Zenith Bank Plc on Tuesday appointed Dame Adaora Umeoji as the Group Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer (GMD/CEO) from June 2024.

She is the first female to lead the bank.

Her appointment is, however, subject to the approval of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

Umeoji will take over from the current GMD, Dr. Ebenezer Onyeagwu, whose time in office expires on May 31.

Here are things to know about Adaora Umeoji

1. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Sociology from the University of Jos,

2. She also holds a Bachelor’s degree in Accounting, and first-class honours in Law from Baze University Abuja.

4. She also bagged a Master in Business Administration from the University of Calabar.

5. Umeoji joined Zenith Bank in 1998, and since joining the bank, she headed the marketing group Maitama branch and went on to be the deputy zonal head of the Abuja Zone.

6. She then became executive director in charge of Abuja and Middle Belt Zones of the Bank.

7. She was appointed to the board on October 9, 2012.

8. She is an alumnus of Harvard Business School.

9. She attended the strategic thinking and management program at Wharton Business School, USA.

10. She holds a certificate in Economics for Business from the prestigious MIT Management Sloan School and a Certificate in Leading Global Businesses from Harvard Business School, USA.

11. She is a fellow of professional bodies including the Chartered Bankers Institute of London, the Chartered Institute of Bankers of Nigeria, the Institute of Credit Administration, the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Nigeria, the Institute of Chartered Meditators & Conciliators, and the Institute of Chartered Secretaries & Administrators of Nigeria, among others.

12. Beyond banking, Umeoji founded the Catholic Bankers Association of Nigeria (CBAN), a platform she uses to promote ethical banking and service to humanity.

13. She is a peace advocate of the United Nations (UN-POLAC), and a Lady of the Order of Knights of St. John International (KSJI).

14. She was recently awarded a Papal Knight of the Order of St. Sylvester by His Holiness Pope Francis.

15. In 2022, the Federal Government honoured her with Officer of the Order of Nigeria as a recognition of her contributions to nation-building.

[TheNation]

French regulators said Wednesday they were fining Google 250 million euros ($272 million) for breaching an agreement on terms for paying media companies for reproducing their content online.

France’s Competition Authority said in a statement the fine was for “failing to respect commitments made in 2022” and accused it of not negotiating in “good faith” with news publishers on how much to compensate them for use of their content.

Google and other online platforms have been accused of making billions from news without sharing the revenue with those who gather it.

To tackle this, the EU created a form of copyright called “neighbouring rights” that allows print media to demand compensation for using their content.

France has been a test case for the rules and after initial resistance Google and Facebook both agreed to pay some French media for articles shown in web searches.

In 2022, French regulators accepted commitments from Google to negotiate fairly with news organisations.

Under the agreement, the US tech giant has to provide news groups with a transparent offer of payment within three months of receiving a copyright complaint.

Organisations representing French magazines and newspapers – as well as Agence France-Presse (AFP) – had lodged a case with the regulator in 2019.

Google had fought hard against the idea of paying for content and was fined 500 million euros ($530 million) in 2021 for failing to negotiate in good faith.

AFP

A presidential aspirant of one of the two mainstream political parties in the United States of America has just lost the nomination to his opponent in a keenly contested presidential primary. Thinking that the combination of both men would make a formidable team in the looming presidential election, the loser was asked whether, if contacted, he would accept to be running mate to the winner of the party flag. His response was terse: "I hate all vices, including the vice presidency"!

In most countries, especially in a democracy, the vice president is seen as the Number Two man; although I think this should not be so, especially where the three arms of government - the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary - are deemed equal and co-terminus according to the theory of separation of powers as propounded by Baron de Montesquieu. One arm should not be Number One and Number Two at the same time. If the Executive claims the Number One slot, then, the Legislature and Judiciary should share the Number Two and Number Three slots as the head of the other two arms of government. The vice president heads no arm of government. He becomes relevant only when the president is not available. But this is an argument for another day!

Whoever it was that likened the vice president or deputy governor to a vehicle's spare tyre is closer to the point. Spare tyres are irrelevant when the actual tyres are in active service. What is a spare? A dictionary definition says it is "an extra tyre carried in a motor vehicle for use in case of a puncture" In the event of no puncture, then, the spare tyre is of no relevance but is a burden that occupies space that could otherwise have been converted to more beneficial use. Little wonder, then, that many motor vehicles these days have devised the means of tucking the spare tyre away in compartments that would not use up space needed for more useful purposes.

