energy market and logistics providers to the industry;

•changes in the hours-of-service regulations, which govern the amount of time a driver may drive in any specific period;

•driver and vehicle ELD requirements;

•requirements leading to accelerated purchases of new trailers;

•mandatory limits on vehicle weight and size;

•driver hiring restrictions;

•increased bonding or insurance requirements; and

•security requirements imposed by the DHS.

From time to time, various legislative proposals are introduced, including proposals to increase federal, state or local taxes, including taxes on motor fuels and emissions, which may increase the Company’s or its independent affiliates’ operating costs, require capital expenditures or adversely impact the recruitment of drivers.

Restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions or climate change laws or regulations could also affect the Company’s customers that use significant amounts of energy or burn fossil fuels in producing or delivering the products the Company carries, which, in turn, could adversely impact the demand for the Company’s services as well as its operations. The Company also could lose revenue if its customers divert business from it because it has not complied with their sustainability requirements. See “Item 1. Business - Regulation” for information regarding several proposed, pending and final regulations that could significantly impact the Company’s business and operations.

Safety-related evaluations and rankings under the CSA program could adversely impact the Company’s relationships with its customers and its ability to maintain or grow its fleet, each of which could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations and profitability.

The CSA includes compliance and enforcement initiatives designed to monitor and improve commercial motor vehicle safety by measuring the safety record of both the motor carrier and the driver. These measurements are scored and used by the FMCSA to identify potential safety risks and to direct enforcement action. Certain measurements and scores collected by the CSA from transportation companies are available to the general public on the FMCSA’s website.

The Company’s CSA scores are dependent upon its safety and compliance experience, which could change at any time. In addition, the safety standards prescribed in the CSA program or the underlying methodology used by the FMCSA to determine a carrier’s safety rating could change and, as a result, the Company’s ability to maintain an acceptable score could be adversely impacted. For example, in January 2016, the FMCSA published a proposed rulemaking that would amend the methodology used by the agency for issuance of a safety fitness determination. Under the proposed rulemaking, the FMCSA would update the current safety fitness rating methodology by integrating on-road safety data from inspections, along with the results of carrier investigations and crash reports, to determine a motor carrier’s overall safety

fitness on a monthly basis. However, in March 2017, FMCSA published a notice of withdrawal that removed the January 2016 proposed rulemaking from further regulatory consideration. Nonetheless, should the FMCSA adopt rulemakings in the future that revise the methodology used to determine a carrier’s safety rating in a manner that incorporates more stringent standards, then it is possible that the Company and other motor carriers could be adversely affected, as compared to consideration of the current standards. If the Company receives an unacceptable CSA score, its relationships with customers could be damaged, which could result in a loss of business.

The requirements of CSA could shrink the industry’s pool of drivers as those with unfavorable scores could leave the industry. As a result, the costs to attract, train and retain qualified drivers could increase. In addition, a shortage of qualified drivers could increase driver turnover, decrease asset utilization, limit growth and adversely impact the Company’s results of operations and profitability.

The Company is subject to environmental and worker health and safety laws and regulations that may expose it to significant costs and liabilities and have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, competitive position and financial condition.

The Company is subject to stringent and comprehensive federal, state, provincial, local and foreign environmental and worker health and safety laws and regulations governing, among other matters, the operation of fuel storage tanks, release of emissions from its vehicles (including engine idling) and facilities, the health and safety of its workers in conducing operations, and adverse impacts to the environment. Under certain environmental laws, the Company could be subject to strict liability, without regard to fault or legality of conduct, for costs relating to contamination at facilities the Company owns or operates or previously owned or operated and at third-party sites where the Company disposed of waste, as well as costs associated with the clean-up of releases arising from accidents involving the Company’s vehicles. The Company often operates in industrial areas, where truck terminals and other industrial activities are located, and where soil, groundwater or other forms of environmental contamination have occurred from historical or recent releases and for which the Company has incurred and may, in the future, incur remedial or other environmental liabilities. The Company also maintains aboveground and underground bulk fuel storage tanks and fueling islands at some of its facilities and vehicle maintenance operations at certain of its facilities. The Company’s operations involve the risks of fuel spillage or seepage into the environment, environmental damage and unauthorized hazardous material spills, releases or disposal actions, among others.

