₦airaland Forum

Yes, they will be produced by BMG which is just a subsidiary of a Chinese Company. All those cars are Chinese cars and some of the brands are discontinued brands from Toyota and the GM unit Oldsmobile which the Chinese company bought. It's just the Chinese being smart business people. They know they know the only way to get market share for their brand of cars is to do cheaper than anyone else and the only way is to build a plant and they figured out how to avoid generators and the prohibitive cost of diesel by going solar. The Chinese car company Lifan is also building a solar plant in Uganda. Just more of the increasing investment of China in Africa.

you are right ,they taught increasing the fee cos of CL would make people go for it but they got it wrong. their business development officer must have done them a lot of HARM.it was when they realised this that they started fighting viewing centers cos they know people would go there to watch thier matches.
one thing i forgot to tell you in is that the next EPL bidding is in 2months time and they are bitting more than wat they can chew by also bidding for AFRICA right which DSTV holds presently.

how do you expect them to survive without doing that. It's not like they want to bid for Africa, it's that they have no choice. A lot of people don't know that the Spanish league rights they had was for the whole of Africa. They didn't want to buy for Africa but they were forced to because the La Liga sales agent wouldn't sell for Nigeria alone. Because they only are based in Nigeria, reselling the rights was tough when your competitors control everywhere else.
That's why they didn't bid against DSTV for the rights again.

It's also why they find it tough to get channels. Multichoice buy up all the rights for Africa on most of the channels and you have to convince these companies to think of Nigeria as a separate market. That's why they are building a consortium of countries to bid for the rights. Competition is good. Look at what competition did to DSTV. It forced them to expand bouquets and introduce different price points. Let them become a monopoly again. You will see the change.

So Hi Tv has one year left on its EPL contract, gets the rights to other soccer leagues and is gearing up to get other league matches and all of a sudden, a previously encrypted channel, Showtime and Al-Jazeera, who have the rights for the Arab world including N. Africa suddenly unencrypt their channels (only unencrypted in Nigeria. It is scrambled in all countries outside Nigeria) so that any Tom, Richard and Harry with a dish can pick up the signal and any cable carrier can broadcast it where they don't have the rights. Interesting!

Hi Tv has a contract with CTL. CTL pays HiTV a fee for its regions. HiTV sub-contracts all premiere league matches in regions where there are smaller cable operators in Nigeria and others. It covers 20% of the costs for the rights.

E-passport: NIS debunks Lebanese community claims
By HUSSAINA SAID

KANO state command of the Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS) has debunked claim by the Lebanese community residing in the state that it is discriminating against them as far as the issuance of e-passport is concern.
This is contained in a press statement signed by the Public Relations Officer of the command, Nasir Umar Esq. (DSI) and made available to Daily Triumph, in reaction to a statement credited to the Lebanese community in the Sunday Trust edition of May 10th, 2009.

According to the statement, "it is indeed baffling for the Lebanese community here in Kano to fake ignorance that Kano command of the service is responsible for renewing or issuing them with the e-passport. They have come severally for such facility and the Comptroller has educated them properly on the subject matter but for reasons best known to them, they resolve indulge in smearing the good name of the comptroller and the command over the issue.

The statement added that against this background the Nigeria Immigration Service, Kano command find if imperative to comment on what it described as misconception. "It is part of the Service’s regulations that all issues relating to nationalized citizens and citizens by registration are treated at its headquarters in Abuja only. And the Lebanese community are quite conversant with these facts," the release explained.

The command therefore advised the Lebanese community in the state to be law abiding residents in order to adopt the due process of obtaining all relevant facilities the Service offers, as the Kano command is committed to due process and abide by the Servicom Charter. 

www.triumphnewspapers.com/epass1452009.html

@ ayusman 16 MTN entry level is less than 1.9m and the monthly take home pay would be less that 80k after tax.

Are you saying the tax rate in Nigeria is over 50%?

Nigerians are myopic. While they were busy fighting for subsidy at the gas pump, they forgot to beg for subsidy for diesel. It's why goods are expensive and manufacturing industries are dropping flies leaving more unemployed people. Nigeria spends more on diesel than petrol. Diesel makes the cost of business six times than the rest of the world. Yet common sense no tell them that diesel must also be subsidized.

