Feature/OPED
State of the World: Business, War, Economics, Civilization, Trade & Politics
By Nneka Okumazie
It is likely that a key reason for Asia’s powerful rise in recent decades is that white people fell into a deep perilous sleep – with no wakefulness in sight.
There is something significant to free enterprise – cold hard cash. And Asia continues to beat them at their own game.
Capitalism, predicated on competitive productivity, found fertility in Asia, as the whites optimized for profit, which goes to some, and waned in – a – collective progress.
Budget cuts, deficits, dismaying healthcare situations, austerity, unemployment, recession, etc. are bells of a decline, though strengths abound in other areas.
There is wealth in the dirt and for centuries, the whites were able to pass around aspects of the unpleasant – in important but profitable work – to others.
But this, for Asia, unlike others in the past for situation, prescience, etc. was willing to seem dumb and get roughened, learn, position, get better and become the engine of global supply.
Though many posit paths for Asia’s not so simple rise, one thing is clear, they took advantage.
The rise of Asia does not mean they would overpower the world, or lead it – unlikely, at least through this century, but they have taken hold of something that in possession of the whites may have been – some – more equitable for the world.
The rise of the dominant civilization through centuries came with trenchant imagination, invention, overwhelming courage, in-group fairness, trust, some integrity, rarefied observation, impermeable loyalty, push-pull drive or attempt propensity, spot-opportunity-alertness, etc.
But these, for more whites, continue to recede.
It is true that after near matchless excellence through history, to relish and chill, because with what should be part decline – remains far ahead of most of the world.
Though emerging differently – Asia was able to soup together their ways and other aspects of growth determinism.
There is no way it should not have been obvious that in a capitalist society, the most important sector is the economy and the most important field is economics.
Another dance is of the drifter’s drum.
Once the economy falters – others follow.
Most of the things that grow – commercially – are for perceived value, graded by price.
Big stuff like the defence that grows across nations – seeming to defy local economics, is not by itself growth but a governance tumour.
There is the security hallucination of weapons first, forgetting the economy is the greatest weapon.
Aside from growing wastes with rusty weapons across zones, there are categories that will almost never be used, not because there won’t be conflicts but because there is less incentive for self-destruction, for those that have things going – somewhat – well for them.
Also, those in power, who initiate wars, often believe that they can win and retain power, not because they see it as a path to ruin.
So, battles are often circumspectly selected, and the mad person is not that crazy – at least initially.
There is a point of enough for direct weapons of war – in proportion to priority objectives.
But there may never be enough for indirect weapons of war – economy, food, development, etc.
The groupies for direct weapons forget that some of the leading nations of present-day productivity are not the most abundant with weapons. Those, for years, on weapons speedway focused on it, to lead, losing out on other areas, as others rose.
Some countries almost seem to have outsourced their defence. Also, there is a high attraction for others to have an alliance with those who make stuff, or maybe prioritize them.
More weapons may mean an appetite for conflict or hyper-belligerence.
Conflicts remain uncertain with the use of fair weapons, as well unclear benefits amid so much noise.
The economic decline may – maybe – be turned around with invasion centuries ago – and then occupation, but with horror weapons now and continuous options for resources and production elsewhere, weapons winders bear economic senescence.
Some may argue the need for new frontiers of defence, yes, maybe, but the economy, economy mostly.
There should be at least hundreds of new economic ideas tested on small scale across locations – to find new options with demand, supply and more.
Economics should be the most with the number of tryouts seeking how to make progress in a changing world, but painfully, most in the field are showroom economists, displaying data prowess, bickering over trends and terms but deficient in applicable economic ideas for continuous progress.
They have become watchers of the gauge, rather than seek hundreds of mobility alternatives to keep the economic cargo moving; that if some parts go to others, there should be tens of options to redirect the loss in gainful ways.
There are some big ideas on what to do in some cases and sometimes just one. If the best to come up with is just one, not at least twenty, it has already failed. Who cares about prestigious titles, degrees, places or roles if they have little ideas in their field on how to move all forward as they watch their civilization asphyxiate?
