Fisher on new stadium (5 Viewers)

[torchomatic]

Not sure if you're trying to be funny. "Some" like me apportion "some" of the blame on CCC, and rightly so IMHO. You make out those "some" blame CCC exclusively, which isn't true.

If that is the case why do some try to blame CCC for the state of our club?

 

---

[Astute]

Not sure if you're trying to be funny. "Some" like me apportion "some" of the blame on CCC, and rightly so IMHO. You make out those "some" blame CCC exclusively, which isn't true.

So the vast majority of us know that SISU fucked up big time, but the future of our club is in doubt because of what CCC have done? You will have to admit that SISU didn't try to do anything for the best of our football club. They were not bothered what happened to it or us. And part of this was making everything bad between themselves and CCC. They didn't want to talk with CCC. They didn't want to do a deal with CCC. They didn't want to take over the mortgage but they did want to take over the arena. And this is why we have all suffered.

CCC could and should have taken a different route. But only the blind can't see why they took the route they did.

 

[Samo]

So the vast majority of us know that SISU fucked up big time, but the future of our club is in doubt because of what CCC have done? You will have to admit that SISU didn't try to do anything for the best of our football club. They were not bothered what happened to it or us. And part of this was making everything bad between themselves and CCC. They didn't want to talk with CCC. They didn't want to do a deal with CCC. They didn't want to take over the mortgage but they did want to take over the arena. And this is why we have all suffered.

CCC could and should have taken a different route. But only the blind can't see why they took the route they did.

ALL of us know SISU fucked up, some of us blame CCC also... simple really.

 

[chiefdave]

So the vast majority of us know that SISU fucked up big time, but the future of our club is in doubt because of what CCC have done?

SISU have been terrible owners to put it mildly but with a bit of luck they won't be our owners forever. What CCC have done in selling the stadium to Wasps has caused a huge, possibly insurmountable, problem for the next 250 years.

Pretty much the only attraction to potential buyers of the club was the possibility of uniting the club and the stadium, that's gone now. So any new owner is looking at a club losing a fortune who either needs to have their losses covered every year or pay out to build a new stadium which CCC have already said won't be possible to build in the city.

 

[covmark]

SISU have been terrible owners to put it mildly but with a bit of luck they won't be our ones forever. What CCC have done in selling the stadium to Wasps has caused a huge, possibly insurmountable, problem for the next 250 years.

Pretty much the only attraction to potential buyers of the club was the possibility of uniting the club and the stadium, that's gone now. So any new owner is looking at a club losing a fortune who either needs to have their losses covered every year or pay out to build a new stadium which CCC have already said won't be possible to build in the city.

This is the crux of it for me.
Sisu have done the damage, but the council have put the final nail in the coffin.

 

[torchomatic]

yes the future of our club IS in doubt not just because of Sisu but because of the disastrous decision to give Wasps a 250 lease. I would think even the most ardent council supporters like yourself could acknowledge that. Seems not.

Anyway, I'm here awaiting kick off so onto more important things.

So the vast majority of us know that SISU fucked up big time, but the future of our club is in doubt because of what CCC have done? You will have to admit that SISU didn't try to do anything for the best of our football club. They were not bothered what happened to it or us. And part of this was making everything bad between themselves and CCC. They didn't want to talk with CCC. They didn't want to do a deal with CCC. They didn't want to take over the mortgage but they did want to take over the arena. And this is why we have all suffered.

CCC could and should have taken a different route. But only the blind can't see why they took the route they did.

 

[Astute]

yes the future of our club IS in doubt not just because of Sisu but because of the disastrous decision to give Wasps a 250 lease. I would think even the most ardent council supporters like yourself could acknowledge that. Seems not.

Anyway, I'm here awaiting kick off so onto more important things.

If I am a CCC supporter that would make you a SISU supporter. And we know that isn't true. But hey it is good to try to put someone on the back foot that has a different or fuller view.

 

[duffer]

You still didn't answer why no bid was made for the councils half.

Yes I did, unless you've got a problem with your reading comprehension.

No bid was invited for the Council's 50%. The council said that they wanted to build trust before talking about ownership, and then did a secret deal with Wasps. What part of that are you struggling to understand?