Yes it does. No more numetro but Silverbird. In fact, it will soon be two. They have a ten screen in the Downtown mall in Abuja which will open early next year.

It should be open again before Xmas but it will be a Silverbird cinema. Numetro pulled out of Nigeria.

As far as economic policies is concerned, he is the best. The $16bn dollar is nonsense released by political mafia to our press who do no journalism whatever They just repeat what they are told. There is nothing to support it. The number for the project was brought down to $4bn by Iweala and the only withdrawals shows less than 5% was paid out. What Obasanjo said was that $16bn was budgeted for the project. That is not the same as paying it out or approved. So nobody stole $16bn. And the economy policies has boosted our economy. In 1999, oil was 50% of GDP. In 2007, it was only 12%. That is impressive.

My question to the poster is why do you want the white man to come and solve your problems? South Africa no get army. Army plenty for Naija. Kenya and if must include the Arabs Egypt, Morocco etc Why have none of you done anything?

People help those who help themselves. More people know about Darfur from the press, George Clooney and Don Cheadle singing about it. My father who is Nigerian does not even know where Darfur is. My mother heard about Darfur while visiting America. Darfur is mentioned more in the foreign press than African press. If you had a dollar for every article on Darfur written in African news media, you would still be a poor man.

All African leaders do sigh and pity. They don't strongarm anybody. See how Europe strongarmed Russia. If it was Africa, they would have let Russia rumble all over Georgia. When your leaders say they don't care why will any one else?

http://www.smartmoney.com/Investing/Economy/Crisis-Turns-Global-Economies-Upside-Down/

To mumu above, here's a link to the smart money website. Secondly, Nigeria's economy is not driven by oil. Only govt. revenue is driven by oil. Oil is 12% of GDP and dropping. I'll post a graph by Harvard business school showing Nigeria's economic graph over the last 25 years. It has been experiencing 7% growth annually since 1999. Corruption does not stop economic growth. China thinks it's the most corrupt country in the world. So does India. Taiwan politicians during their economic boom were stealing so much money, estimated at $400bn during the period, yet the economy kept growing. Corruption does not stop economic growth.

The reason why most people can't see the growth is the lack of welfare services which is controlled by the govt. Let them hand over the infrastructure and electricity to the private sector and you will see the difference. But they won't because it's their piggy bank. But that does not deter economic growth. All the other countries mentioned as emerging markets have similar problems as Nigeria.

It is a subjective report and I am an economist and you are not because you are bringing in things not used to calculate the report or are used in economy indices. Nigeria's economy is stronger on macro economic level it's ever been. Safe is a relevant term used in relation to other countries.

ikeyman00:
gbam!! my point

Of course it's subjective. All reports are but you and Kobojunkie have not argued convincingly that it is wrong. Even the Corruption Report that used to rank Nigeria as the most corrupt nation in the world is subjective. It's called a Corruption Perception Index.

The report was regarding the current economic crisis and a country's ability to survive the shock. It didn't say we were 100% safe but said we were safer than other economies. The report argues for its case effectively. Please argue for yours in like manner.

@ Kobojunkie

You did not disprove anything I said. I said they budget at $59 a barrel. Your bolded quotes show they do. They never went over $59 even when it hit $145. A proposed budget is not an implemented budget.   Therefore the fact they intended to budget at $62.5 and chose to move it to $45 shows prudence and the safety factor they are employing. If the outlook looks worse they will budget lower. Nothing wrong with that because it means they are not over leveraged.

Even if the budget is based on $150 a barrel, what does that have to do with the economy. That is money that goes to state govt. and Federal institutions to eat and what was not one of the indices used by Merrill Lynch. We are talking about Merrill Lynch establishing a statement that Nigeria economy is safe. No where was Government's budget in it. Strong external reserves in relation GDP. A largely cash economy and a drive of banks to recruit more people to keep their money in the bank. Low inflation rate increase in relation to other countries in the world. High return rate on investment in comparison to other countries in the world. I read the report. Please go and read it.

