Nigeria’s Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has summoned MultiChoice Nigeria’s Chief Executive Officer for an investigative hearing over the company’s latest subscription price increase, which has sparked backlash among consumers.

The regulatory body, exercising its powers under Sections 32 and 33 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), directed MultiChoice to appear before it on Thursday, February 27, 2025, at its headquarters in Abuja to justify the sharp increments in DStv and GOtv rates.

The FCCPC’s intervention comes amid growing consumer complaints regarding MultiChoice’s frequent price hikes, which many Nigerians have labeled exploitative. In its statement, the commission noted that Nigerian consumers continue to face repeated price increases, even as the company applies different pricing strategies in other markets. This, the agency said, raises concerns about fairness, potential market abuse, and the treatment of Nigerian consumers compared to their counterparts in other African nations.

“The FCCPC is deeply concerned that Nigerian consumers continue to face frequent price increases, amid accusations that MultiChoice applies different pricing strategies in other markets, heightening questions about fairness and market abuse,” the agency said in a statement.

MultiChoice announced earlier this week that, effective March 1, 2025, subscription prices across all DStv and GOtv packages will increase. The changes include:

• DStv Compact moves from N15,700 to N19,000 (+25%).
• DStv Compact Plus increasing from N25,000 to N30,000 (+20%).
• DStv Premium, the highest plan, rises from N37,000 to N44,500 (+20%).
• GOtv Jinja moves from N3,600 to N3,900.
• GOtv Jolli increases from N4,850 to N5,800.
• GOtv Max rises from N7,200 to N8,500.
• GOtv Supa increases from N9,600 to N11,400.
• GOtv Supa Plus, the most expensive GOtv package, jumps from N15,700 to N16,800.

This price adjustment follows a similar hike in 2024, where MultiChoice increased subscription rates, citing inflation, currency devaluation, and increased operational costs. Nigerian consumers, however, argue that these hikes are unjustified, as there have been no notable improvements in service quality, content diversity, or customer experience.

FCCPC’s Warning: Regulatory Sanctions on the Table

The FCCPC has made it clear that MultiChoice must provide a satisfactory explanation for the new price adjustments or face regulatory sanctions, penalties, or corrective measures. The commission emphasized that protecting consumers from arbitrary pricing in the pay-TV industry remains a priority.

“Should MultiChoice fail to provide satisfactory explanations or be found in violation of fair market principles, the FCCPC will be left with no other option than to impose regulatory penalties, sanctions, or other corrective measures to protect Nigerian consumers,” the commission stated.

The FCCPC also noted that it is engaging with the broadcasting sector’s regulatory bodies to ensure fair competition and prevent consumer exploitation in Nigeria’s digital subscription industry.

Just Another Round in MultiChoice’s Price Hike Battle 

MultiChoice Nigeria is not new to regulatory scrutiny, having faced multiple lawsuits, regulatory summons, and inquiries by Nigerians, regulators, and lawmakers over its pricing strategy. Yet, in nearly all instances, the company has successfully defended its position in courts and regulatory hearings, emerging victorious against attempts to force price reductions.

The South African-based cable TV company has consistently argued that its pricing structure is dictated by market forces, inflation, and operational costs, leaving regulators with little power to intervene in what the company maintains is a business decision.

Given this track record, Nigerians remain skeptical about the FCCPC’s ability to force any meaningful change, with many pointing out that past regulatory actions have done little to halt the company’s recurring price hikes.

One of the primary frustrations among Nigerian consumers is the lack of viable alternatives to MultiChoice’s DStv and GOtv services. While there were a few competitors, such as Startimes and TStv, they failed to match MultiChoice in terms of content, sports coverage, and reliability. As a result, many Nigerians feel trapped, with no choice but to continue paying higher prices for essential sports, entertainment, and news content.

Some have called for the government to encourage new players to enter the pay-TV market to break MultiChoice’s near-monopoly. Others have argued that allowing Netflix, Amazon Prime, and other streaming services to operate freely without excessive regulatory burdens could provide a more competitive alternative.