Are "spare tyres" similarly of little or no use in a political setting? The answer is yes and no. In the United States, there is the saying that the vice president is to be seen and not heard. In other words, the Number Two must not hug, share or struggle for the limelight with the boss. When the mother elephant trumpets, the baby must keep quiet! Any errant baby elephant that trumpets when the mother trumpets will get a knock on the head to silence it! Like John the Baptist, the forerunner, said in the scriptures that he must decrease for Jesus Christ to increase, the vice president or deputy governor is to promote his or her boss rather than attempt, like Lucifer did with God, to set up his or her own throne and contest power with or undermine the boss.

The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) invests the president and governors with immense powers, such that their vice is left virtually at their mercy. They can empower them; they can also emasculate them. Even where the Constitution vests the vice president with the headship of the National Economic Council, he still can only effectively function in this office at the pleasure of the president.

This, however, is not to say that the position of vice president or deputy governor is totally irrelevant. For the purpose of contesting elections, no one can be deemed duly elected as president or governor without having a duly elected vice or deputy. Where the election of a vice or deputy is voided, the election of the president or governor stands similarly voided. I think this is what the African-American politician and civil rights activist, Rev. Jesse Jackson, means when he said a bird needs two wings to fly.

Our history is replete with strong deputies who even took the shine off the boss. Chief Obafemi Awolowo was a strong deputy to Gen. Yakubu Gowon. When Gowon, in 1974, declared 1976, the date he had earlier set for the return to civilian rule, as unrealistic and Awo left his cabinet, he was toppled on July 29, 1975 while attending an OAU meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Gen. Murtala Muhammed was a strong leader; his deputy, Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo, was not seen, not to talk of being heard. But when Obasanjo himself became the Head of State as a result of the assassination of Murtala on February 13, 1976, his deputy, Gen. Musa Yar'adua, was not only a very strong deputy, he was the de facto ruler while Obasanjo was a mere figurehead Head of State.

The country's first civilian president, Alhaji Shehu Shagari and his vice, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, were both captives of their party, the National Party of NIgeria (NPN). The party chairman, Meridith Adisa Akinloye, and Umaru Dikko, of the rice and cement armada fame, were, perhaps, even more powerful than Shagari and Ekwueme.

Buhari as military dictator (1983 - 1985) was not as powerful as his deputy, Tunde Idiagbon. Buhari is said characteristically to enjoy the plums of office while someone else does all the job for him. So, Idiagbon was famously regarded as Buhari's brain box in Buhari's first coming as the country's leader.

Ibrahim Babangida was his own man. He marginalized his deputy, Commodore Ebitu Ukiwu, who was forced to resign and was replaced by pliant and fawning Augustus Aikhomu. Sani Abacha, like Babangida, was his own man. Efforts by his deputy, Gen. Oladipo Diya, to wield some influence led to his being entangled in allegations of a coup plot. Diya barely escaped with his life.

Gen Abdulsalami Abubakar and his deputy, Mike Akhigbe, were birds of a feather - drab! The only eventful events of their tenure were that MKO Abiola, winner of the June 12, 1993 presidential elections judged free and fair by all, died in their custody; they released some detained persons and also handed over power to a civilian government on May 29, 1999.

In his second coming as Nigeria's leader, Obasanjo, in his first term of office, literally ceded effective power to his deputy, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who leveraged it to feather his nest. Atiku nearly pulled the rug off Obasanjo's feet but the wily old fox fought back and had Atiku's back to the wall during his second term. Nevertheless, Atiku was a strong deputy.

Umaru Yar'Adua was a strong-willed leader but ill-health got the better part of him. Both as vice president and as president, Goodluck Jonathan was a weak leader. Jonathan and his vice, Namandi Sambo, were birds of a feather - colourless!

In Buhari's second coming as NIgeria's leader, he was an absentee president who abdicated power to a cabal of family members and friends to run the country aground while serving ethnic, religious and regional interests. Buhari's vice, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, was a passenger in the corridors of power. At best, he only improved on his curriculum vitae!

It is too early to say what kind of leader President Bola Ahmed Tinubu will make. As the governor of Lagos State, he was a strong governor who saw off two deputy governors before finishing his second term with the third. Will he make a strong president? For now, the answer blows in the wind. The confidence he found to announce that fuel subsidy is gone in his inaugural address to the nation must now be brought to bear in vital sectors of the country's national life: rampaging insecurity, runaway inflation and virtual economic collapse, the fight against corruption, and the need to call his predecessor to account for his atrocious tenure.