It is a subjective report and I am an economist and you are not because you are bringing in things not used to calculate the report or are used in economy indices. Nigeria's economy is stronger on macro economic level it's ever been. Safe is a relevant term used in relation to other countries. They did not say it was 100% safe and there will not be some austerity measures. It is safe in comparison to how other countries will be affected.   This is an investment report, not a welfare report and you are using dodgy statistics; going all the way to 1999, ten years ago to establish what exactly; that the govt. budgeted badly in 1999 which led to the prudence that is now part of the system. This is before debt relief and bank consolidation.

You still haven't shown the reports where the govt. is borrowing money to finance its budget. You wrote it. Prove it. It is Soludo's choice not to use the external reserves to supplement the budget just like no matter what, Bush does not release America's large oil reserves to to increase supply and reduce the price at the pump. Soludo thinks austerity is better. I am not as knowledgeable as him. Since I know you just like to argue without substance, I will paste a summary of the report for you to read.

[b]According to the statistics, the world’s 10 least vulnerable economies are Nigeria, Mexico, Phili-ppines, Colombia, Egypt, Oman, Indonesia, Peru, China and Russia.
Also, the report identified Australia, Switzerland, Korea, Romania, Hungary, Sweden, Bulgaria, Euro area, United Kingdom and the United States of America as the highest risk economies in the world.
The risk ranking was based on seven indicators and they are - current account financing gap, foreign exchange reser-ves/short-term external debt ratio, private credit-to-Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ratio, and private credit growth, loans to deposits and banks capital-to-assets ratio. Merrill Lynch said the report also addressed all the requests in 62 indicators of the 60 world economies.
According to the report, Nigeria, with a population of 141.41million, was able to record a 7.3 per cent growth in GDP, with its Consumer Price Index hovering at 11.5 per cent, its current account balance, fiscal balance and public debt at 6 per cent, 6.3 and 10.4 percentage respectively.
To determine its external vulnerability, Nigeria’s external debt position was put at 12.9 per cent of the GDP, while external debt /exports ratio was put at 9 per cent. Her forex reserves totalled $60.8billion.
The percentage of Nigeria’s total external debt in relation to the GDP was put at two per cent, total foreign claims is $15.3billion while international claims stood at $13.1billion.
The report stated that the percentage of Current Account Balance plus net Foreign Direct Investment of the Nigerian GDP was 34, Forex reserves/short-term external debt totalled 41, while percentage of export of the GDP was 38 point.
The percentage of private credit of GDP was 43, while the percentage of bank capital to assets, according to Merrill Lynch was 41.
The 10 most vulnerable countries, which are mostly European countries, were said to have exhibited worse balance of payments positions, stretched external debt service ratios and overleveraged financial systems.
“Many of the economies that top our risk ranking have been identified by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) as those that have experienced capital flow bonanzas in the past five years and hence exhibit higher likelihood of economic crisis,” the report explained.
Explaining further on how it put the report together, Merrill Lynch states that: “While we believe that our country risk ranking produces plausible results, one needs to be aware that, as any ranking of that type, it is highly sensitive to the selection of indicators employed. For example, developed countries can probably sustain higher external vulnerability indicators than emerging markets; some Euro area country statistics are possibly misleading given there is a monetary union.”[/b]

author=Kobojunkie link=topic=196465.msg3109908#msg3109908 date=1227125968]

Now, I am not an economist, but I have to ask. When you say “our economy has reached a sort of steady state”, What in the world do you mean? Paying off of debts started back during Abacha’s time, but most all the others have remained the same way for over 30 years. What did we reach? When?

You just wan argue. he didn't say it was good. Steady means it's going nowhere nor is it falling back. Compared to the 80s and 90s, it is steady. The excessive inflation rate and devaluation of the currency does not exist compared to the absurd shocks and falls of earlier times. That is steady. He did not say we are now world champions or people are not suffering in Naija.

Someone noted that oil prices have now fallen below $58 a barrel and may continue to fall. The Country is already scrambling for ways to find loans.

The government budget has always been at $59 a barrel, even during the boom. That's how they got the huge external reserves which makes Soludo look very wise. Next year's budget will be at $45 a barrel. The external reserves can meet any difference. The country is not scrambling for loans. Show me a quote where they are scrambling for loans. If someone wrote so, it's a lie.