Increasing efforts to control air emissions, including greenhouse gases, may have an adverse effect on the Company. Federal and state lawmakers have implemented, and are considering, a variety of new climate-change initiatives and greenhouse gas regulations that could increase the cost of new tractors, impair productivity and increase the Company’s operating expenses. For example, in 2011, the NHTSA and the EPA adopted final Phase I rules that established the first-ever fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, including certain combination tractors’ model years 2014 to 2018 and, in October 2016, the EPA and NHTSA jointly published final Phase 2 standards for improving fuel efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from new on-road medium- and heavy-duty vehicles beginning for model year 2019 through model year 2027. In addition, for the first time, greenhouse gas emissions limits and fuel efficiency standards will be imposed on new trailers.

Compliance with environmental laws and regulations may also increase the price of the Company’s equipment and otherwise affect the economics of the Company’s industry by requiring changes in operating practices or by influencing the demand for, or the costs of providing, transportation services. For example, regulations issued by the EPA and various state agencies that require progressive reductions in exhaust emissions from diesel engines have resulted in higher prices for tractors and diesel engines and increased operating and maintenance costs. Also, in order to reduce exhaust emissions, some states and municipalities have begun to restrict the locations and amount of time where diesel-powered tractors, such as the Company’s, may idle. These restrictions could force the Company to alter its drivers’ behavior, purchase on-board power units that do not require the engine to idle or face a decrease in productivity. The Company is also subject to potentially stringent rulemaking related to sustainability practices, including conservation of resources by decreasing fuel consumption. This increased focus on sustainability practices may result in new regulations and/or customer requirements that could adversely impact the Company’s business.

If the Company has operational spills or accidents or if it is found to be in violation of, or otherwise liable under, environmental or worker health or safety laws or regulations, the Company could incur significant costs and liabilities. Those costs and liabilities may include the assessment of sanctions, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, the imposition of investigatory, remedial or corrective action obligations, the occurrence of delays in permitting or performance of projects, and the issuance of orders enjoining performance of some or all of the Company’s operations in a particular area. The occurrence of any one or more of these developments could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, competitive position and financial condition. Environmental and worker health and safety laws are becoming increasingly more stringent and there can be no assurances that compliance with, or liabilities under, existing or future environmental and worker health or safety laws or regulations will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or prospects. See “Item 1. Business - Regulation” for information regarding several proposed, pending and final regulations that could significantly affect the Company’s business and operations.

The Company is subject to the risks of litigation and governmental proceedings, which could adversely affect its business.

The Company is, and in the future may be, subject to legal and governmental proceedings and claims. The parties in such legal actions may seek amounts from the Company that may not be covered in whole or in part by insurance. Defending itself against such legal actions could result in significant costs and could require a substantial amount of time and effort by the Company’s management team. The Company cannot predict the outcome of litigation or governmental proceedings to which it is a party or whether it will be subject to future legal actions. As a result, the potential costs associated with legal actions against the Company could adversely affect its business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or prospects.

Insurance and claims expenses could significantly reduce the Company’s profitability.

The Company is exposed to claims related to cargo loss and damage, property damage, personal injury, workers’ compensation, group health and group dental. The Company has insurance coverage with third-party insurance carriers, but it assumes a significant portion of the risk associated with these claims due to its self-insured retention (SIR) and deductibles, which can make its insurance and claims expense higher or more volatile. Additionally, the Company faces the risks of increasing premiums and collateral requirements and the risk of carriers or underwriters leaving the transportation sector, which may materially affect its insurance costs or make insurance more difficult to find, as well as increase its collateral requirements. The Company could experience increases in its insurance premiums in the future if it decides to increase its coverage or if its claims experience deteriorates. In addition, the Company is subject to changing conditions and pricing in the insurance marketplace and the Company cannot assure you that the cost or availability of various types of insurance may not change dramatically in the future. If the Company’s insurance or claims expense increases, and the Company is unable to offset the increase with higher freight rates, its results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. The Company’s results of operations may also be materially and adversely affected if it experiences a claim in excess of its coverage limits, a claim for which coverage is not provided or a claim that is covered but its insurance company fails to perform.

