₦airaland Forum

eyoniggar:
You be madshytaz?

Them go hear wen for Binibu this saturday.
Una never know this kind Barca team self.

d kind we hear for nou camp? upon all ur gragra, na only 1-0.
We go show una pepper for saturday.

bgees:
World class or not. how we dey battle Benfica ? can we repeat what Barcelona did to A40 or what they will do to biina ??

Even when the played against our newly assembled team at the Nou camp, they could only manage 1-0.
We go show dem pepper for Saturday. Just praying that MP keeps his head and not try the nonsense he did against lyon.

Benfica go kill una

nellaluv:
Whats d meaning of omo ale

Lit Trans: Lover/bf/gf's child
Meaning: Bastrd, Sonofa . . . .

dayokanu:
JOSE MOURINHO!!!. Sheva 30milla says it all

Mourinho was against the transfer and was the beginning of the end of his tenure at Chelsea.

bgees:
Add Pepe Reina to the list of world class. Mascherano is the best all-out defensive midfielder in world. you dont have to believe. I can see Dayokanu is giving u some education. God!! u gunners can never change.

Yes macherano too (forgot about him) but not Reina.

Beaf:
I would have loved Chris Ogiemwinyi as petroleum minister.
The choice of Aganga as finance minister is most welcome. Now that there's a high flier manning the show, Sanusi's rusty butt is bound to get kicked.

and if it doesnt?

BTW no one is complaining that both ministers for finance are from the southwest, but if they were from the north, una go dey shout federal character

Its a case of Rafa and lack of money dont mix. The guy bought so many failed imports, and only Torres can be considered world class. If you want to keep Rafa, he will need money to deliver.

LT move to Jets is dubious IMO. A quality WR was what I expected.

Interesting points raised by the rep

The former minister, Mukhtar, was qualified, but one cannot say that he has been active (talk less of judging his competence). Babalola seem to have been more vocal.

Rafa simply neeeds a huge transfer kitty to deliver. He is not the type to blend in unproven players. Even after selling Alonso, the money he got should have been put to better use. All the Ngog, Insua, etc arent just good enough. A team that plays a lone striker and they dont have a credible backup.

Liverpool have two alternatives to move forward
1. Fire Rafa and get a manager that can work with a limited budget (like O'neil). If a big enough offer comes, sell Gerard.
2. Some rich smuck buys out Hicks and Gillete.

The former is the more plausible solution. A season outside the champions league will really dent liverpool's finances.

The sooner Wenger sells Cesc and moves Nasri to AM, the better for Arsenal. Like Gerard, Cesc is a specialist and  for all his passing skills, cannot run at defenders or win the ball convincingly. If Barca are silly enough to cough out anything north of $30m for him, Wenger should jump at it and use the money to buy 2-3 quality players who are not glass footed.
Cesc is the second coming of Guti, and is just another overrated and overpriced player. He tries to play like Xavi but lacks the defensive abilities of the latter.

bawomolo:
kai and i thought drew brees and the saints would shut you and ricky generator up.  yall don't give up easily eh 
dwayne wade is signing this summer, it's a do or die affair 

Shut wetin?colts won 14 games and got to the superbowl. where were the bears and their Jay 'da Diva of INTs' Cutler? 
Wade is going nowhere. Instead either Amare or Bosch is joining him this summer. He will be bringing the heat in south florida till his retirement.
Go checkout my boys 8 game winning streak. We headingf into the playoff in good form, while your bullshiits are heading to lake michigan for some overdue fishing

edoyad:
biina Tell me where in the world a military system of govt has a president as it's head ? Military system of govt has a dictator at the helm just like any other form of undemocratic govt

During IBBs tenure, we had elected officers (governors, LG chairmen, etc) and a legislature at both the federal and state levels. It was far from a military government.