Kyiv has reached a breakthrough agreement with Washington on mineral resource management, a deal that has not only solidified U.S.-Ukraine economic ties but also fueled political tensions between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in recent weeks.

The deal, confirmed by Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Minister Olha Stefanishyna in an interview with the Financial Times on Feb. 25, marks a significant shift in Ukraine’s economic strategy as it seeks to leverage its mineral wealth to secure long-term financial stability. Zelensky’s office also confirmed the agreement to the Kyiv Independent.

While Ukraine has also presented the deal as a step toward strengthening ties with the U.S., many experts believe that the agreement is largely skewed in Washington’s favor, raising concerns about Ukraine’s sovereignty over its own natural resources.

This development comes as Ukraine faces a daunting economic challenge: the estimated cost of reconstruction and recovery from Russia’s full-scale invasion has now ballooned to a staggering $524 billion over the next decade, according to a joint report by Ukraine’s government, the World Bank, the European Commission, and the United Nations. The sheer scale of destruction—affecting key sectors such as housing, energy, transportation, and trade—has left Ukraine in dire need of massive financial aid and investment.

A Deal That Favors the U.S.?

In an earlier proposal by Trump, Ukraine would contribute to the fund until the contributions reach the sum of $500 billion. The United States would provide a long-term financial commitment to the development of a “stable and economically prosperous Ukraine.” But Zelenskiy refused to sign the deal, with Kyiv protesting it had received far less than that in U.S. aid and the deal lacked the security guarantees Ukraine needs.

Under the final version of the minerals agreement, Ukraine will establish a sovereign fund, contributing 50% of proceeds from the future monetization of state-owned mineral resources, including oil, gas, and related logistics.

These revenues will be used to invest in projects within Ukraine. However, the deal specifically excludes resources that already contribute to the state budget, such as those controlled by Ukraine’s state-owned energy firms Naftogaz and Ukrnafta.

A key point of contention is that while the fund will be jointly managed by Ukraine and the U.S., decision-making authority will ultimately rest with Washington under American legal oversight. Many believe that this provision gives the U.S. significant control over Ukraine’s natural wealth, essentially making it a junior partner in the arrangement.

While the deal drops earlier U.S. demands for a $500 billion claim over Ukraine’s mineral resources, it still allows the U.S. to claim joint ownership of Ukraine’s resource-related infrastructure, including ports. This means that Ukraine will not only share revenues but also relinquish significant control over key economic assets.

Trump’s Hardline Approach and Zelensky’s Concessions

The minerals deal has been at the center of a heated dispute between Trump and Zelensky. Ukraine had initially rejected the U.S. proposal due to a controversial repayment structure, which would have required Kyiv to return two dollars for every one received in aid. Additionally, Zelensky had pushed for security guarantees as part of the agreement, but the final deal does not include such provisions.

Trump has been publicly pressuring Zelensky to move forward with the deal, accusing him of dragging his feet. In a sharp rebuke, Trump called Zelensky a “dictator without elections” and warned that if he did not act quickly, he would “not have a country left.” The U.S. president has framed the agreement as a way to ensure that America recoups “the tens of billions of dollars” it has spent supporting Ukraine’s war effort.

“What we’re doing is now we’re saying, look, we want to be secured,” Trump said. “The American taxpayer now is going to get their money back, plus.”

Zelensky Desperate To End The War

Amid these negotiations, Zelensky has signaled an unprecedented willingness to end the war, even suggesting that he would step down as president if it would bring peace to Ukraine.

“If [it guarantees] peace for Ukraine, if you really need me to resign, I am ready. I can exchange it for NATO,” he said. His public rhetoric has also shifted in recent weeks, with increasing emphasis on finding a diplomatic resolution to the conflict.

This shift comes as Ukraine faces a worsening military and economic situation. The war, now in its third year, has left the country in ruins. According to the World Bank’s latest estimates, Ukraine’s direct losses have surged to $176 billion, up from $152 billion just a year ago. The report highlights the extensive damage inflicted on Ukraine’s housing, energy, and transportation sectors. It notes that 13% of Ukraine’s total housing stock has been damaged or destroyed, affecting more than 2.5 million homes.