The Company derives a material portion of its revenue from its major customers, the loss of one or more of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.

A material portion of the Company’s revenue is generated from its major customers, the loss of one or more of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business. In 2016 and 2015, the Company’s top ten customers, based on revenue, accounted for approximately 36% and 33%, respectively, of the Company’s revenue, and the Company’s largest customer accounted for approximately 8% of its revenue in both 2016 and 2015. For the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company’s top ten customers, based on revenue, accounted for approximately 31% of its revenue, and the Company’s largest customer accounted for approximately 6% of its revenue. A material portion of the Company’s freight is from customers in the building materials industry, and as such, the Company’s results may be more susceptible to trends in construction cycles, which are affected by numerous factors, including rates of infrastructure spending, real estate equity values, interest rates and general economic conditions, than carriers that do not have this concentration.

Economic conditions and capital markets may adversely affect the Company’s customers and their ability to remain solvent. The Company’s customers’ financial difficulties can negatively impact the Company’s results of operations and financial condition and the Company’s ability to comply with the covenants in its debt agreements, especially if they were to delay or default on payments to us. Generally, the Company does not have contractual relationships that guarantee any minimum volumes with customers, and the Company cannot assure you that customer relationships will continue as presently in effect. A reduction in, or termination of, the Company’s services by one or more of its major customers could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business and operating results.

Difficulty in obtaining goods and services from the Company’s vendors and suppliers could adversely affect the Company’s business.

The Company is dependent upon its vendors and suppliers, including equipment manufacturers, for tractors, trailers and other products and materials. The Company believes that it has positive vendor and supplier relationships and are generally able to obtain favorable pricing and other terms from such parties. If the Company fails to maintain amenable relationships with its vendors and suppliers, or if its vendors and suppliers are unable to provide the products and materials the Company needs or undergo financial hardship, the Company could experience difficulty in obtaining needed goods and services, and subsequently, its business and operations could be adversely affected.

The Company is subject to certain risks arising from doing business in Canada and Mexico.

The Company provides trucking services in Canada in addition to the United States, and the Company also transports freight into and out of Mexico by transferring the Company’s trailers to tractors operated by Mexican-based carriers with which the Company has contractual and long-standing relationships. As a result, the Company is subject to risks of doing business internationally, including fluctuations in foreign currencies, changes in the economic strength of Canada and Mexico, difficulties in enforcing contractual obligations and intellectual property rights, burdens of complying with a wide variety of international and United States export and import laws, and social, political, and economic instability. In addition, if the Company is unable to maintain its Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) status, it may have significant border delays, which could cause its operations in Canada to be less efficient than those of competitor truckload carriers also operating in Canada that obtain or continue to maintain C-TPAT status, and the Company may face a loss of certain business due to customer requirements to deal only with C-TPAT participating carriers. As a C-TPAT participant, the Company’s security measures are subject to periodic review by the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Company is required to perform an annual security threat assessment of its international operations. If CBP determines the Company has failed to comply with its minimum security criteria for highway carriers and other evolving security standards recommended by the agency, the Company may be unable to maintain its C-TPAT status. The Company also faces additional risks associated with its foreign operations, including restrictive trade policies and imposition of duties, taxes or government royalties imposed by the Canadian or Mexican government, to the extent not preempted by the terms of North American Free Trade Agreement.