A dictator is defined by his style of government (and not his origins) e.g. Mugabe is a civilian dictator. Being undemocratic has more to do with what you do when you are in office and less with how you got into office.
Rawlings got into office through undemocratic means but his regime was seen as being democratic and key in turning around Ghana's fortunes.
Elections and democracy are two different things, and in Africa, are usually uncorrelated.

edoyad:
A president is an elected head of state, in reference to countries cos american colleges, companies and some civic organisations also use that term. A military man or unelected head of state cannot be president unless he/she got into power constitutionally eg. Jonathan.
Nigeria's presidents would be: Zik, Shaggy, Shonekan(?), Shege, UMya and Goodie.

A president is defined by the system of governance and not the process of ascension. The UK does not have a president even though they have elected officers.
Shonekan was the head of an interim government.

@OP
A president is the head of a the executive arm in a presidential system of government.
Azikiwe was only a ceremonious president and had minimal executive powers compared to the PM, as the first republic was based on a parliamentary system.
IBB was Nigeria's first and only military president.

naijaking1:
What is the conjecture here? I'm sure you were not living on planet earth when a senator challanged and querried the appointment of a CBN governor from Kano when the ministers of finance, national planning, and economic adviser in addition to the president are all from from Katsina/Kano/Kaduna. The senator wondered whatever happened to federal character.
Lose of confidence in our financial system did not just start with this appointment, but it contiuned with the guys behaviors as a CBN governor. Almost nobody trusts the fin. minister---alh. whatever to supervise the rogue activities Sanusi.
Anyway, thanks for not asking me for evidence to show that Sanusi is really from Kano

The conjecture is that you made claims that Sanusi fired some directors because they disagreed with him.
- you failed to provide any evidence that the directors did disagree with Sanusi (all you referenced was a misguided article with no credible sources, which didn't even know that they were non-executive directors and not deputy governors)
- you failed to show that the directors were actually fired by sanusi, but that their tenures were simply not renewed. You subsequently claimed that it was sanusi that manipulated this.
- You failed to provide any evidence of Sanusi manipulating the presidency or senate.

Your recent claim (without evidence) was that Sanusi "basically worked his personal agenda into the the financial policies of this nation" simply because he is from Kano and 'K3 buddy' with minister of finance, national planning, or the the president. You provided no substantiated evidence (and please dont make reference to the nonsense from RP) that he is implementing a personal agenda nor that his actions are supported only by the other 3 personalities. Hopefully we will have a new finance minister who is not from the north and we will see if you soon condemn that one too if he supports Sanusi's actions

Note: prime candidate for FM, Aganaga has already hinted at his approval of Sanusi's actions saying
On the capital market crisis, he stated, “When you talk about issues about the capital market, most of it are homemade issues and that is the fact that we were too fast, but I think some of my colleagues are already taking actions to correct that and we need to focus on both the banking and capital market reforms.”

Now you are jumping to the question of federal character which has nothing to do with the topic at hand, or Sanusi's overall competence or did Sanusi also 'fire' the senator that raised the issue of national character?

BTW you have provided no evidence that Sanusi is indeed from Kano or that he is a prince

@superbrain
Congrats on the admit.
If you are into pet, I think conocophilips has some research facilities somewere around there, and might worth looking into for job or research funding opportunities.

bawomolo:
happy easter people.

maverick fans, how market 

e be like say d chicago bullshiit go need fishing trawler dis season
dem still dey wait for d-wade to come and save dem, haha - I laugh in ashanti!

illusion2:
@bgees,pls forget about 4th place,lets concentrate on winning the Europa cup,pray we don't lose Torres & Steve G in the summer & hope Hicks & Gillet finally bow out this year

You are a realist

paddy_lo:
True however oil is at $85 but the budget is priced at $67, so excess crude should begin to fill up for the rest of the yr
as long as there is no more sharing

Not just sharing but that our revenue stays above the projected $67 X 2.3 billion. A fall in price or production can result in reduced revenue meaning deficit spending.