 

[Astute]

SISU have been terrible owners to put it mildly but with a bit of luck they won't be our owners forever. What CCC have done in selling the stadium to Wasps has caused a huge, possibly insurmountable, problem for the next 250 years.

Pretty much the only attraction to potential buyers of the club was the possibility of uniting the club and the stadium, that's gone now. So any new owner is looking at a club losing a fortune who either needs to have their losses covered every year or pay out to build a new stadium which CCC have already said won't be possible to build in the city.

It makes me laugh when posters on here try to make out I have said differently. What you have put here is exactly the same as my view and what I have said on here countless times. The only difference between us is that I say that I can see why CCC did it. Some ignore this fact.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Yes I did, unless you've got a problem with your reading comprehension.

No bid was invited for the Council's 50%. The council said that they wanted to build trust before talking about ownership, and then did a secret deal with Wasps. What part of that are you struggling to understand?

The part I struggle to understand is its relevance.

You've told me what the council wanted, you haven't told me what the club (that thing that brings us all on here) wanted.

Why didn't the club, at any point in the last 12 years, present a bid for the council's share in ACL?

 

[shmmeee]

ALL of us know SISU fucked up, some of us blame CCC also... simple really.

Be fair. "Some" of us continually derail threads by injecting "what about the council?" at random and inappropriate times. So much so that the impression is you can't say anywhere, in any topic about the impact Sisu's decisions have had without being accused of being a council fanboy.

Then hide behind the "hey, are you saying it's all Sisu" defence.

That's what people have a problem with, don't be intellectually dishonest and claim otherwise.

 

[shmmeee]

How is "We will have to move on soon" .... "We really need to move on by this date." .... "OK, we're moving on now" a secret deal?

The club were told by all corners what would happen if they went down this route. They did. It did. Once Sisu stated repeatedly that they didn't want to return and refused several offers and attempts to bring them back, you can't blame anyone else. They also failed to actually listen to what CCC wanted from the Ricoh and therefore completely failed to present a comparable offer (one that included the Higgs and the community). They had chance after chance after chance to reconcile or at least put a bid together, they chose not to. And now we're supposed to feel sorry because it's the club we love? Sorry. No.

You want to blame someone for Wasps being here? You want to blame someone for us not owning a share of the Ricoh? You want to blame someone for CCC not feeling obliged to help out the club? Blame the people who had the genius idea to try and get out of the lease first and worry about the rest later.

 

[covmark]

Be fair. "Some" of us continually derail threads by injecting "what about the council?" at random and inappropriate times. So much so that the impression is you can't say anywhere, in any topic about the impact Sisu's decisions have had without being accused of being a council fanboy.

Then hide behind the "hey, are you saying it's all Sisu" defence.

That's what people have a problem with, don't be intellectually dishonest and claim otherwise.

Works both ways though shmmeee. Every time the council or anyone other than sisu is mentioned, you have skybluetony telling people to stop distracting from sisu's failings. Sisu lover, usual suspects etc has been thrown around far more than council fanboy tbf.

It's all rather pathetic though if we're honest.

 

[ccfc92]

Be fair. "Some" of us continually derail threads by injecting "what about the council?" at random and inappropriate times. So much so that the impression is you can't say anywhere, in any topic about the impact Sisu's decisions have had without being accused of being a council fanboy.

Then hide behind the "hey, are you saying it's all Sisu" defence.

That's what people have a problem with, don't be intellectually dishonest and claim otherwise.

TBF, Torch's reply to Astute : "I would think even the most ardent council supporters like yourself could acknowledge that. Seems not. " sums this up perfectly.


The majority of sensible fans realise that the blame lies with all parties for where we are, but not an equal portion with the 3 parties: Former owners, SISU and CCC.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Be fair. "Some" of us continually derail threads by injecting "what about the council?" at random and inappropriate times. So much so that the impression is you can't say anywhere, in any topic about the impact Sisu's decisions have had without being accused of being a council fanboy.

Then hide behind the "hey, are you saying it's all Sisu" defence.

That's what people have a problem with, don't be intellectually dishonest and claim otherwise.

I think some have an issue of understanding responsibility.

CCFC is 100% the responsibility of its directors & owners. Whilst others may influence it, it is the responsibility of its directors to adapt the club to such influences to ensure CCFC's prosperity.