Most economists in recent decades had no major paths for the future. They sheltered in the lack-of-better-ideas prison, similar now by most economists, towards the future, with resignation. Such a shame that they know how many economic troubles had been responsible for problems across the world throughout history, but refuse to drive economics reproductively with great ideas for new options regardless of what emerges and how tough it gets, uncertainties or catastrophes.
Most economists are an embarrassment, with nothing to contribute to progress than – to be dated analysis, debates over who crashes first, sham indicators and void revisions.
They forget how responsible they are not just for their own civilization, but also for the developing world since the majority of the developing world will never do anything new for themselves except copy from elsewhere, or adopt something really insignificant to their collective progress and yell.
Many years ago, the rigid capitalism models, caused lots of union troubles that may be led, in part, to horror stance that maybe also led, in part, to trouble ideologies years on. Economy first, but most economists show no leadership, so the advantage is taken of their turf for all kinds of illegal stuff.
If for example, in many developing countries, someone asks some people, why are you involved in organized crime? They may give common ludicrous answers, but one thing they don’t often say:
They want to be regarded.
In many developing countries, money – per capitalism copy – rules, so not having means being nothing, and many don’t want this.
So, for them, it is a status game, show-off and classifying display to appear better than others.
Status is worthless.
It is not often obvious because most people want to be admired, but status by itself – as a destination, not a tool – is worthless.
The world is a collection of segmented countries. If developed countries are trains on their tracks, and some emerging nations too are, some developing nations have no trains, no tracks and their people are standing by.
In that no progress situation, some are better off, so instead of most seeking ways to found a new track, or repurpose an old track, get some locomotor and get started, their people on that ground, table on status, use possessions or exposure to class, so as to distinguish selves from others.
Some get aboard other trains, do OK, but mostly get sucked in becoming little to progress.
They may not see it but are insignificant in how most act or appear, to many on trains of progress.
Who cares that someone in some null developing country somewhere drives a cool vehicle?
What does it solve? What does that do for the world or their people per progress?
There is some developing country somewhere, with their reputable companies, neighbourhoods, schools, positions, tribalism, with people there thinking they have it all, who cannot look at themselves at how backwards they are, and find ways to collectively go forward.
Most often forget that individual success is mostly an opportunity to take the collective risk so that if it works, it benefits them and their people. But unfortunately, these places lack much, while getting consumed by petty heavy nonsense, repeating the same with many of their progenitors.
There is often an insistence on education, democracy, freedom, transparency, etc. Those are cool indexes but are like the tenth need for most developing countries.
Since their schools mostly don’t have advanced facilities or much, rather than focus on studying what others are studying, yet not great at it, they should instead have institutes of imagination, colleges of observation, labs of integrity, departments of courage, groups of fairness, schools of trust and integrity.
Most of the countries lack these. There is hardly a way for most new leaders or many of the sham revolutions to do much.
Why won’t many be corrupt?
On the ground, the goal is to make it comfortable or maybe find ways to feel better than others, etc.
What a joke for all the symbolism from most of these places that they just cannot have basic fairness.
Conferences, summits or gatherings to discuss their nothing subjects all lack emotional observation, no exception.
The same way status is worthless in those countries is the same way status is worthless anywhere in the world.
The moving train has several mechanical parts, it is possible to be on an amazing train and have others work on the ugly parts, but after a while, those tending and supplying the ugly parts hold some power. Status may still seem valid, but others handle something important.
Status, Rolodex or connections, as the way things should happen, is part of the model of economic decline.
It was cool monarchy powered stuff, but with similar, now, in parallel to Asia’s fierce economic procession, doom, doom.
There are many of the bygone eras who hardly saw the future. Then in their status, feeling like the centre of all, are gone, faded, irrelevant, not remembered. This is often forgotten by many in the present.
There are people who for whatever reason believe that being born white or in some associated country means being special, or better than others, NO it does not.
Those in the tug for this or against can’t see their loss in economic substitution.
For some, they claim they are protecting civilization, or others from taking over, but this will not happen.
Mostly, in these major countries, they have so many programs, to assist the sick, the troubled, those in need, including interventions, tips against addiction, harm, etc. The summary of the message is don’t waste your life, even if it achieves nothing grand per se, just do OK, and who knows, it might.