Tinubu's vice, Kashim Shettima, was a strong governor in Borno but is yet to carve a niche for himself as the country's Number Two. What did he bring into this government, if I may ask? What is his forte? Is it security? Is it the economy? Is it bridge-building and fire-fighting? I have not seen much of Shettima's contributions to the Tinubu presidency.

Tinubu is engulfed on many fronts. He appears to me as the only one fighting the fires. Exasperated, I think, his wife, Oluremi, joined the fray the other day in Bauchi, gallantly vowing to die fighting on the side of her husband. Where are the key members of the Tinubu administration and in which area are they lifting up Tinubu's hands, like biblical Aaron and Hur did unto Moses?

Although Tinubu has passed a vote of confidence in his Chief of Staff, all we hear from some circles are stories of scandals, more scandals and still more scandals! The office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation is powerful; a Northern Christian occupies it. Has that resulted in his ability to wall in his constituency around the president?

The greatest challenge of the country today is insecurity - which is gulping money that otherwise should have been put to productive ventures, which is destroying critical infrastructure, which is driving farmers from the farm and students/pupils from school, which is creating millions of internally-displaced persons, which daily leads to the killing and maiming of the innocent, which breeds kidnapping for ransom, etc.

Yet, the National Security Adviser is from the same North. The MInister of Defence is from the same North. The Chief of Defence Staff is from the same North. The Chief of Air Staff is from the same North. We can go on and on! What have all these people brought to the table?

Opinion is divided as to the actual role of the vice president in the Boko Haram debacle but what cannot be denied is that he has a wealth of experience when the topic of discussion is insurgency. How has he brought that experience to bear since May 29, 2023?

Is there a grand design to continually bleed this country for some people to daily smile to the bank? Is there a plot to make the country ungovernable for a southern President? A scantily-concealed scorched-earth policy to unhing this President may be afoot. Who is for and who is against needs to be unraveled.

Omoyele Sowore recounts the touching reunion with his daughter, Ayomide "Mamike" Sowore.

According to his statement. "Permit me to share with you what I found out about my daughter, Ayomide “Mamike” Sowore, when I returned home to her after five years. This might blow your mind!"

There have been a few writeups and commentaries on the above subject lately, and it is quite amusing how an event that represents a classic case of the familiar boardroom coup, in the form of the hostile takeover of a bank from its previous owners several years ago, is now suddenly being criminalised. The acquiring parties in the transaction have been dubbed "political thieves" in one instance and projected in similar uncomplimentary epithets in several other instances.

We may not approve of it, all right, but without going into the specifics of the institution and personalities involved in the case at hand, hostile takeovers are widely accepted forms of acquiring businesses. They also do occur with something of uncommon regularity the world over, every now and then.

Hostile takeovers refer to the acquisition of targeted corporations, often against the express or tacit wishes and preferences of their existing board and management. Plus, they are perfectly legal and effectively regulated, with adequate provisions to deal with errant behaviour on either side. They are distinct from friendly takeovers, in which the two parties to the transaction mutually agree to cooperate towards the same result.

Often accomplished by stealth, a hostile takeover takes place when an acquiring entity, also described as the acquirer or aggressor, desires to attain full control of the target company by way of the surreptitious acquisition of a significant enough quantum of its shares from existing shareholders. More often than not, that is achieved without the prior knowledge, sanction, and/or cooperation of the target company's existing management and/or owners, who are subsequently bought out in the end.

It is imperative to stress at this point that the entire setting around the hostile takeover undertaking is centered around the application of the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle; between and amongst holders of the target company's stocks and potential investors desirous of acquiring same, and it is achieved through the instrumentality of the appropriate medium for the trading of the stocks. 

Through such legal stock transactions, the stake of the original owners or majority shareholders gradually gets diluted as the shares exchange hands and new buyers are brought in; a process that can be accomplished within a relatively short time span or over an extended period from start to finish. Once the aggressor has acquired a reasonable enough proportion of shares to trigger a takeover, the deed is as good as done.

Of course, in all probability, the target company would view a hostile takeover as nothing short of a brazen assault or an undesirable invasion aimed at undermining the independence and effective control of its existing management team. And rightly so too. Conversely, advocates and/or supporters of hostile takeovers would argue that they help stimulate and promote impactful positive changes and improvements in the acquired entity. These can manifest in the form of improved corporate governance practices, along with enhanced operational efficiencies and increased shareholder value in the acquired entity.

Now, we may not approve of the methods employed in the case of Access Bank acquisition well over two decades ago today, for example, and that is fine. But the next logical and honest question we should all ask ourselves is whether or not the acquisition and subsequent takeover of the bank from its initial promoters has achieved the above-stated objectives. 