Likewise, had Sisu's INFLUENCE over ACL caused ACL to go bust, that would have been due to the board and owners of ACL not adapting to Sisu's influence.

Yes high rent didn't help the club, but the rent problem was CCFC's responsibility to solve.

 

[Grendel]

Be fair. "Some" of us continually derail threads by injecting "what about the council?" at random and inappropriate times. So much so that the impression is you can't say anywhere, in any topic about the impact Sisu's decisions have had without being accused of being a council fanboy.

Then hide behind the "hey, are you saying it's all Sisu" defence.

That's what people have a problem with, don't be intellectually dishonest and claim otherwise.

Most councils value the existence of local sports clubs and sporting heritage.

This council is unique in its lack of interest and the fact is if we had other council leaders similar to those in Nottingham Swansea Eto we would not have even heard of the preferred bidder for ccFC - sisu

So yes some of us think they are clueless incompetent and shit. Sorry.

 

[ccfc92]

Most councils value the existence of local sports clubs and sporting heritage.

This council is unique in its lack of interest and the fact is if we had other council leaders similar to those in Nottingham Swansea Eto we would not have even heard of the preferred bidder for ccFC - sisu

So yes some of us think they are clueless incompetent and shit. Sorry.

Do you think CCC believed SISU/CCFC wouldn't be at the Ricoh for long though? With all the Sixfields, New stadium, Court cases etc...?

Therefore looked for alternative tenants in case they were left with an empty stadium? And that's why they sold to Wasps?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

SISU have been terrible owners to put it mildly but with a bit of luck they won't be our owners forever. What CCC have done in selling the stadium to Wasps has caused a huge, possibly insurmountable, problem for the next 250 years.

Pretty much the only attraction to potential buyers of the club was the possibility of uniting the club and the stadium, that's gone now. So any new owner is looking at a club losing a fortune who either needs to have their losses covered every year or pay out to build a new stadium which CCC have already said won't be possible to build in the city.

Here's my problem with the logic here. If you believe the club is now stricken for 250 years; you can't believe Fisher's claims about the new stadium. You can't believe what he said about being disinterested n The Ricoh, and that the club had moved on. Sandra Garlick's supporters gathering is what? A farce?

If you believe any of these, you can do nothing than blame the vast percentage of blame at the individual, or entity that decided the negotiate in this ridiculous way. In fact, now almost three years after the rent strike began in search of an 'Average League One rent'; what actually do SISU want?

Faced with that; I can't see how you can harshly judge a council - faced with a white elephant - entering talks under the auspices of commercial confidentiality with a view to finding another owner.

And if you then expect them to conclude those talks, then step outside the terms of the confidentiality agreement and jeopardise the deal to offer the agreed terms to a party that's behaved as above - well, I'm sorry, that's astonishing

 

[SkyblueBazza]

I think some have an issue of understanding responsibility.

CCFC is 100% the responsibility of its directors & owners. Whilst others may influence it, it is the responsibility of its directors to adapt the club to such influences to ensure CCFC's prosperity.

Likewise, had Sisu's INFLUENCE over ACL caused ACL to go bust, that would have been due to the board and owners of ACL not adapting to Sisu's influence.

Yes high rent didn't help the club, but the rent problem was CCFC's responsibility to solve.

Well said that man - more & better reason than the "Voice of Reason" her/himself

PUSB

 

[martcov]

Works both ways though shmmeee. Every time the council or anyone other than sisu is mentioned, you have skybluetony telling people to stop distracting from sisu's failings. Sisu lover, usual suspects etc has been thrown around far more than council fanboy tbf.

It's all rather pathetic though if we're honest.

the trend - for some on here - is to keep mentioning alleged failings of CCC any time SISU is on the ropes in a discussion. I would have thought the council would be mentioned less as they are no longer involved. SISU are still in control and deserve being criticised on a number of points.

 

[chiefdave]

Here's my problem with the logic here. If you believe the club is now stricken for 250 years; you can't believe Fisher's claims about the new stadium. You can't believe what he said about being disinterested n The Ricoh, and that the club had moved on. Sandra Garlick's supporters gathering is what? A farce?