Further, to the extent that the Company conducts operations outside of the United States, it is subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which generally prohibits United States companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining favorable treatment. If the Company is not in compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, other anti-corruption laws or other laws governing the conduct of business with government entities (including local laws), it may be subject to criminal and civil penalties and other remedial measures, which could harm its reputation and have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects. Any investigation of any actual or alleged violations of such laws could also harm the Company’s reputation or have a material adverse impact on its business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects.

The Company’s contractual agreements with its owner-operators expose it to risks that it does not face with its company drivers.

The Company relies, in part, upon independent contractor owner-operators to perform the services for which it contracts with customers. Approximately 20% of the Company’s freight was carried by independent contractor owner-operators in 2017. The Company’s reliance on independent contractor owner-operators creates numerous risks for the Company’s business. For example, the Company provides financing to certain of its independent contractor owner-operators purchasing tractors from the Company. If owner-operators operating the tractors the Company financed default under or otherwise terminate the financing arrangement and the Company is unable to find a replacement owner-operator, the Company may incur losses on amounts owed to it with respect to the tractor in addition to any losses it may incur as a result of idling the tractor. Further, if the Company is unable to provide such financing in the future, due to liquidity constraints or other restrictions, the Company may experience a shortage of owner-operators available to it.

If the Company’s independent contractor owner-operators fail to meet the Company’s contractual obligations or otherwise fail to perform in a manner consistent with the Company’s requirements, the Company may be required to utilize alternative service providers at potentially higher prices or with some degree of disruption of the services that the Company provides to customers. If the Company fails to deliver on time, if its contractual obligations are not otherwise met, or if the costs of its services increase, then the Company’s profitability and customer relationships could be harmed.

The financial condition and operating costs of the Company’s independent contractor owner-operators are affected by conditions and events that are beyond the Company’s control and may also be beyond their control. Adverse changes in the financial condition of the Company’s independent contractor owner-operators or increases in their equipment or operating costs could cause them to seek higher revenues or to cease their business relationships with the Company. The prices the Company charges its customers could be impacted by such issues, which may in turn limit pricing flexibility with customers, resulting in fewer customer contracts and decreasing the Company’s revenues.

Independent contractor owner-operators typically use tractors, trailers and other equipment bearing the Company’s trade names and trademarks. If one of the Company’s independent contractor owner-operators is subject to negative publicity, it could reflect on the Company and have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, brand and financial performance. Under certain laws, the Company could also be subject to allegations of liability for the activities of its independent contractor owner-operators.

Owner-operators are third-party service providers, as compared to company drivers who are employed by the Company. As independent business owners, the Company’s owner-operators may make business or personal decisions that conflict with the Company’s best interests. For example, if a load is unprofitable, route distance is too far from home or personal scheduling conflicts arise, an owner-operator may deny loads of freight from time to time. In these circumstances, the Company must be able to timely deliver the freight in order to maintain relationships with customers.

If the Company’s owner-operators are deemed by regulators or judicial process to be employees, the Company’s business and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Tax and other regulatory authorities have in the past sought to assert that owner-operators in the trucking industry are employees rather than independent contractors. Taxing and other regulatory authorities and courts apply a variety of standards in their determination of independent contractor status. If the Company’s owner-operators are determined to be its employees, it would incur additional exposure under federal and state tax, workers’ compensation, unemployment benefits, labor, employment, and tort laws, including for prior periods, as well as potential liability for employee benefits and tax withholdings.

The Company depends on third parties in its brokerage business, and service instability from these providers could increase the Company’s operating costs or reduce its ability to offer brokerage services, which could adversely affect its revenue, results of operations and customer relationships.

The Company’s brokerage business is dependent upon the services of third-party capacity providers, including other

truckload carriers. These third-party providers may seek other freight opportunities and may require increased compensation during times of improved freight demand or tight trucking capacity. The Company’s inability to maintain positive relationships with, and secure the services of, these third parties, or increases in the prices the Company must pay to secure such services, could have an adverse effect on its revenue, results of operations and customer relationships. The Company’s ability to secure the services of these third-party providers on competitive terms is subject to a number of risks, including the following, many of which are beyond the Company’s control:

•equipment shortages in the transportation industry, particularly among contracted truckload carriers and railroads;

•interruptions in service or stoppages in transportation as a result of labor disputes, seaport strikes, network congestion, weather-related issues, acts of God or acts of terrorism;

•changes in regulations impacting transportation;

•increases in operating expenses for carriers, such as fuel costs, insurance premiums and licensing expenses, that result in a reduction in available carriers; and

•changes in transportation rates.