Now, in some places, certain tiny groups say they have to do ruinous martyrdom to conquer others. So an ideology that tells people to waste their life will conquer a place already evolved to cherish life?
It won’t happen.
Most of the fears are diversions from an economy that has cratered and no answer, so find something to grab minds and leave out answers.
Whatever the future may hold, hate is not the future.
Deception is not the future.
It is possible to predict their directions, but both will not win.
In hindsight deceit revealed is sometimes more than disappointing, just like hate, greed, lust, evil, wickedness, etc.
It is easier to predict the future, with themes than with events.
The future is extremism, though could be in useful stuff.
Extremism, not moderation will be the future, from different directions.
Though Asia made it, they don’t have big ideas that would move them or the world far super forward.
The world too is short on answers.
The fields that produce studies and should quadruple outputs, to close in on pervasive progress face funding cuts and diversions.
Progress stalls because of economics and swing set, post-ideas economists.
Technology is far subject to economics than many believe it is an advance driven progress.
There is a big country whose meaning will – maybe – depend on sabotage and antagonism because they have lost out on the future, so they have to posture with both.
There is also another big country, with super-smart people doing amazingly and leading across fields nationally and internationally, but that country is unlikely to succeed, even if some of their known cognitive snipers elsewhere – come to power.
This is due to religious aggression, certain culture and the funnel of their people to get out to enthusiastically build the civilization of others.
Religion is mostly about association and possession – what the people believe they have. It is not often the most important to decisions as many prioritize whatever according to desires, needs or status, not adherence or pure heart.
The future is religion as well, though may not be just organized.
Some people remain consumed by what skills people would need in future?
Economics is before all, few see it or that it is diseased and needs massive multiple ideas, instead most people run amok seeking scraps of economic servants.
[Matthew 6:21, For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.]
By Blaise Udunze
Could it be said that Nigeria’s true identity today represents a country suffering and grappling with soaring inflation, mass unemployment, failing public infrastructure and multidimensional poverty despite almost three decades of enormous public revenue inflows? With the look of things, one question therefore deserves urgent national attention. Without missing any words, what exactly has government at all levels done with the trillions of naira shared through the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC)?
One obvious fact is that since the return to democratic governance in 1999, Nigeria has witnessed a remarkable expansion in federal revenue sharing since the existence of this country.
Findings based on monthly allocations reported by FAAC and the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) showed that over the past 27 years, the FAAC has distributed an estimated N160 trillion among the Federal Government, the 36 states and the 774 local governments. The obvious here is that the figure represents one of the largest transfers of public resources in Nigeria’s history.
One would definitely assume that, since the removal of the fuel subsidy in June 2023, government revenues have risen dramatically. Not to miss out on other gains from crude oil earnings, statutory revenue, Value Added Tax (VAT), exchange-rate adjustments, electronic money transfer levies, customs collections and other federally collected revenues, resulting in unprecedented monthly FAAC allocations.
In 10 years alone, FAAC distributed approximately N25.58 trillion to the three tiers of government, with states and the FCT receiving about N13.8 trillion during the period. One would also wonder that since President Bola Tinubu assumed office in May 2023, more than N56 trillion has been distributed through FAAC.
Surprisingly, amidst it all, in just over three years, President Tinubu’s administration has presided over FAAC distributions amounting to approximately 35 per cent of the estimated N160 trillion shared since the return to democracy in 1999. In other words, more than one in every three naira ever distributed through FAAC over 27 years has been shared under the current administration. But this recent figure represents only a fraction of the larger national story.
The more important question is not simply how much money has been shared. The question is what Nigeria has built with more than N160 trillion in public allocations over nearly three decades.
What is of concrete concern is that the sheer size of N160 trillion is difficult to comprehend until placed beside Nigeria’s major economic indicators.
Nigeria’s total public debt stood at approximately N149.39 trillion as of March 31, 2025. This means that the estimated FAAC allocations shared since 1999 are larger than the country’s entire current debt stock. While FAAC funds cannot directly be compared with debt because they serve different fiscal purposes, the comparison highlights a critical reality that shows that Nigeria has generated and distributed enormous financial resources, yet still carries one of Africa’s largest debt burdens.
