Is X (yes, Twitter) worth the $44 billion that Elon Musk paid when he took it private?

In the past, I had argued that he blew money which he has in unlimited form. But today, I am updating that Musk bought X at a discounted value. Possibly, using the double play strategy which I explained in a Harvard Business Review piece, and which simply means that where you capture value in business may not necessarily be what people see as the core nucleus of your business (yes, the one oasis). 

Musk has played a double play strategy where X delivered a platform which assisted his candidate to win the US presidency. But that X must not be the product (or company) through which Musk must capture value. Since the election, Musk has possibly added at least $70 billion to his virtual bank digits, and that might not have been possible without his voyage into X.

So, he paid $44b and there is a value return of $70b already, so, how can you say that he overpaid in X since without X, the platform which enabled his political ascension might not have been possible? If X is a tool which was bought for a mission, X delivered. As we speak, it has generated more than $44b.

As Guardian UK and other media empires exit X, the platform can mutate as a place to reshape outlooks for future elections. If that is the case, X can even earn more money because it is the world’s #1 political square with the capacity to deliver huge results in the future.

Of course, X does not need to make tons of money for Musk, but it simply needs to make making money in other areas possible. The risk for X, though,  is what happens in four years since there would not be Trump on any ballot. Why worry – that is a political eternity for anyone to worry about right now.

The Dangote Petroleum Refinery has taken a major step in transforming Nigeria’s fuel supply chain by partnering with the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN).

As part of this significant agreement, the refinery will supply 60 million liters of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), commonly known as petrol, each week to IPMAN. This partnership, which could see the association receiving up to 240 million liters of petrol monthly, is expected to enhance Nigeria’s fuel distribution network and reduce reliance on imported fuel, a longstanding financial drain on the nation.

IPMAN, which oversees over 30,000 retail outlets and controls approximately 70% of Nigeria’s fuel retail market, views this agreement as a game-changer. Members will now be able to lift products directly from Dangote Refinery, bypassing middlemen and ensuring smoother operations.

According to Chinedu Ukadike, IPMAN’s National Publicity Secretary, this arrangement marks a significant shift for the association.

“We are going to off-take the product in millions of liters. Before now, most of the imported products in Nigeria were distributed through IPMAN,” Ukadike told The PUNCH. “So, we can off-take the products, no matter the millions of liters that are produced. Dangote has offered to give us over 60 million liters, depending on our patronage.”

The agreement not only streamlines distribution but also empowers IPMAN members to directly compete with other players in the market, including the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). This development comes in the wake of IPMAN depositing N40 billion with the NNPC to procure products, funds that have not been refunded. Frustrations with such inefficiencies in the existing system likely influenced IPMAN’s decision to pursue a direct partnership with Dangote Refinery, which represents a more reliable alternative.

Ukadike further noted that the supply agreement would be scaled based on demand, with operations expected to commence before the end of November.

“The 60 million liters is to be given weekly. We can take and distribute it across the country once we start lifting the product from the refinery,” he explained. “We are finalizing discussions. Documentation is in process. Once they are sorted, we will off-take PMS from the plant. This is going to happen before the end of this month.”

To ensure transparency and efficiency, IPMAN has created a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to handle product off-taking, replacing the previous system where individual marketers purchased smaller quantities. This change is expected to eliminate bottlenecks and ensure guaranteed funding for transactions.

As Africa’s largest refinery, Dangote’s operation is poised to reshape Nigeria’s energy sector. Economists believe the agreement positions IPMAN to better serve the market and potentially lower fuel costs.

“It’s also very interesting to note that IPMAN members with around 30k retail pump stations across Nigeria control about 70% of the retail market. If they pump 15 million liters of PMS daily to Nigerians, where is the phantom 55 million-70 million phantom consumption numbers coming from?” Kelvin Emmanuel, an energy expert, asked, pointing to inconsistencies in NNPC’s reported figures.

Emmanuel also criticized NNPC’s pricing inefficiencies, noting, “You can imagine NNPC structuring a Letter of Credit at $28 per metric tonne and passing down unknowingly the financing cost of N36 per liter to the consumer. Isn’t it the job of the regulator NMDPRA to stop it? This is what everyone that was off-taking petrol through NNPC as a third-party to a single buyer, was made to stomach.”