The Company is dependent on computer and communications systems, and a systems failure or data breach could cause a significant disruption to its business.

The Company’s business depends on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of its computer and communications hardware systems and infrastructure. The Company currently maintains its computer systems at multiple locations, including several of its offices and terminals and third party data centers, along with computer equipment at each of its terminals. The Company’s operations and those of its technology and communications service providers are vulnerable to interruption by fire, earthquake, power loss, telecommunications failure, terrorist attacks, Internet failures, computer viruses, data breaches (including cyber-attacks or cyber intrusions over the Internet, malware and the like) and other events generally beyond its control. Although the Company believes that it has robust information security procedures and other safeguards in place, as cyber threats continue to evolve, it may be required to expend additional resources to continue to enhance its information security measures and investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities. A significant cyber incident, including system failure, security breach, disruption by malware or other damage, could interrupt or delay the Company’s operations, damage its reputation, cause a loss of customers, agents or third party capacity providers, expose the Company to a risk of loss or litigation, or cause the Company to incur significant time and expense to remedy such an event, any of which could have a material adverse impact on its results of operations and financial position.

The Company’s business may be harmed by terrorist attacks, future wars or anti-terrorism measures.

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, federal, state and municipal authorities have implemented and are implementing various security measures, including checkpoints and travel restrictions on large trucks and fingerprinting of drivers in connection with new hazardous materials endorsements on their licenses. Such existing measures and future measures may have significant costs associated with them which a motor carrier is forced to bear. Moreover, large trucks carrying large freight are potential terrorist targets, and the Company may be obligated to take measures, including possible capital expenditures intended to protect its trucks. In addition, the insurance premiums charged for some or all of the coverage currently maintained by the Company could continue to increase dramatically or such coverage could be unavailable in the future.

If the Company’s employees were to unionize, the Company’s operating costs could increase and its ability to compete could be impaired.

None of the Company’s employees are currently represented under a collective bargaining agreement; however, the Company always faces the risk that its employees will try to unionize, and if its owner-operators were ever re-classified

as employees, the magnitude of this risk would increase. Further, Congress or one or more states could approve legislation and/or the National Labor Relations Board (the NLRB) could render decisions or implement rule changes that could significantly affect the Company’s business and its relationship with employees, including actions that could substantially liberalize the procedures for union organization. For example, in December 2014, the NLRB implemented a final rule amending the agency’s representation-case proceedings that govern the procedures for union representation. Pursuant to this amendment, union elections can now be held within 10 to 21 days after the union requests a vote, which makes it easier for unions to successfully organize all employers, in all industries. In addition, the Company can offer no assurance that the Department of Labor will not adopt new regulations or interpret existing regulations in a manner that would favor the agenda of unions.

Any attempt to organize by the Company’s employees could result in increased legal and other associated costs and divert management attention, and if the Company entered into a collective bargaining agreement, the terms could negatively affect its costs, efficiency and ability to generate acceptable returns on the affected operations. In particular, the unionization of the Company’s employees could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects because:

•restrictive work rules could hamper the Company’s efforts to improve and sustain operating efficiency and could impair the Company’s service reputation and limit the Company’s ability to provide next-day services;

•a strike or work stoppage could negatively impact the Company’s profitability and could damage customer and employee relationships, and some shippers may limit their use of unionized trucking companies because of the threat of strikes and other work stoppages; and

•an election and bargaining process could divert management’s time and attention from the Company’s overall objectives and impose significant expenses.

