Thursday, August 16, 2018
Video - Victor Moses shocks fans with sudden exit announcement
Nigerian football fans are in shock at the retirement of one of their star players, Victor Moses. The 27-year-old Chelsea winger has released a statement to confirm his departure from the Nigerian national team.
Victor Moses of Nigeria retires from international football at 27
The Chelsea winger played 37 times for his country, scoring 12 times since making his debut in 2012.
He had previously represented England up to Under-21 level, while coming through the ranks at Crystal palace.
"I have experienced some of the best moments of my life wearing the Super Eagles shirt and have memories with me that will last a lifetime," he said.
"However, I feel that now is the right time to step away in order to be able to focus fully on my club career and young family, as well as to allow the next generation the opportunity to step up and to flourish.
"Thank you for the memories and good luck to the team for the future."
Moses won the Africa Cup of Nations with Nigeria in 2013, and represented the nation at two World Cups, in 2014 and 2018.
Nigeria were knocked out at the group stage in Russia this summer, having beaten Iceland but suffered defeats by Croatia and Argentina.
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Video - Nigeria Coffee Art
To Nigeria now, where we meet an artist who's found a new purpose for coffee. Ekene Ngige is an avid coffee drinker, and has been using it in staining techniques in his art too.
Monthly uber passengers in Nigeria reaches 267,000
Transportation network company, Uber Nigeria, currently has 9,000 active driver-partners and no fewer than 267,000 monthly riders, an official has said. Francesca Uriri, the company’s Head of Communications in West Africa, made the disclosure in an interview in Lagos on Wednesday.
Uriri said that the drivers and riders were based in Abuja and Lagos, where Uber currently focused. She claimed that the growing number of the riders was due to safety and services provided by the company. “Uber works together with regulators to ensure the safety of its platform and that of those who use it,’’ Uriri said.
The official also said that Uber maintained a high level of privacy. “Uber has taken steps to protect its sensitive external data repositories. “In Nigeria Uber is currently available in Lagos and Abuja and is focused on enabling driver-partners by providing business and economic opportunities.
“The steadily growing number of Uber driver-partners in Nigeria is a testament to the appeal of the Uber business model. “That is because it creates real opportunities for local entrepreneurs to create and enjoy flexibility and enhance earning potential,’’ she said.
According to Uriri, each city in Nigeria is unique and offers unique opportunities. “We have found Nigeria to be defined by agility, creativity and adaptability; we are committed to growth, and excited about the potential. “ When Uber commenced operations in Lagos four years ago, it (Lagos) was the fourth city in sub-Saharan Africa,’’ she said. She said that Uber was already present in over 140 cities in 40 countries before then.
“ Today, Uber is available in 13 cities in Sub-Saharan Africa, and is available globally in over 600 cities in over 75 countries spanning six continents,’’ she said. Uriri said that Uber was constantly looking for ways to help driver-partners to get more value through many partnerships. “In Nigeria, we have partnered with companies such as FirstBank and Germaine Autos to ease the barriers of car ownership for driver-partners and to provide valuable car maintenance and servicing plans.’’
Uriri listed mapping and traffic congestion as some of Uber’s challenges in Nigeria but said that the company was working hard daily to overcome challenges to ensure seamless experience. Uber is a technology platform.
The Uber app connects driver-partners and riders. Driver-partners use their own vehicles to pick up riders and drive them to their destinations and are paid for each completed trip. Uber was founded in March 2009 in San Francisco, California.
Related stories: Uber is recording exponential grown in Lagos, Nigeria
Nigerian government hands out cash to battle extreme poverty
The Nigerian government has just launched a collateral-free loan scheme which will see two million petty traders receive $28 repayable in six months.
It’s the latest social intervention program under Nigeria’s president Muhammadu Buhari. The government also offers free meals in public primary schools and plans to distribute $300 million in looted funds recovered from Swiss authorities to its poorest people. Around 300,000 households in 19 of Nigeria’s 36 states are expected to receive $14 per month.
There’s one simple reason Nigeria is doubling down on cash transfers to its poorest people: 86.9 million Nigerians—nearly 50% of its estimated 180 million population—live in extreme poverty.
So, does handing out cash to poor people actually work?
Yes, according to data.