The comparison with national budgets is equally revealing. Come to think of it, Nigeria’s proposed N58.18 trillion 2026 budget represents one of the largest annual spending plans in the country’s history, whilst the cumulative FAAC allocations since 1999 are equivalent to almost three times the size of Nigeria’s 2026 federal budget.
No doubt, the implication is profound. A country that has shared resources equivalent to several annual national budgets should reasonably demonstrate significant improvements in infrastructure, healthcare, education, electricity, industrialisation and citizens’ welfare. But the reality remains different.
One thing is obvious today and cannot be disputed by the political players, both past and present: Nigeria continues to struggle with poor roads, unreliable electricity, inadequate healthcare facilities, overcrowded classrooms, high unemployment and widespread poverty.
The truth is that the comparison becomes even more striking when looking at specific sectors, as this would provide a clearer picture. Considering that Nigeria’s recent proposed 2026 budget allocates approximately N3.52 trillion for education, N2.48 trillion for health and N3.56 trillion for infrastructure, bringing the combined allocation for these three critical sectors to about N9.56 trillion. The estimated N160 trillion shared through FAAC since 1999 is more than 16 times the combined 2026 federal allocation for education, health and infrastructure.
This raises a fundamental question: if Nigeria has received resources sufficient to finance these strategic sectors multiple times over, why do citizens continue to experience declining social services?
The comparison with capital investment is also significant. Nigeria’s proposed 2026 capital expenditure of N26.08 trillion is only a fraction of the estimated FAAC allocations shared since 1999. Had a substantial portion of these revenues been consistently channelled into productive capital projects, Nigeria could have developed world-class transportation networks, reliable electricity systems, modern healthcare facilities, industrial clusters and globally competitive education infrastructure.
That is the scale of the opportunity Nigeria has had. Instead, millions of Nigerians continue asking a painful question: Where is the evidence?
Economic theory is straightforward. When governments receive large financial resources, citizens expect corresponding improvements in their standard of living. Public revenue exists to create public value, not merely to finance government administration. Imagine what N160 trillion could have achieved if strategically invested over 27 years.
Nigeria has an estimated housing deficit exceeding 28 million units. A sustained investment programme using only a fraction of FAAC resources could have delivered millions of affordable homes while creating massive employment opportunities across construction, cement, steel, furniture and logistics industries.
Strategic agricultural investment could have transformed Nigeria into a food-secure nation through irrigation systems, mechanised farming, storage facilities, rural roads and agro-processing industries.
Investment in healthcare could have ensured that every local government has functional primary healthcare centres equipped with trained personnel, essential medicines and modern facilities.
Education could have been completely transformed through improved teacher training, digital learning infrastructure, modern classrooms, research facilities and expanded access to quality education.
Nigeria’s electricity challenge could have received far greater attention through investments in transmission networks, renewable energy, gas-powered generation and embedded power solutions that would reduce the cost burden on businesses and households.
A significant portion of FAAC resources invested in small and medium-sized enterprises could have created millions of jobs, expanded local production and strengthened Nigeria’s private sector.
None of these ambitions was beyond Nigeria’s financial capacity. The resources existed. The challenge has been utilisation.
Across many states, FAAC has gradually become less of a development catalyst and more of a monthly survival mechanism. Salaries, recurrent expenditure, political appointments, administrative costs and government overheads consume substantial portions of public resources, while capital projects remain insufficient.
The dependence on FAAC has also discouraged many states from aggressively developing sustainable internally generated revenue. Many states still depend heavily on federal allocations, weakening fiscal innovation and reducing accountability. A system where governments wait monthly for federal transfers creates little incentive to build productive economies.
Ironically, decades of increased allocations have coincided with worsening economic realities. Food prices continue rising. Millions remain unemployed or underemployed. Hospitals struggle with inadequate equipment. Schools remain overcrowded. Roads continue deteriorating. Manufacturers battle high energy costs. Businesses continue closing. Families spend more of their income meeting basic needs.
