Report comment

Whoever designed the Camel was perhaps also responsible for the Co-Op offer for purchasing NISA. But then you get that when a company is run by committees! It’s too complex and appears to hedge its bet on future returns rather than buying the company outright with lower valuation. The other problem the Co-op has is that they are buying a membership’s turnover which may or may not stay loyal with the company and subsequently affect future earnings for their investment. Bearing in mind that £137m & about £100m of acquired debt which the shareholders are directly & indirectly responsible for in my opinion sounds like a fair deal to me as an outsider. You can’t have your cake & eat it comes to mind. I agree with the suggestion that having practically no asset value leads me to think that the current offer is fair. If the NISA membership can’t guarantee future earnings to the Co-op by staying loyal than I can’t see why the Co-op wants to pour money into a business that may struggle with all the challenges of consolidation currently facing our sector.
I am sure you agree that you are only worth what the market is prepared to pay you at any given time. There is no bidding war going on here, just one and only credible buyer so far? In this case you only have one ace up your sleeve! I personally as a retailer wants NISA to succeed but they will regret it if they reject this offer.

A revised offer may or may not come? Then what? I would rather bet my livelihood on the future partnership with the Co-op with better supply chain than risk all on the current faux pas which may linger on for many months to come, wasting time on the future direction of the company. I don’t believe that NISA management are painting an unfair picture for personal gain. Members quite frankly should instead concentrate on their future rather than worry about what the others are getting out it. Large chunks of turnover has gone which will no doubt make grim reading and will of course be reflected in next year’s accounts valuing the company even less.

Objectivity & pragmatism is more important here than conflating incidental facts about management’s intentions with conspiracy!!

Arjan Mehr Londis Bracknell