PS There is to be a trend among Nigerians that if anything that is not excessively cynical or detrimental is endorsing the govt. I think the govt. I think it has a lot of problems. I think people are suffering and calling the economy safe though not untrue, is nothing to brag and write about. I don't think the poster was bragging, not Merrill Lynch. Safe has many connotations. You lose nothing, you gain nothing. With the losses mounting in foreign markets, they need to spin something. As someone said, the car parked in the garage is the perfect analogy.

link=topic=196068.msg3105585#msg3105585 date=1227041091]
it's not an argument of semantics, this is similar to state marijuana laws that can be overrun by federal law. please get that right.      they do lose rights if they are not married and there is no civil union in place. why can't married be redefined?  how does it affect the mormon church?
[quote][/quote]You are arguing with emotions and not facts trying to reprimand what is no t there. You say[b] they do lose rights if there is no civil union in place. [/b] What does not mean? All couples do not have the same rights if they cannot show a legal contract of partnership, gay or straight. If you have no civil union or marriage, there is no legal union.

You say that is similar to state marijuana laws that be overrun by federal laws. Federal laws cannot automatically overrun State laws. Otherwise, it would be a waste of time pushing for gay marriage. No Federal law recognizes gay marriage nor civil unions. It is a matter for the Federal Courts to decide. When there is a clash, it goes to the courts. This issue will get there eventually. Till, then the state's law is as good as God Almighty.

It is a matter of semantics foremost because they already had the same rights as heterosexuals in California. Look, Obama and Biden are for giving civil unions the same rights as marriage rights on the Federal level.  The Mormon Church as far as I know is not opposed to them getting the same rights as married couples. They are opposed to the change in the definition of marriage.

I personally don't care about that issue one way or the other but the Church and its members think its important. Social changes do affect the way people think. They have a right to defend their beliefs silly as it may be.

But as long the President-elect believes marriage is only between a man and a woman the odds of them changing these attitudes any time soon is improbable. Therefore isn't their energy better served seeking equality for civil unions and marriage on the Federal level instead of fighting the gay marriage fight.

And that's why it's about semantics. It's about the word marriage. It's about having the right to say marriage as everyone else and not to feel like second class citizens. And I can understand that.

The gays already had equal rights. Nobody asked the California govt. to take it away.  They wanted marriage and the Church rallied against it. Lobbying the Federal govt. to give them equal rights is less of a hot button topic. It would be more successful than trying to change the definition of marriage.[quote author=bawomolo

bawomolo:
that doesn't matter considering the current gay marriages have been repealed. the supreme court would be forced to step in soon

What do you mean by it doesn't matter? It matters because it tells you it's an argument of semantics.
They have lost no rights by gay marriage being disbanded because civil unions and marriages are the same in California.
The Mormon Church isn't against that. The Mormon church doesn't care about that. All they care about is the definition of marriage.

Being married or not; they lost no rights. It's why Elton John could not understand what they are fighting for. They are fighting for a redefinition of marriage to include a man and a man or a woman and a woman. That is what the Mormon Church objects to and why it contributed to Prop. 8.

vincentont:
plz what category of award did 2face won at d world music award because i didn't see his name on the list of 2008 winners(world music award

He didn't win any award at the World Music Awards. He was given an award by AIT for best selling Nigerian Artist, which is just a recognition, not a World Music Award.
I don't know why people are writing that. The Best Selling African artist went to Akon. That was the World Music Award.

[/quote][quote author=bawomolo link=topic=196068.msg3097209#msg3097209 date=1226898199]no they actually don't. the current benefits for civil unions aren't the same as that of marriage

Actually, that's not true. There are no legal rights taken away from civil unions versus marriages in the State of California. It is the Federal Government that discriminates between marriage and civil unions.

When they say Prop. 8 has taken away their rights, they don't mean California rights but United States rights because at the Federal level, civil unions and marriages are not granted the same rights.

They should be fighting Obama and his govt. to give civil unions and marriages the same legal rights.