This contradiction raises serious governance questions. In Nigeria’s case, painfully, revenue growth does not automatically create development. Development requires transparency, accountability, strategic planning and effective implementation.
Nigeria must therefore move beyond celebrating monthly FAAC figures and begin measuring the outcomes generated from those resources.
Every month, Nigerians hear announcements of billions and trillions shared among governments. But rarely do they hear: How many hospitals were completed? How many schools were renovated? How many kilometres of roads were delivered? How many jobs were created? How many communities gained access to clean water? How many businesses were supported?
Revenue announcements must never replace performance reports. Every state and local government should publish transparent FAAC utilisation reports showing allocations received, projects funded, costs, locations and measurable outcomes.
Technology makes this possible. Open budgeting platforms, public expenditure dashboards and digital monitoring systems can ensure citizens know how their resources are being deployed.
Transparency should no longer be optional. The Federal Government equally has a responsibility.
Higher revenues must translate into improved national infrastructure, stronger institutions, better security, industrial growth and enhanced social protection.
Nigeria cannot continue borrowing heavily while simultaneously receiving record public revenues without demonstrating corresponding developmental outcomes.
Public finance is not simply about collecting money. It is about creating lasting value. Roads improve commerce. Electricity supports industries. Education increases productivity. Healthcare strengthens human capital. Agriculture reduces dependence on imports. Digital infrastructure enhances competitiveness. These are investments that create future prosperity.
When public revenue is consumed mainly by recurrent obligations, future generations inherit debts without corresponding assets.
Nigeria must strengthen accountability institutions, including auditors-general, public accounts committees, anti-corruption agencies and civil society organisations, to monitor how FAAC resources are utilised.
Citizens also have a responsibility. Public money belongs to the people. Communities must demand evidence of projects funded by government resources.
The tragedy of Nigeria is not simply a shortage of revenue. It is the failure to convert revenue into development. Nigeria has demonstrated remarkable ability to generate public income. What remains lacking is the political discipline and institutional capacity to transform that income into national prosperity.
The estimated N160 trillion shared through FAAC since 1999 represented a historic opportunity to rebuild Nigeria’s economy and improve citizens’ lives.
Millions of jobs could have been created. Infrastructure could have been transformed. Poverty could have been reduced. Investor confidence could have strengthened. Living standards could have improved.
Instead, many Nigerians continue to experience economic hardship despite decades of enormous public revenue distribution.
History will not judge governments by how much FAAC they received. History will judge them by what those allocations built.
The real question is no longer whether Nigeria has enough money. The question is whether Nigeria has the leadership, accountability and political will to convert public wealth into public prosperity. Not to focus on using the FAAC as an electoral tool to weaponise the opposition. Until that happens, N160 trillion in FAAC allocations will remain a symbol of missed opportunity rather than a foundation for national transformation.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: bl***********@***il.com
By Gleb Tsipursky
Nigeria’s artificial intelligence conversation has moved from whether businesses will use the technology to how they can use it without creating expensive new forms of confusion. Business Post recently examined the practical barriers facing Nigerian SMEs, including infrastructure constraints, digital skills shortages, regulatory gaps, and the need for any new technology to show a visible return. That is the right frame. For a small or mid-sized business, a clever system that creates hidden rework can cost more than it saves.
The timing matters. The Deep Learning Indaba brought Africa’s machine-learning community to Lagos from August 2 to 7 under the theme of sovereign intelligence. Nigeria’s National Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics is also promoting practical adoption, entrepreneurship, and locally grounded systems. The country has talent, ambition, and increasingly accessible tools. What many businesses still lack is a simple management mechanism for learning from the moments when those tools get things wrong.
Every SME adopting AI should keep an exception ledger.
An exception ledger is a short operational record of cases in which an employee had to correct, override, redo, or stop an AI-assisted task. It does not need special software. A spreadsheet can work. Each entry should answer five questions: What was the task? What did the system get wrong or leave uncertain? What did the employee do? What business consequence would have followed if nobody intervened? Does the same problem appear often enough to justify a change in the workflow?