True but hedging is usually based on price. . .Also with the amnesty in place,Nigeria output has room to rise,
dont forget our quota does not include condensate which alone is 600,000 barrels on top of our quota of 2million barrels
right now we actually produce a little over 2million bpd, plus our condensate production
As for the Govt,well i believe a strong federal Govt can prevail on the states to reduce Govt spending
afterall its the Fed Govt that usually produces the budget,and can equally refuse to sign any supplementary budget based on excess crude funds
click on my profile and read my post that didnt register on here(due to the spambot),and u will know why even though lots of companies do it
its not really easy to pull off and usually does blow up in such companies faces, esp commodity hedges

The agreement has been made to spend the money. $4.8 billion was deducted in March and the account is simply being abused.
Besides our OPEC quota (which we are currently exceeding), unrest in the Niger delta could result in reduced production and in turn reduced revenue

as for my conclusion, i only really became alarmed based on this quote below from sanusi,
"Mexico has done it, and you can hedge half of your production at $37 per barrel so that whatever happens to the price of oil you will not be hit hard".

I just believe with oil at $85, US economy expanding,Asian and BRIC countries growing again, Europe flat and Africa projected to grow this yr as well
that any talk of $37- $40 oil is misplaced.  . . . .if he really wants to hedge, he should hedge in a range of strike prices btw $70 - $100 a barrel. . .(involving a downside put @70 and an upside call @100 on oil Futures)
to put it in lay mans terms if the price falls to Zero, Nigeria would still be paid $70 a barrel for each barrel of oil entered into contract to deliver

and if oil prices rises past $100 to say $140 our gains are capped at $100, and we forfeit whatever upside there is to be had(or unwind the trade,whichever is cheaper),

However i feel all this is unnecessary, our politicians are too much of illiterates to understand it anyway
Try explaining to the NASS why oil is at $140 but u can only make $100 due to some hedging contracts u entered into?

The much simpler way like i said earlier is to stick with Excess crude and put political pressure on the politicians to cut spending,
afterall they were the ones that raised the benchmark budget from $57 TO $67 For this yr
It will make it easier for everyone to understand. . .we save whatever is above the budget,times whatever we produce for the month

The statement says 'you can' and not you should or must. Where, when and how to hedge will depend on various factors e.g. the lesser our projected revenue is from actual, the less we need to hedge.
There is no guarantee that oil prices will stay up: it could sky rocket to $100+ and could also nose dive to less than $50. Nobody knows the future, and all are speculations (some more reasonable than others).
The uncertainty in oil revenue is more towards the second half of the year, when the winter is no more and Iraqi supplies might result in a glut.
A hedging position guarantees us a minimum price for our oil, which makes managing the ECO account easier (cos even if they dont spend anything from the ECO acct, if average cumulative oil revenue for the year drops below our projections the government will need short term loans). It comes at a cost and that is what should be weighed against the probability of and potential losses.
For me the key is to do it right - hedge at the right cost for the right amount of security.

Note: You dont necessarily have to hedge on both sides. In fact, given that we supply the commodity, we can let the higher end free run and only secure the lower end. Bracket edging is more suitable for investment portfolio management.

mikeansy:
Perhaps you have more info on the character of the man than everyone else.

I advise you to share that with us because you will come to realise that only a few people on Nairaland may have had more knowledge of the man's character.

I don't know about his person.

I just know that his economics and temperament does not fit the office of CBN Governor in a capitalist economy like Nigeria.

When did Nigeria become a capitalist economy?
Nigeria (like most countries) runs a mixed economy.