But they are not which makes it obvious that's not what's bugging them. It is obvious that what galls them is the word civil union. They want the word marriage. Civil union makes them feel inferior. It's the social recognition they want, thus a redefinition of marriage as not between a man and woman only. That's what it's all about. It's not about rights because in Cali, they've already got it.

Changing the definition of marriage won't work. They should argue for the equal legal rights for civil unions and marriages on the Federal level.

To Girl22,
This is why I don't like posting. People read what they want to read. I never said you were lying. Please, show me where I said so. In fact, I went to great detail to show where I believed you received your facts; which means I believe you believe what you believe. What I did was research which had a different opinion.

John Hanson is believed to be white. A picture exists which claims to be done in 1860 that shows him to be white. Go to A&E website.They have covered this issue. The said the scholars who did their research mistook the African American John Hansen who helped freed slaves move to Liberia with that John Hansen. You did not reply to this aspect?

Even if we were to agree that John Hansen was black, he was the head of the congress. There were eight people after him who held that office. The official term of President of the United States did not enter the lexicon until 1789 after a new constitution drawn up in 1787 recognized the United States and put in things like the Bill of Rights. It is this constitution that is recognized as officially creating the United States of America and creating the office of the President. It is not only John Hanson who is ignored but the other eight non-blacks who led after him. You did not bother to put a rebuttal to this.

The above are facts. The perception of it might differ. Such as, if he were head of the congress, technically he was the President even it was not an acknowledged position. That is the stance taken by "Afro-centric" scholars. John Hansen would have been called President if such a position existed then. You could argue for or against this position. It is supposition.

The existence of the Illuminati is supposition. There is no place I can knock on their door and meet them. They do not have a phone number or do their members acknowledge themselves in the public.  Also, people who believe in the existence of this organization and I have met them, believe they are capable of anything; wars, terrorist attacks, cover-ups, rewriting history and so on. Thus, if you believe in it, I cannot dissuade you using facts. Also you might believe the information I have uncovered proving that one John Hanson to be another might be a cover-up to stop people from knowing that "John Hansen" was really black. You cannot argue with that. That was my point.

Conspiracy theorists have predicted things before their time. Please, give solid examples. I don't want Nostradamus like predictions or Biblical like predictions. Why? Because anyone can interpret it as they wish. I want Yomi at 9:00 will show up at my house or Yar'adua will declare war on Ghana on November 15. Please, provide some predictions like that.

John F. Kennedy said "things" about secret societies. What are these things? You will now tell me the Illuminati killed him because he was on to them. I have heard that one before. Again, theories that cannot be disproved or proved with facts. Only supposition. Of course, only if you do believe it.

Regarding this John Hanson; he was the head of the Congress. In 1776, the thirteen Colonies declared their independence from England. John Hanson was the first head of the Congress. And there were eight heads of Congress after him. But none of them were called President of the United States of America because the position of the executive as a separate body was not created until 1789 until George Washington took the post. "African centric" scholars will argue that it is just semantics and he was the president of the United States. And it is true that he was on a $2 bill that is no longer in print. To Tpia, who doubted the originality of the bill, they have changed all the bills and who is on it so many times, there are other people on old bills who are no longer on new bills.

But the picture of John Hanson I could find showed him as a tan white man. It is not the dark-skinned clearly black man that is in your picture. My research shows the problem to be this. There was another John Hanson who was a black legislator who after slavery helped move free slaves to Liberia. The argument is, "Afro-centric" scholars have gotten the two men misplaced.

It seems you also believe in the existence of the Illuminati, a shady organization of over five hundred centuries old that decides all world events. They supposedly include much of the world's richest families, including the Bush and Clinton Family. People also believe the Illuminati planned 911. I assume you believe in this cult organization, because your link goes to the you tube video which mentions the Illuminati.

Therefore, you might believe the above stated facts to be a lie and a conspiracy to hide the real identity of the "first black president." In that case, it is doubtful you will be swayed with facts. Therefore any argument to be convince you otherwise will be a waste of time.

The writer of the post is very clear. It means a park and ride system as it used in all other countries in the world. You park your car in a public parking lot, which you pay a fee for and ride to work and on the way back, pick your car. These lots will be located outside the city where people come from. It saves costs for the rider and will generate revenue for the govt. Simple.