That sounds modest, but it changes how a company measures AI. Most adoption discussions focus on usage, time saved, or the number of employees trained. Those figures reveal activity. They say little about whether the work is becoming more reliable.
Consider a distributor using AI to draft quotations. The system may save ten minutes on most quotes, but twice a week it could mix up a product specification or fail to carry through a delivery condition. If staff silently repair those errors, the company records the time savings while hiding the correction cost. The same pattern can occur in customer service, bookkeeping, marketing, procurement, recruitment, or inventory forecasting.
The ledger turns those invisible corrections into management information. If one mistake appears once, it may require no action. If the same exception appears repeatedly, managers can change the prompt, source data, approval step, software configuration, or division of responsibility between the employee and the system. The business then improves the workflow rather than merely telling staff to “be careful.”
This is particularly important in Nigeria because SMEs operate with little room for waste. Business Post’s recent coverage of responsible AI for African SMEs has emphasised that trust, security, and accountability need to grow alongside adoption. An exception ledger gives those principles an everyday operating form. It lets an owner see whether a tool is producing a manageable stream of minor corrections or creating a pattern that threatens cash, customers, compliance, or reputation.
The ledger also protects employees from a common failure in technology rollouts. When an AI system makes an error, the human reviewer can become the person blamed for failing to catch it. That creates a perverse incentive to hide problems. A formal exception process sends the opposite message: catching a failure is valuable information. Employees become sensors for workflow quality rather than the last invisible line of defence.
Managers should keep the process light. If logging an exception takes ten minutes, staff will avoid it. A useful entry should take less than a minute and use a few fixed categories, such as factual error, missing context, policy conflict, customer sensitivity, data problem, or unclear ownership. The goal is not paperwork. The goal is pattern recognition.
A monthly review can then identify three kinds of decisions. First, some tasks are safe enough for greater automation because exceptions remain rare and low impact. Second, some tasks need a stronger human checkpoint because errors are costly or difficult to detect. Third, some tasks should stay primarily human because the judgment involved cannot be reduced to a reliable rule at the current stage of the technology.
This approach also helps Nigerian SMEs avoid a false choice between moving fast and acting responsibly. Small businesses cannot afford elaborate governance structures modelled on large banks or multinational companies. They can, however, create one feedback loop that connects frontline corrections to management decisions.
That feedback loop matters as Nigeria builds a larger AI ecosystem. A country can train more engineers, expand computing capacity, develop local-language models, and encourage entrepreneurship, but adoption succeeds inside businesses one workflow at a time. The practical test is whether a system helps people complete real work with fewer errors, less rework, and clearer accountability.
Nigeria has good reasons to accelerate AI adoption. The strongest businesses will not be those that accumulate the most tools. They will be those that learn fastest from the exceptions those tools create.
Gleb Tsipursky, PhD, is a behavioural scientist, CEO of Disaster Avoidance Experts, and author of The Psychology of AI Adoption at Work: From Resistance to Results (Georgetown University Press, 2026). https://disasteravoidanceexperts.com/ai********@**********************ts.com
Feature/OPED
GLO@23: How Billionaire Otunba Mike Adenuga Built a Telecom Empire That Refuses to Sell Out
By Bodex Hungbo
In a corporate world where corporate giants regularly swap boardrooms like trading cards and sell off equity at the first sign of volatility, one legendary tycoon continues to prove that absolute control is the ultimate power move. That man is Otunba Mike Adenuga Jr., the visionary billionaire whose dense belief in indigenous enterprise gave birth to Globacom, the telecom powerhouse affectionately known across the continent as Glo.
As Globacom marks a monumental 23-year milestone, the spotlight shines brightly not only on the company’s extraordinary ascent, but on the enduring legacy of its founder. Adenuga stands as the only Nigerian to establish, nurture, and retain 100% sole ownership of a national telecommunications network; one that has evolved into one of Africa’s most recognisable, resilient, and influential brands.
While rival networks scrambled through endless corporate restructuring, foreign buyouts, hostile takeovers, and high-stakes rebrandings, “The Bull” pulled off what many in international finance considered impossible: holding complete control of Nigeria’s proudest homegrown tech giant for over two decades without surrendering a single inch of authority.