So what is the current balance in the excess crude oil account? just $3.2billion and will likely be empty soon.
The excess crude oil account saves excess revenue (not price differential) and is managed on a monthly basis. The 3 tiers of government (and not the FG alone) have agreed to spend the excess.
Oil revenue depends on both oil prices and oil production. Nigeria has fallen below the projected revenue on several occasions (due to lower prices and/or reduce production)
The ECO account (if properly maintained) buffers the governments income from short term ripples in our oil revenue. It does not protect the revenue from adverse events.
Hedging would bound the variation in revenue which will in turn make managing the ECO account more effective. They are complementary and not to be interchanged.
Hedging is used to minimize the impact of an adverse effect, and even taking out an insurance is a form of hedging your position.
The decision on hedging should be based on the potential losses and the cost of the hedging.
But seems you have already concluded on how, and the associated costs of the hedging, and thus it is wrong. If hedging is as bad as you paint it, I wonder why so many people do it
I dont know what you do for a living, but hedging is not as esoteric as you are trying to make it.

naijaking1:
@biina
You're faking ignorance of Sanusi's strong political connections with the presidency of Yar'dua. Despite being a member of the Kano/Katsina/Kaduna-K3 mafia, everybody knew that Sanusi basically worked his personal agenda into the the financial policies of this nation without interuption from either the mininster of finance, national planning, or the the president, because they were all K3 buddy buddies. Sanusi is a better politican than he is a banker.

I dont have the time for someone whose argument are based solely on conjectures and flase claims. Feel free to believe anything that lets you sleep at night

The excess crude oil account approach is just an internal buffer and its effectiveness requires that your average oil price be above your budgeted value. If it ever falls below, you will need to borrow money or default from your budgeted expenditure, and likely end up with a budget deficit. It is even less effective if the excess of 'good' months are spent as has been agreed by the three tiers of government in Nigeria. Also the excess crude account provides no buffer against variation in oil production or opec quota changes.
Hedging is complimentary to the ECO account, and not a replacement. You want predictability and bounds on your income.

@paddy_lo
So Mexico that saved $5billion from hedging its oil prices last year, and is spending $1.2billion this year, must be quite stupid.  
You are so quick to take the words of Rubin like the Koran, without any reference to other sources. Here is someone who disagrees with Rubin http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/oil-predictions
Already one of Rubin's premises was that OPEC would increase production to meet increased demand, but OPEC on March 17 declined to make changes as demand has been 'sluggish'.
But the general idea behind edging is to trade returns for reduced volatility, something that is bad for a nations budget and expenditure. That there is no consensus on oil prices trends means increased volatility, and thus hedging is the right move. The only issues that needs to be addressed is what fraction of our production and at what price.

naijaking1:
@realman
Thanks for the article, I know I have seen it before paraphrasing it in an earlier write-up

Not surprising that you would remember an article filled with erroneous statements and falsehood.

@biina
I don't expect you to tire-o, and shamelessly too.
You ask for names, you got, you ask for circumstances, you got it , I know that soon, you will ask for evidence that Soludo was replaced by biina Sanusi

In your profuse denial of events, you have simply forgotten to acknowledge that a wise ruler listens to both consenting and dissenting opinons. You can weave it anyway you want, it's obvious Sanusi's personal animosity trumps national interests. Are you surprised that the same 2 board members who adviced and insisted on due process are the same ones unable to renew their contracts?

Hello

So you expect me to simply ignore your false statements?
You have now changed your position from Sanusi firing the executives, to accepting that their tenures were not renewed.
But you stick to your baseless statements that their contracts were not renewed by the president and senate, simply because they disagreed with Sanusi. Sanusi must  then have control over the presidency and Senate.

That they disagreed with Sanusi itself is yet to be substantiated. All you have is an article by someone who made such false statements as they being deputy governors and that they were only appointed this year. The article provides no verifiable references or witnesses. Even a statement from said directors, no matter how subjective, was not quoted.

A more reasonable and logical explanation is that the author noted that two members of the CBN board had left, assumed erroneously that they were deputy governors, and with the recent actions taken by the CBN, further assumed that they must have been removed for disagreeing with Sanusi. I cant blame the author though, since people like you are so blinded by your personal dislike for Sanusi that you gobble up such nonsense without a second thought.

You can keep deceiving yourself that Sanusi's actions are guided by personal issues with some bank executives, but please try not to preach such nonsense to others.