You have totally missed the point. Even if you assume I don't believe all those things they are all things SISU have done. The point is SISU won't be here forever and, no matter if anyone believes them or not, the club now has a major problem no matter who takes over. Remember CCC repeatedly insisted ACL were performing well without the club, therefore no reason at all they couldn't retain ownership until such a time as SISU leave and new owners takeover who they are happy to negotiate with.

Faced with that; I can't see how you can harshly judge a council - faced with a white elephant - entering talks under the auspices of commercial confidentiality with a view to finding another owner.

I can certainly judge the council, especially as they have repeatedly misled (to use a term that is very kind to them) the public and falsely stated the position. If CCC had been open and honest who knows where we would be now, something we will never know.

And if you then expect them to conclude those talks, then step outside the terms of the confidentiality agreement and jeopardise the deal to offer the agreed terms to a party that's behaved as above - well, I'm sorry, that's astonishing

I expect an open and honest sales process with all parties who would be impacted being consulted, including CCFC, CRFC and the people of Coventry. If there was a need to sell ACL it should have been put on the market and all parties given the opportunity to bid on the same terms. Had that happened I suspect there would have been huge pressure on SISU to bid. As an absolute minimum I expect the football club to be offered the same deal as a rugby club from nearly 100 miles away.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

You have totally missed the point. Even if you assume I don't believe all those things they are all things SISU have done. The point is SISU won't be here forever and, no matter if anyone believes them or not, the club now has a major problem no matter who takes over. Remember CCC repeatedly insisted ACL were performing well without the club, therefore no reason at all they couldn't retain ownership until such a time as SISU leave and new owners takeover who they are happy to negotiate with.



I can certainly judge the council, especially as they have repeatedly misled (to use a term that is very kind to them) the public and falsely stated the position. If CCC had been open and honest who knows where we would be now, something we will never know.



I expect an open and honest sales process with all parties who would be impacted being consulted, including CCFC, CRFC and the people of Coventry. If there was a need to sell ACL it should have been put on the market and all parties given the opportunity to bid on the same terms. Had that happened I suspect there would have been huge pressure on SISU to bid. As an absolute minimum I expect the football club to be offered the same deal as a rugby club from nearly 100 miles away.

No; you're missing the point. You're concentrating on the legacy post-SISU. What I was discussing, and what you have failed to address is SISU's duplicity in negotiation, which is front, middle and central in the mess the club is now left with. Irrespective of owners

 

[chiefdave]

No; you're missing the point. You're concentrating on the legacy post-SISU. What I was discussing, and what you have failed to address is SISU's duplicity in negotiation, which is front, middle and central in the mess the club is now left with. Irrespective of owners

Because I am very concerned about what will happen post SISU. You seem happy that the council have left the club in a position it will most likely never recover from as it puts one over on SISU.

No one is saying SISU have behaved well but you can't say the council have been much better. Look at all the councils comments about us playing in Northampton, look at their statements about rebuild trust when we came back, all the time while they were negotiating to bring Wasps in.

There is absolutely no reason an open an honest sale of ACL could not have taken place if CCC needed to sell. Instead they kept publicly stating there was no need to sell and ACL were doing brilliantly while secretly negotiating with Wasps. That is completely unforgiveable.

SISU have done a lot of damage to this club but when people look back in many years time I would be surprised if CCC weren't seen to be the ones who struck the most damaging blow.

 

[martcov]

You have totally missed the point. Even if you assume I don't believe all those things they are all things SISU have done. The point is SISU won't be here forever and, no matter if anyone believes them or not, the club now has a major problem no matter who takes over. Remember CCC repeatedly insisted ACL were performing well without the club, therefore no reason at all they couldn't retain ownership until such a time as SISU leave and new owners takeover who they are happy to negotiate with.



I can certainly judge the council, especially as they have repeatedly misled (to use a term that is very kind to them) the public and falsely stated the position. If CCC had been open and honest who knows where we would be now, something we will never know.



I expect an open and honest sales process with all parties who would be impacted being consulted, including CCFC, CRFC and the people of Coventry. If there was a need to sell ACL it should have been put on the market and all parties given the opportunity to bid on the same terms. Had that happened I suspect there would have been huge pressure on SISU to bid. As an absolute minimum I expect the football club to be offered the same deal as a rugby club from nearly 100 miles away.