While this partnership represents a significant shift, concerns remain over the continued issuance of import licenses for PMS despite Dangote Refinery’s capacity to meet local demand. Experts have criticized this practice as economic sabotage, with Emmanuel labeling it a move aimed at undermining the refinery’s competitive edge.

“The Petroleum Industry Act is clear as daylight that if the local refineries have the capacity to produce and the output confirms this claim, the regulator is not supposed to grant import licenses to bring products to Nigeria. Clearly, some people are not happy with the arrival of Dangote Refinery within the sector,” Emmanuel observed.

The Dangote-IPMAN deal is expected to address many shortcomings in the current fuel distribution system while promoting transparency and efficiency. The agreement is expected to stabilize fuel supply and pricing across the country by ramping up local production. Analysts are optimistic that this development will ultimately benefit Nigerian consumers by fostering competition and reducing costs.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, in a paper presented at the Chinua Achebe Leadership Forum at Yale University, was scathing in his critique of Nigeria’s electoral process.

The event, which honored the literary giant Chinua Achebe, served as a platform for Obasanjo’s hard-hitting address titled “Leadership Failure and State Capture in Nigeria,” where he called for reforms.

Obasanjo’s speech, presented via a pre-recorded video, painted a grim picture of Nigeria’s electoral system and laid out a reform agenda. He stressed that credible elections are the cornerstone of democracy and called for the immediate dismissal of Mahmood Yakubu, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), along with officials at all levels of the commission.

“The INEC Chairperson must not only be absolutely above board but must also be transparently independent and incorruptible,” he declared, emphasizing the need for a rigorous vetting process to eliminate partisan influences.

Obasanjo further recommended shorter tenures for INEC officials to minimize the risk of political manipulation.

“Nigeria must ensure the appointment of new credible INEC leadership at the federal, state, local government, and municipal – city, town, and village – levels, with short tenures to prevent undesirable political influence and corruption, and to re-establish trust in the electoral system by its citizens,” he said.

Technological Failures or Deliberate Sabotage?

The 2023 general elections in Nigeria have been widely described as a shocking aberration, marking yet another low point in the nation’s turbulent electoral history. The elections, marred by irregularities, technological failures, and allegations of manipulation, have sparked widespread criticism and calls for urgent reforms.

One of the most damning aspects of Obasanjo’s critique focused on INEC’s failure to fully utilize its technological tools, specifically the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the INEC Election Result Viewing Portal (IReV). These innovations were introduced to enhance transparency and prevent electoral fraud.

“These technologies were touted by the INEC chairman himself,” Obasanjo said. “In the end, these technologies did not fail. INEC willfully failed to use or implement them, which resulted in widespread voting irregularities. It was a case of inviting the fox into the henhouse.”

The failure of the IReV platform during the presidential election, which INEC blamed on a technical glitch, became a focal point of post-election litigation. However, both the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal and the Supreme Court dismissed these cases, further eroding public trust in the judiciary’s role as an impartial arbiter of electoral disputes.

INEC’s credibility has been on a downward spiral, with its conduct during both the general elections and subsequent off-cycle elections drawing widespread condemnation. Allegations of partisan appointments within INEC have only worsened the situation. For instance, PREMIUM TIMES revealed that four of Tinubu’s recent nominees for Resident Electoral Commissioners had direct affiliations with his All Progressives Congress (APC).

Obasanjo’s criticism resonates with many Nigerians who feel betrayed by a system that promised transparency but delivered chaos. His call for the cancellation of results during the presidential election collation—results he said failed the “credibility and transparency test”—was met with both praise and criticism.

Hypocrisy Noted in Obasanjo’s History

Critics have pointed to the irony of Obasanjo’s stance, given the deeply flawed elections that occurred under his presidency in 2003 and 2007. The latter was so contentious that the winner, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, openly admitted to its shortcomings and initiated electoral reforms. While Yar’Adua’s death in 2010 truncated the process, his successor, Goodluck Jonathan, made significant strides toward improving electoral credibility.

Tinubu’s Silence on Electoral Reforms

Despite mounting evidence of systemic failures and public outcry, the Tinubu-led administration has shown little interest in addressing Nigeria’s electoral challenges. This reluctance has fueled speculation that the government intends to exploit the current system for its own benefit.

Some political analysts have noted that the Tinubu-led government’s inaction signals an alarming disregard for democratic principles. They warn that until credible reforms are enacted, the specter of electoral malpractice will continue to loom over the nation, jeopardizing its democratic future.