With this uninspiring display against wolves, una go fit beat spurs and citeh so?

realmen:
Why Two CBN Deputy Govs Lost Job
o ANAN Chief Faults CBN's Strategy
Intercontinental Recovers N4.8B
By Ade Ogidan and Godwin Ijediogor, Lagos and Simeon Nwakaudu, Makurdi
AS operators, regulators, customers and the public take stock of the fallout from the sacking of five banks chiefs, information reaching The Guardian indicated that the action did not actually enjoy the total backing of the apex bank's helmsmen.
A sharp disagreement was said to have emanated during meetings summoned to agree on the action, which saw five banks' chief executives lose their positions.
It was gathered that some of the apex bank's deputy governors opposed the move, its timing and motive.
But that might have cost the deputy governors, Mrs. Juliet Madubueze and Professor Akpan Ekpo, their own jobs, as they were dismissed from their positions to which they were appointed early this year, as recently reported, though the reports were silent on the real reasons for their removal.

Further misrepresentation of the facts.

1. Prof. Akpan Ekpo, and Mrs Juliet Madubeze were non-executive directors of the CBN  and not deputy governors as claimed in the article
2. They had been appointed to the board of the CBN since 2005 and not 'earlier this year' as claimed by the article
3. Non-executive directors are appointed to a renewable 4 year term. The duo were not removed, but had come to the end of their tenure, and their tenures were not renewed. In fact , Prof. Akpan Ekpo was appointed as the Director General of West African Institute for Financial and Economic Management at the Central Bank of Nigeria Learning Centre

naijaking1:
Sorry, I don't have access to all the newspapers for the past 9 months like you do, but everything I said are in the public domain.

what do you need all the newspapers for?

The article you referenced clearly states

The President also approved the appointment of two additional members to the Board of the CBN. They are Mr. Stephen Oronsaye and Mr. Nebolisa Arah. Oronsaye, who is currently the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, is to serve on the CBN board in his personal capacity and is to replace Prof. Akpan H. Ekpo (South-South Zone), while Arah who was the pioneer managing director of Fidelity Bank is to replace Mrs. Juliet Madubueze (South-East Zone).
The appointments of Mr. Samuel Olofin, Dahiru Muhammad and Joshua O. Omuya to the CBN board were also renewed by the President.
All the board appointments are subject to confirmation by the Senate.

But you earlier claimed that Sanusi 'fired' the board members because they disagreed with him

Seems you find it difficult to admit that you misrepresented the facts.

naijaking1:
I take it that you have never heard about Prof. Akpan Ekpo, and Mrs Juliet Madubeze, or you just want to play your old 'show it to me' game?

http://allafrica.com/stories/200908170390.html

I thought you said the directors were sacked by Sanusi for disagreeing with him?
Why then are you making reference to two non-executive directors whose initial 4 year terms were up and were not renewed. Did Sanusi sack Soludo as well? Seems you just wanted to misrepresent the truth again. FYI the CBN governor has no power over the appointment or removal of directors. Its under the purview of the presidency and senate.

Also, you claimed (no proof provided yet )that the directors disagreed with Sanusi were in the right, while the remaining 11 board members were in the wrong. Are you now claiming that those two directors know better than the rest of the CBN board?

What is to be achieved by showing the audit report to the CEOs?
Were they not already aware of the poor situation of their banks hence their need to continuously borrow money from the CBN?
Were they not the ones that mismanaged the banks into insolvency?
Have they not failed to  utilize the opportunity provided by the EDW and have only worsened the position of  the banks?
Showing the CEOs the audit report and giving them time would have only served to undermine the process of cleaning up the sector. They had the opportunity to turn things around via the EDW and failed to do so, and instead were busy hiding their non-performing loans. The executives knew the truth and what they were doing, and if they were ignorant, the more reason to fire them.

Spurs will play Arsenal, Chelsea and ManU next. They are out of the running for 4th place.
Villa and Liverpool pose greater threats.