A 2016 study by Overseas Development Institute (ODI) showed links between cash transfers and an improvement in school attendance, use of health services and dietary diversity in households that receive them. As Quartz has reported, when given to women, cash transfers have a positive impact on reducing domestic and sexual violence in poor households as well as reducing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
Research has also dispelled the notion that poor people could abuse cash transfers with non-essential purchases. Several countries are wise to the potential of cash transfers as a development policy. Around a billion people currently receive cash transfers across 130 countries, according to the World Bank (pdf) with most of the transfers coming from governments.
But there’s a catch.
Studies also show that while giving money to poor people outright can have a positive impact on reducing poverty, the effects don’t last after the cash transfers stop. For many recipients, the cash transfers are essentially a means to better living on a day-to-day basis rather than a permanent transformative fix. The short-lived effects clearly give governments a hint: cash transfers are not substitutes for good governance or delivering a better life to citizens in the long-term.
Ephemeral effects aside, local nuance means cash transfers in Nigeria will unlikely be straightforward business. For starters, Africa’s largest economy notoriously lacks national records through which it will properly identify its poorest people. More so, with the poorest people likely unbanked, it’s unclear how the cash will reach them in a manner that’s transparent. In a country where corruption is rampant, that’s a red flag.
And then there’s the question of timing. With general elections due early next year, some will regard the interventions as a play for votes. There is already ample reason to be cynical. Recent state level elections have been marred by brazen vote-buying by agents of major political parties.
Cheta Nwanze, researcher with SBM Intelligence, a Lagos-based intelligence consulting firm, says the loan scheme “will likely end up as a largesse which will not make a dent” and for which “return rates will be very poor.” Recent history backs up some of that sentiment. After launching a $126 million loan scheme for farmers in 2015, the government has struggled to recover the loans. As of December 2017, less than 50 of the 5,540 rice and wheat farmers who received loans had repaid them.
It’s the latest social intervention program under Nigeria’s president Muhammadu Buhari. The government also offers free meals in public primary schools and plans to distribute $300 million in looted funds recovered from Swiss authorities to its poorest people. Around 300,000 households in 19 of Nigeria’s 36 states are expected to receive $14 per month.
There’s one simple reason Nigeria is doubling down on cash transfers to its poorest people: 86.9 million Nigerians—nearly 50% of its estimated 180 million population—live in extreme poverty.
So, does handing out cash to poor people actually work?
Yes, according to data.
A 2016 study by Overseas Development Institute (ODI) showed links between cash transfers and an improvement in school attendance, use of health services and dietary diversity in households that receive them. As Quartz has reported, when given to women, cash transfers have a positive impact on reducing domestic and sexual violence in poor households as well as reducing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
Research has also dispelled the notion that poor people could abuse cash transfers with non-essential purchases. Several countries are wise to the potential of cash transfers as a development policy. Around a billion people currently receive cash transfers across 130 countries, according to the World Bank (pdf) with most of the transfers coming from governments.
But there’s a catch.
Studies also show that while giving money to poor people outright can have a positive impact on reducing poverty, the effects don’t last after the cash transfers stop. For many recipients, the cash transfers are essentially a means to better living on a day-to-day basis rather than a permanent transformative fix. The short-lived effects clearly give governments a hint: cash transfers are not substitutes for good governance or delivering a better life to citizens in the long-term.
Ephemeral effects aside, local nuance means cash transfers in Nigeria will unlikely be straightforward business. For starters, Africa’s largest economy notoriously lacks national records through which it will properly identify its poorest people. More so, with the poorest people likely unbanked, it’s unclear how the cash will reach them in a manner that’s transparent. In a country where corruption is rampant, that’s a red flag.
And then there’s the question of timing. With general elections due early next year, some will regard the interventions as a play for votes. There is already ample reason to be cynical. Recent state level elections have been marred by brazen vote-buying by agents of major political parties.
Cheta Nwanze, researcher with SBM Intelligence, a Lagos-based intelligence consulting firm, says the loan scheme “will likely end up as a largesse which will not make a dent” and for which “return rates will be very poor.” Recent history backs up some of that sentiment. After launching a $126 million loan scheme for farmers in 2015, the government has struggled to recover the loans. As of December 2017, less than 50 of the 5,540 rice and wheat farmers who received loans had repaid them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)