The war has also caused a 70% increase in damaged or destroyed assets, including power plants, transmission lines, and district heating systems. Key infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and ports, has suffered significant losses, making logistics and trade operations increasingly difficult.

With these staggering figures, and the US’ unwillingness to continue funding the war, Ukraine’s ability to sustain the war effort is diminishing, pushing Zelensky to explore all possible avenues for peace.

Will Russia Abide by a Peace Deal?

While Zelensky has shown enough willingness to make concessions, it remains unclear whether Russia would agree to a peace settlement that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty.

On Feb. 25, Russian Foreign Ministry Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik confirmed that Moscow’s war objectives remain “unfulfilled.” Using the Kremlin’s term for the war, he stated that the “objectives of the Special Military Operation have not yet been achieved.” Russia continues to demand that Ukraine withdraw from all four regions it illegally annexed—Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk—before any serious negotiations take place.

Even if Zelensky were to agree to some form of territorial concession, there is little confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin would abide by any agreement. Western intelligence reports suggest that Putin is using peace talks as a way to consolidate territorial gains, rather than negotiating in good faith.

Meanwhile, the U.S. has been engaging in direct talks with Russia, excluding Ukraine from the discussions. A Feb. 18 meeting in Saudi Arabia between American and Russian officials sparked outrage in Europe, with concerns that Ukraine is being sidelined in negotiations over its own future.

Trump has also hinted at a possible meeting with Putin before the end of February, fueling speculation that Washington may be seeking a separate deal with Moscow. Trump has claimed that the war “could end within weeks” and has suggested deploying European peacekeepers to Ukraine—a proposal that has received mixed reactions from European leaders. The U.K. is reportedly preparing a plan to deploy 30,000 European troops as part of a post-war security arrangement.

Over the past decade, global oil and gas investors have funneled an estimated $80 billion into energy projects elsewhere, largely bypassing Nigeria. This stark revelation was made by Olu Verheijen, Special Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Energy, at the 2025 Nigeria International Energy Summit (NIES) held in Abuja on Monday.

The summit, which brought together top energy stakeholders and government officials, served as a platform to reflect on Nigeria’s 2024 energy sector performance and its implications for Africa’s broader energy transformation. A key takeaway was that the Nigerian government is aggressively pursuing reforms to restore investor confidence, enhance oil production, and reposition the country as a top-tier oil and gas investment destination.

Addressing the core issue of why Nigeria lost out on $80 billion in oil and gas investments, Verheijen pointed to long-standing concerns over regulatory instability, fiscal uncertainty, and security challenges that made the country unattractive to global investors.

To reverse this trend, President Tinubu issued three landmark directives in February 2024—Directives 40, 41, and 42—designed to remove investment bottlenecks and enhance Nigeria’s competitiveness in the global energy market.

According to Verheijen, these measures have already begun to yield results. By mid-2024, the Ubeta Final Investment Decision (FID) was secured through a joint venture with Total, followed by the approval of Bonga North FID by Shell and its partners at the end of the year. These multi-billion-dollar projects signal renewed confidence in Nigeria’s oil and gas sector.

Looking ahead, additional FID approvals are expected in 2025, further solidifying the country’s attractiveness as an energy investment hub.

Oil and Gas Sector Renaissance: Nigeria’s 2.06mbpd 2030 Target

Beyond attracting foreign investment, President Tinubu has set ambitious targets for Nigeria’s oil and gas sector. The administration aims to restore crude oil production to 2.06 million barrels per day (bpd) in the short term and scale up to 4 million bpd by 2030.

To achieve this, the government has focused on enhancing security in oil-producing regions, a major challenge that has long hindered production.

“Through a data-driven security framework implemented in collaboration with oil operators, the Office of the National Security Adviser, and the Ministry of Defence, we have facilitated a 500,000 bpd increase in oil production since the start of this administration,” Verheijen revealed.