And a dispassionate response to that question should necessarily take into consideration the current standing of the bank in the industry, vis-a-vis the state it was prior to the acquisition, while also not losing sight of the fact that many of the bank’s contemporaries established at or about the same time with it have since gone under.

It is also worthy of note that the same or similar hostile takeover practices that some of the writeups in reference actively seek to criminalise are still happening, both in the nation's financial services industry and in other critical sectors of the economy even as we speak. 

Indeed, the latest of such takeovers occurred just recently when Femi Otedola effectively took over as Chair of First Bank of Nigeria (FBN) Holdings Plc in a similar fashion, by virtue of his becoming the largest shareholder of the bank through his direct and indirect holdings. Another instance, albeit a failed one, would be that of the attempted takeover of Transcorp Plc, with investments in the Hospitality, Power, and Oil & Gas Sectors, also by the same investor not long ago. This was, however, promptly resolved amicably through negotiations between the two parties, in the overall best interest of the organisation.

Other notable examples of hostile takeovers from across the world include: the acquisition of Time Warner by America Online Inc. (AOL), regarded as the biggest and one of the most aggressive takeover bids to date; InBev’s acquisition of Anheuser - Busch, maker of Budweiser in mid-2008; the acquisition of PeopleSoft by Oracle towards the end of 2004; that of RBS and ABN Amro in October 2007; and Kraft Foods’ takeover of Cadbury, amongst several others.

Of course, there are several initiative-taking and reactive defensive strategies out there that can be employed to guard against hostile takeovers and/or respond to them, which the original promoters of Access Bank obviously failed to take advantage of at the time. but that is an entirely different discussion for another day.

Abdullahi Usman

He travels like a bird

With wings that take him far But his feathers fall everywhere And settle like a scar

When he lands he’s worshipped

A king upon a throne

But they don’t know the consequence For he doesn’t let it show

His children miss him dearly Those feathers which he dropped Heartbeat, heartbeats all over Heartbroken he is naught

A brick atop a ceiling

A drop outside a glass

We know outside he means something But when is his entrance?

...

August 3, 2019

The day we saw him last Though far across the water His freedom was still cast

Myself upon a couch

My Brother sprawled on chair

My Mother’s words reached high-pitched points Now finally aware

I imagined it with handcuffs Peaceful from respect

A man who fought for his people Not needing to object

And then I saw the truth An act of tyranny

A look into the harsh abuse

 Now everyone would see ...

His laugh came with an accent

His heritage so clear

We loved the way he said his words The way he wore his hair

We poked fun at him often For things a father has

His funny, big round tummy His passion for bad dance

He gave the greatest hugs

A man with a big heart

That beat for everyone he knew — I’ve known him less apart

I hope once more I’ll see him

That his wings land him home

His crown thorns grow unbearable His window dew drops foam

Personal finance expert Dave Ramsey has sided with Warren Buffet on the authenticity of Cryptocurrencies saying the value of Bitcoin is still based on “thin air” despite its price.

According to Bitcoin News, Dave Ramsey made his remark while answering a question about Bitcoin in the latest episode of the Dave Ramsey Show.

The question came from an audience in Connecticut who emphasized that with a market capitalization of over $1 trillion, Bitcoin was no longer a child’s play and is a viable enough asset for allocation of at least five percent of investment portfolio.

In response, David Ramsey acknowledged that indeed Bitcoin’s market capitalization sets it apart from other crypto assets, but its value is still based on thin air.

When quizzed on whether Bitcoin is a good enough investment to add to a portfolio Ramsey swiftly replied “ No, it is not”

David Ramsey went ahead to explain how Gold got its value. He explained that two people agreed on Gold’s value and fought over it. Likewise green paper money. Both currencies were agreed upon by two people and were fought over.

He argued that bitcoin might someday level out and become a thing, but it is not there, yet he stated.

Regarding whether Bitcoin should be treated as a single stock, Ramsey replied that Bitcoin is a currency and thus has no intrinsic value except for the track record that indicates people are willing to fight over it.

He added that the value of every currency is based on people’s faith in them and in his opinion, Bitcoin has the least faith.

What to Know 

• Warren Buffet the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway and the eighth richest man in the world stated that Bitcoin can’t be valued because it is not a value-producing asset. He has stated many times that he has no Bitcoin.
• Dave Ramsey is the founder and CEO of the company Ramsey Solutions, where he’s helped people take control of their money and their lives since 1992. He’s also an eight-time national bestselling author, personal finance expert, and host of The Ramsey Show.

[Nairametrics]