Higher health care costs and labor costs could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

With the passage in 2010 of the United States Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the PPACA), the Company is required to provide health care benefits to all full-time employees that meet certain minimum requirements of coverage and affordability, or otherwise be subject to a payment per employee based on the affordability criteria set forth in the PPACA. Many of these requirements have been phased in over a period of time, with the majority of the most impactful provisions affecting the Company having begun in the second quarter of 2015. Additionally, some states and localities have passed state and local laws mandating the provision of certain levels of health benefits by some employers. The PPACA also requires individuals to obtain coverage or face individual penalties, so employees who are currently eligible but have elected not to participate in the Company’s health care plans may ultimately find it more advantageous to do so. It is also possible that by making changes or failing to make changes in the health care plans the Company offers it will have difficulty attracting and retaining employees, including drivers. Finally, implementing the requirements of health care reform is likely to impose additional administrative costs. The costs and other effects of these new healthcare requirements may significantly increase the Company’s health care coverage costs and could materially adversely affect its financial condition and results of operations.

The Company’s total assets include goodwill and indefinite-lived intangibles. If the Company determines that these items have become impaired in the future, net income could be materially and adversely affected.

As of December 31, 2017, the Company had recorded goodwill of $302.7 million and indefinite-lived intangible assets of $93.1 million, net of accumulated amortization. Goodwill represents the excess of cost over the fair market value of net assets acquired in business combinations. In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification, Topic 350, “Intangibles — Goodwill and Other,” the Company tests goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets for potential impairment annually and between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value below its carrying amount. Any excess in carrying value over the estimated fair value is charged to the Company’s results of operations. Further, the Company may never realize the full value of its

intangible assets. Any future determination requiring the write-off of a significant portion of intangible assets could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. If there are changes to the methods used to allocate carrying values, if management’s estimates of future operating results change, if there are changes in the identified reporting units or if there are changes to other significant assumptions, the estimated carrying values and the estimated fair value of the Company’s goodwill and long-lived assets could change significantly, and could result in future non-cash impairment charges, which could materially impact its results of operations and financial condition for any such future period.

The requirements of being a public company, including compliance with the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, may strain the Company’s resources, increase the Company’s costs and distract management.

As a public company, the Company must comply with new laws, regulations and requirements, certain corporate governance provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, related regulations of the SEC and the requirements of The NASDAQ Capital Market (NASDAQ), with which the Company was not required to comply as a private company. For example, the Company must:

•maintain a comprehensive compliance function;

•comply with rules promulgated by NASDAQ;

•prepare and distribute periodic public reports in compliance with obligations under the federal securities laws;

•establish new internal policies, such as those relating to insider trading; and

•involve and retain to a greater degree outside counsel and accountants in the above activities.

Complying with statutes, regulations and requirements relating to public companies occupies a significant amount of time of management and significantly increases the Company’s costs and expenses, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Furthermore, the Company’s management may not be able to implement programs and policies to comply with such statutes, regulations and requirements in an effective and timely manner.

A small number of the Company’s stockholders hold a substantial portion of its outstanding common stock.

Mr. Daseke and his affiliates beneficially own approximately 31% of the Company’s common stock as of February 1, 2018. In addition, Mr. Daseke serves as the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors. Consequently, Mr. Daseke and his affiliates are able to strongly influence all matters that require approval by the Company’s stockholders, including the election and removal of directors, changes to the Company’s organizational documents and approval of acquisition offers and other significant corporate transactions. In addition, other members of the Company’s board of directors and key management at the corporate level and at the Company’s operating companies own more than an additional 11% of the Company’s common stock as of February 1, 2018. This concentration of ownership will limit other stockholders’ ability to influence corporate matters, and as a result, actions may be taken that you may not view as beneficial and may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and might adversely affect the market price of the Company’s common stock to the extent investors perceive a disadvantage in owning stock of a company with a controlling stockholder.

The Company’s charter designates the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by its stockholders, which could limit its stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with the Company or its directors, officers, employees or agents.