Verheijen described 2024 as a landmark year for Nigeria’s oil and gas sector, citing a series of transformative developments:

1. Nigeria secured three out of Africa’s four FIDs—valued at over $5.5 billion—cementing its position as a premier destination for offshore investments.
2. The country approved its first deepwater FID in over a decade, signaling renewed investor confidence.
3. Five major oil asset acquisitions were completed, expanding production capabilities.
4. Two domestic refineries were revived, boosting local refining capacity.
5. Dangote Refinery commenced petrol production, significantly reducing Nigeria’s reliance on imported fuel.

“Our nation solidified its position as a premier destination for deep offshore oil and gas investments, approved its first deepwater FID in over a decade, facilitated five major asset acquisitions, revived two domestic refineries, and commenced petrol production at Africa’s largest refinery.

“These milestones are not coincidental; they result from strategic leadership and decisive economic policies under President Bola Tinubu’s administration,” Verheijen said.

Reforming the Power Sector: Presidential Metering Initiative (PMI)

Beyond oil and gas, the Tinubu administration is also pushing reforms in the power sector, focusing on eliminating inefficiencies and stabilizing electricity supply.

A key initiative is the Presidential Metering Initiative (PMI), which consolidates all metering programs under a unified framework targeting the deployment of seven million smart meters.

“The goal is to end the inefficiencies of estimated billing, improve revenue collection for electricity distribution companies (Discos), and enhance overall service delivery,” Verheijen explained.

To ensure the long-term financial stability of the power sector, the government is also clearing outstanding debts owed to gas suppliers and generation companies while implementing a gradual transition to cost-reflective tariffs. The strategy aims to balance affordability with financial sustainability, ensuring that vulnerable populations are protected through a targeted subsidy system.

Nigeria’s Role in Africa’s Energy Future

Verheijen emphasized that Nigeria’s success in securing major oil and gas investments, expanding refining capacity, and enhancing electrification will have far-reaching consequences for Africa’s energy security, intra-African trade, and industrialization.

As the largest oil producer in Africa, Nigeria plays a critical role in regional energy markets. OPEC data shows that while major oil producers like Saudi Arabia (9 million bpd), Russia (9 million bpd), and the U.S. (13 million bpd) dominate global production, Nigeria remains the highest producer in Africa.

As competition for investment grows, Nigeria is positioning itself as a top energy hub, leveraging policy reforms and security improvements to attract global investors and reclaim its share of the $80 billion that previously bypassed the country.

To reach 4 million bpd production by 2030, the Tinubu administration is banking on continued investor confidence, a stable regulatory framework, enhanced security, and improved infrastructure.

While challenges remain—especially in security and refining capacity—the recent wave of FID approvals, refinery revivals, and strategic reforms indicate a renewed trajectory for Nigeria’s energy sector.

Trump is moving super fast as he remakes America in his own ways. Now, he has visited the wealth visa which allows people with change to get US green cards, and then US citizenship, by investing in the country: “In a dramatic shift in U.S. immigration policy, President Donald Trump announced a new, exclusive path to U.S. citizenship—a $5 million ‘gold card’—aimed at attracting ultra-wealthy investors.”

From Trump’s mouth: ‘“We’re going to be putting a price on that card of about $5 million, and that’s going to give you [permanent resident] Green Card privileges, plus it’s going to be a route to citizenship,” Trump explained. “It’s somewhat like a Green Card, but at a higher level of sophistication.”’

Good People, Trump’s The Art of the Deal is one of my current readings. What he did in Ukraine, closing a deal with Ukraine for minerals, was asymmetric that I could not understand how a human being could win left and right that way. Ukraine as a result of that deal will not just lose parts of its lands and thousands of young men and women, but now parts of its future. And yet “No NATO” or US security guarantee! How would they explain what happened to their grandkids?

So, if Trump could get Ukraine to do that deal, this gold card of $5m seems fair!

Trump Unveils $5m ‘Gold Card’ as a New Pathway to U.S. Citizenship, Scraps EB-5 Visa Program