Was not the term "the door is open" used in the anticipation of an offer from SISU? Then it became more we must move on..... Still no serious offer with a business plan from SISU. Instead, reminders from TF that he is building a stadium and has moved on... TF still insists he wouldn't have taken the same offer as Wasps. It was always on the market at the right price and preferably to CCFC. No offer was received from SISU and so when an offer came it was taken. More fool SISU.

 

[covmark]

Because I am very concerned about what will happen post SISU. You seem happy that the council have left the club in a position it will most likely never recover from as it puts one over on SISU.

No one is saying SISU have behaved well but you can't say the council have been much better. Look at all the councils comments about us playing in Northampton, look at their statements about rebuild trust when we came back, all the time while they were negotiating to bring Wasps in.

There is absolutely no reason an open an honest sale of ACL could not have taken place if CCC needed to sell. Instead they kept publicly stating there was no need to sell and ACL were doing brilliantly while secretly negotiating with Wasps. That is completely unforgiveable.

SISU have done a lot of damage to this club but when people look back in many years time I would be surprised if CCC weren't seen to be the ones who struck the most damaging blow.

Just to add, we also had the council saying that bridges had to be built before a sale to CCFC could happen. All the while they were dealing with Wasps. This is also unforgiveable.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Indeed but we don't have a benefactor to build a new ground and to all intents and purposes write off the cost of it. If SISU do actually build a new ground they will want a return on that investment.

...thereby proving the debate is all on SISU's terms.

 

[ccfc92]

Was not the term "the door is open" used in the anticipation of an offer from SISU? Then it became more we must move on..... Still no serious offer with a business plan from SISU. Instead, reminders from TF that he is building a stadium and has moved on... TF still insists he wouldn't have taken the same offer as Wasps. It was always on the market at the right price and preferably to CCFC. No offer was received from SISU and so when an offer came it was taken. More fool SISU.

Something that the likes of Torch etc seem to forget.

The club had the chance to buy the Ricoh (Sisu i'm not so sure) but they never publicly voiced interest in the Ricoh. Always said they'd be building a new stadium, even when they announced the return.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Because I am very concerned about what will happen post SISU. You seem happy that the council have left the club in a position it will most likely never recover from as it puts one over on SISU.

No one is saying SISU have behaved well but you can't say the council have been much better. Look at all the councils comments about us playing in Northampton, look at their statements about rebuild trust when we came back, all the time while they were negotiating to bring Wasps in.

There is absolutely no reason an open an honest sale of ACL could not have taken place if CCC needed to sell. Instead they kept publicly stating there was no need to sell and ACL were doing brilliantly while secretly negotiating with Wasps. That is completely unforgiveable.

SISU have done a lot of damage to this club but when people look back in many years time I would be surprised if CCC weren't seen to be the ones who struck the most damaging blow.

No. I'm not happy at all. I just saw this coming. I've posted on here a million and one times that SISU were using the football club as a chip on a game of roulette - and what happens if our number doesn't come up? Ad it backfired, just as I predicted. That doesn't make me happy one iota.

You can't, or won't answer my question about the proposed stadium, and analyse how this would have shaped negotiations. And more specifically, how you negotiate with someone who's telling you they have other plans and don't want to buy.

And everything CCC did was reactive to SISU's agenda. To suggest they were main protagonists is ludicrous

 

[Deleted member 5849]

That's how councils work offcourse, they're a dictatorship. No wait, it's the other one. Democracy.

Oh to be so naive.

 

[chiefdave]

You can't, or won't answer my question about the proposed stadium, and analyse how this would have shaped negotiations. And more specifically, how you negotiate with someone who's telling you they have other plans and don't want to buy

What do you want to know? Any proposed new stadium wouldn't have impacted negotiations in the slightest. I would have thought anyone with a modicum of common sense would have worked out that if SISU had become owners of ACL / Ricoh any plays for a new stadium, if they even exist, would be scrapped.

I haven't said CCC should have negotiated with SISU. I have said one of two things should have happened. Either, and this I think was the best option, ACL gets put on the market and any interested party gets a chance to bid or, as an absolute minimum, the club gets the chance to match any agreed sale.