The Company’s charter provides that, unless it consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, be the sole and exclusive forum

for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on the Company’s behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of the Company’s directors, officers, employees or agents to us or the Company’s stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL) or the Company’s charter or bylaws, or (iv) any action asserting a claim against the Company that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine, in each such case subject to such Court of Chancery having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants therein. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of the Company’s capital stock will be deemed to have notice of, and consented to, the provisions of the Company’s charter described in the preceding sentence. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with the Company or its directors, officers, employees or agents, which may discourage such lawsuits against the Company and such persons. Alternatively, if a court were to find these provisions of the Company’s charter inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, the Company may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect its business, financial condition or results of operations.

Some provisions of the Company’s governing documents and Delaware law, may inhibit a takeover, which could limit the price investors might be willing to pay in the future for its common stock.

Some provisions in the Company’s charter and bylaws may have the effect of delaying, discouraging, or preventing an acquisition of the Company or a merger in which the Company is not the surviving company and may otherwise prevent or slow changes in the Company’s board of directors and management. These provisions include:

•no cumulative voting in the election of directors, which limits the ability of minority stockholders to elect director candidates;

•the exclusive right of the Company’s board of directors to elect a director to fill a vacancy created by the expansion of the board of directors or the resignation, death, or removal of a director with or without cause by stockholders, which prevents stockholders from being able to fill vacancies on the Company’s board of directors;

•the ability of the Company’s board of directors to determine whether to issue shares of the Company’s preferred stock and to determine the price and other terms of those shares, including preferences and voting rights, without stockholder approval, which could be used to significantly dilute the ownership of a hostile acquirer;

•a prohibition on stockholder action by written consent, which forces stockholder action to be taken at an annual or special meeting of the Company’s stockholders;

•the requirement that a special meeting of stockholders may be called only by the chairman of the board of directors, the chief executive officer, or the board of directors, which may delay the ability of the Company’s stockholders to force consideration of a proposal or to take action, including the removal of directors;

•limiting the liability of, and providing indemnification to, the Company’s directors and officers;

•controlling the procedures for the conduct and scheduling of stockholder meetings;

•providing for a staggered board, in which the members of the board of directors are divided into three classes to serve for a period of three years from the date of their respective appointment or election; and

•advance notice procedures that stockholders must comply with in order to nominate candidates to the Company’s board of directors or to propose matters to be acted upon at a stockholders’ meeting, which may discourage or deter a potential acquirer from conducting a solicitation of proxies to elect the acquirer’s own slate of directors or otherwise attempting to obtain control of the Company.

These provisions, alone or together, could delay hostile takeovers and changes in control of the Company or changes in the Company’s board of directors and management.

As a Delaware corporation, the Company is also subject to provisions of Delaware law, including Section 203 of the DGCL, which prohibits business combinations between us and one or more significant stockholders unless specified conditions are met. These provisions could discourage an acquisition of the Company or other change in control transaction, whether or not it is desired or beneficial to the Company’s stockholders, and thereby negatively affect the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for the Company’s common stock. In addition, to the extent that these provisions discourage an acquisition of the Company or other change in control transaction, they could deprive stockholders of opportunities to realize takeover premiums for their shares of the Company’s common stock.

The Company does not currently pay dividends on its common stock.

The Company does not currently intend to pay cash dividends on its common stock. Any future dividend payments are within the absolute discretion of the Company’s board of directors and will depend on, among other things, its results of operations, working capital requirements, capital expenditure requirements, financial condition, level of indebtedness, contractual restrictions with respect to payment of dividends, business opportunities, anticipated cash needs, provisions of applicable law and other factors that the Company’s board of directors may deem relevant. Additionally, legal and contractual restrictions in agreements governing the Company’s Series A Preferred Stock and current indebtedness place certain restrictions on the Company’s ability to pay cash dividends. Consequently, a stockholder’s only opportunity to achieve a return on its investment in the Company will be if the stockholder sells its common stock at a price greater than the stockholder paid for it. 

An active trading market for the Company’s common stock may not be sustained.