From the very beginning, Adenuga refused to follow the standard playbook written by foreign multinationals. When Globacom officially launched in August 2003, the market was heavily dominated by well-funded international operators who insisted that certain consumer-friendly models were economically impossible in Africa. Sceptics openly declared that a wholly indigenous, single-owner startup could never go toe-to-toe with established global giants.
Adenuga didn’t just compete; he single-handedly revolutionised the entire landscape.
At a time when competitors claimed that charging consumers per second rather than per minute was technically unfeasible, Glo introduced per-second billing on day one. By charging 1 kobo per second, Globacom shattered the status quo overnight, forcing the entire telecom industry to follow suit. That single disruptive move democratised mobile access, saved everyday Nigerians billions of Naira, and transformed mobile phones from luxury items for the elite into essential tools for the masses.
Adenuga’s commitment to self-reliance went far beyond marketing strategies; it was backed by monumental capital investments in hard infrastructure. To ensure that Glo would never be beholden to external actors, he funded game-changing projects directly from his own vision and capital.
Chief among these milestones was the construction of Glo-1, a multi-million-dollar, high-capacity submarine fibre-optic cable stretching over 9,800 kilometres directly from the United Kingdom to Nigeria. Single-handedly funded without taking a single dollar in foreign equity, Glo-1 provided West Africa with unprecedented broadband capacity, drastically improving internet speeds, powering corporate enterprises, and anchoring the region’s digital economy.
Alongside this undersea marvel, Globacom built an extensive terrestrial fibre-optic backbone across Nigeria, expanding coverage into underserved rural communities and providing the critical pipeline for modern data services, mobile banking, and digital commerce.
The fierce independence that defines Globacom is a direct reflection of its founder’s personal journey. Adenuga’s rise is the ultimate story of relentless African grit. Long before he was dubbed “The Bull” of African commerce, a young Adenuga drove taxis and worked security jobs in the United States to pay his way through university.
Returning to Nigeria with a sharp mind and an insatiable work ethic, he built his fortune brick by brick. He conquered hard commodities, established a presence in oil and gas with Conoil, mastered corporate banking, and ultimately turned his sight toward telecommunications. Every venture was driven by the same philosophy: absolute dedication, hands-on execution, and a fierce refusal to settle for second best.
Despite commanding a multi-billion-dollar fortune, Adenuga remains famously reclusive. Operating largely away from public cameras and party circuits, he chooses to let his work speak for him. His quiet philanthropy, strategic investments, and relentless job creation have lifted thousands of families and injected vital energy into the broader West African economy.
Beyond cell towers and fibre-optic lines, Globacom transformed itself into an iconic symbol of African pride. Recognising the power of local culture long before global streaming platforms arrived, Adenuga turned Glo into the largest single corporate promoter of African entertainment and sports.
Glo flooded the creative industry with record-breaking sponsorship deals and endorsements, signing Nollywood legends, musical powerhouses, and sports heroes as brand ambassadors. From sponsoring the prestigious CAF African Footballer of the Year Awards and the Nigerian Premier League to funding cultural festivals, comedy tours, and reality shows, Glo actively elevated African talent to global prominence.
Through these cultural investments, the brand cultivated an emotional connection with millions of subscribers, proving that an African brand could stand tall, celebrate its heritage, and deliver world-class service without losing its soul.
Industry analysts frequently cite Globacom as more than just a corporate success; it is an enduring case study in what happens when visionary local leadership is matched with long-term capital and solid determination. Over 23 years, Glo has weathered fierce market competition, rapid technological transitions from 2G to 5G, and volatile macroeconomic shifts, all while maintaining its position at the top tier of African telecommunications.
As customers, industry leaders, and well-wishers celebrate GLO@23, the milestone serves as a powerful tribute to a titan who dared to build on his own terms.
Today, Globacom isn’t merely a telecom network; it stands as living proof of African capability, self-determination, and industrial excellence. As the green network prepares for its next era of digital expansion, artificial intelligence integration, and next-generation connectivity, one truth remains crystal clear across Africa’s business landscape: The Bull is still on the throne, and his legacy is built to last.