You could easily flip your argument and ask how SISU could negotiate with CCC when CCC are to be charitable, being less than honest about the performance of ACL. Think of what was being discussed prior to the sale to Wasps. SISU were being expected to bid in the region of £10m for Higgs share, anything less was ripping off a charity, and a similar amount for CCC's share plus clearing the loan as they couldn't be trusted to repay it. You know as well as I do that if SISU had bid £5m and asked for a 250 year lease in return they would have been torn apart on this forum and elsewhere.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

And everything CCC did was reactive to SISU's agenda. To suggest they were main protagonists is ludicrous

One could of course suggest much of SISU has been reactive to CCC intransigence.

tbh, I'm not sure what raking over the past in terms of blame helps. We are where we are.

There are, however, many ways out of where we are... if only we start actually trying some of them!

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

What do you want to know? Any proposed new stadium wouldn't have impacted negotiations in the slightest. I would have thought anyone with a modicum of common sense would have worked out that if SISU had become owners of ACL / Ricoh any plays for a new stadium, if they even exist, would be scrapped.

I haven't said CCC should have negotiated with SISU. I have said one of two things should have happened. Either, and this I think was the best option, ACL gets put on the market and any interested party gets a chance to bid or, as an absolute minimum, the club gets the chance to match any agreed sale.

You could easily flip your argument and ask how SISU could negotiate with CCC when CCC are to be charitable, being less than honest about the performance of ACL. Think of what was being discussed prior to the sale to Wasps. SISU were being expected to bid in the region of £10m for Higgs share, anything less was ripping off a charity, and a similar amount for CCC's share plus clearing the loan as they couldn't be trusted to repay it. You know as well as I do that if SISU had bid £5m and asked for a 250 year lease in return they would have been torn apart on this forum and elsewhere.

Your opening gambit is the most preposterous statement I've read in some time. A party who states 'we're not interested in your stadium as we're building anew' - that ambition wouldn't impact the negotiation to buy the stadium they're claiming they're disinterested in?!? What sort of logic is that?

 

[martcov]

What do you want to know? Any proposed new stadium wouldn't have impacted negotiations in the slightest. I would have thought anyone with a modicum of common sense would have worked out that if SISU had become owners of ACL / Ricoh any plays for a new stadium, if they even exist, would be scrapped.

I haven't said CCC should have negotiated with SISU. I have said one of two things should have happened. Either, and this I think was the best option, ACL gets put on the market and any interested party gets a chance to bid or, as an absolute minimum, the club gets the chance to match any agreed sale.

You could easily flip your argument and ask how SISU could negotiate with CCC when CCC are to be charitable, being less than honest about the performance of ACL. Think of what was being discussed prior to the sale to Wasps. SISU were being expected to bid in the region of £10m for Higgs share, anything less was ripping off a charity, and a similar amount for CCC's share plus clearing the loan as they couldn't be trusted to repay it. You know as well as I do that if SISU had bid £5m and asked for a 250 year lease in return they would have been torn apart on this forum and elsewhere.

The Club were not interested in the deal Wasps got and made no serious offer with a business plan to CCC prior to Wasps. They would not have got ripped apart if CCC had said ok, let's negotiate from here. They would have been praised for at least making an offer. That is however pure conjecture on both our parts. Fact is, they didn't make an offer and have moved on.

 

[Samo]

One could of course suggest much of SISU has been reactive to CCC intransigence.

tbh, I'm not sure what raking over the past in terms of blame helps. We are where we are.

There are, however, many ways out of where we are... if only we start actually trying some of them!

Well it seems it's better than watching the game.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Your opening gambit is the most preposterous statement I've read in some time. A party who states 'we're not interested in your stadium as we're building anew' - that ambition wouldn't impact the negotiation to buy the stadium they're claiming they're disinterested in?!? What sort of logic is that?

Of course you're right, but that's kind of the point.

The RIcoh rent was high because there was a monopoly in stadium supply for Coventry City Football club.

Likewise, SISU have banked on there being a monopoly of club supply for a stadium in Coventry.

Both 'sides'of this have played the negotiating hands using basic A level Economics But in that instance, the 'new stadium' only hardened from Plan B to Plan A when negotiations were at an end, according to certain parties involved.

Not unreasonable to see it as a negotiating tool, however. Yep, of course it'd have an effect on the value and yep... it did indeed have an effecton the value.

Nobody, afte all, thought the stadium management company worth buying on the terms offered.