Although the Company’s common stock is listed on NASDAQ, there has been a limited public market for its common stock and a more active trading market for its common stock may not develop or be sustained. An absence of an active trading market could adversely affect the Company’s stockholders’ ability to sell its common stock in short time periods. Also, as a result of the limited public market for the Company’s common stock, the Company’s share price may experience significant volatility and may not necessarily reflect the value of the Company’s expected performance. Furthermore, an inactive trading market may impair the Company’s ability to raise capital by selling shares and may impair its ability to acquire other companies by using the Company’s shares as consideration, which, in turn, could harm its business.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about the Company, its business, or its market, or if they change their recommendations regarding the Company’s securities adversely, the price and trading volume of the Company’s common stock could decline.

The trading market for the Company’s common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts may publish about the Company, its business, its market, or its competitors. If any of the analysts who cover the Company change their recommendation regarding the Company’s common stock adversely, or provide more favorable relative recommendations about the Company’s competitors, the price of the Company’s common stock would likely decline. If any of the analysts who cover the Company were to cease coverage of the Company or fail to regularly publish reports on it, the Company could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause the price or trading volume of the Company’s common stock to decline.

Pursuant to the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the JOBS Act), the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for so long as the Company is an “emerging growth company.”

Under the JOBS Act, the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 until the Company is no longer an “emerging growth company.” The Company could be an “emerging growth company” until the earlier of (i) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following July 28, 2020, the fifth anniversary of the IPO, (b) in which the Company has total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion or (c) in which the Company is deemed

to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of its common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of its prior second fiscal quarter, and (ii) the date on which the Company has issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also provides that an “emerging growth company” can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), for complying with new or revised accounting standards. An “emerging growth company” can therefore delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. The Company has chosen not to “opt out” of such extended transition period, which means that when a standard is issued or revised and it has different application dates for public or private companies, the Company, as an emerging growth company, can adopt the new or revised standard at the time private companies adopt the new or revised standard. This may make comparison of the Company’s financial statements with another public company that is neither an emerging growth company nor an emerging growth company which has opted out of using the extended transition period difficult or impossible because of the potential differences in accounting standards used.

Item 1B: Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

Daseke’s headquarters, which is leased, is located in a multi-tenant office building in Addison, Texas. The Company has 88 locations in North America, 22 of which are owned and 66 of which are leased. Daseke’s terminals may include customer service, sales/marketing, fuel and/or maintenance and warehousing facilities. Daseke believes that substantially all of its property and equipment is in good condition and its buildings and improvements have sufficient capacity to meet current needs. From time to time, Daseke invests in additional facilities to meet the needs of its business as it pursues additional growth.

The following tables provides information regarding terminals and certain other locations owned or leased by Daseke:

In addition to the locations listed above, Daseke owns parcels of vacant land and leases or owns several non-operating facilities in various locations around the United States. Daseke also maintains various drop yards throughout the United States and Canada.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

The Company is involved in litigation and claims primarily arising in the normal course of business, which include claims for personal injury or property damage incurred in the transportation of freight. The Company’s insurance program for liability, physical damage and cargo damage involves self-insurance with varying risk retention levels. Claims in excess of these risk retention levels are covered by insurance in amounts that management considers to be adequate. Based on its knowledge of the facts and, in certain cases, advice of outside counsel, the Company believes the resolution of claims and pending litigation, will not have a material adverse effect on it, taking into account existing reserves.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

None.

Part II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Daseke’s common stock and warrants trade on NASDAQ under the symbols “DKSE” and “DSKEW,” respectively. As of March 14, 2018, there were 94 stockholders of record of its common stock.

The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low sales for our common stock and our warrants, as reported on NASDAQ. On February 27, 2017, the Business Combination occurred, whereby a wholly owned subsidiary of Hennessy merged with and into Private Daseke, with Private Daseke surviving as a direct wholly owned subsidiary of Hennessy. Hennessy was a special purpose acquisition company with no operations.