Webometrics has recently released the openness ranking of World universities for the second half of 2016, within which less than 50 Nigerian universities were included; With Harvard University (USA) coming first in the world as usual.

Openness refers to the total number of pdf files of a university according to google. It relies on information (statistics) of web publications of a University for a Specific period of time; available on google scholar. It therefore based on volume of research articles published by a university.

The quantity of google scholarly articles a university has reveals how much of research is being conducted by the university; which is what openness ranking is all about – a university’s research output.

Openness rank is a part of the many indicators that make up several university rankings, others being excellence, presence and visibility; for Webometrics. Although it does not exactly specify the impact of the research papers a university has; the openness indicator however reveals the extent to which a school is engaged in research, which is what world class institutions are known for.

Although no Nigerian university was among the first 1000 in the world, University of Nigeria ranked highest of the Nigerian universities on the list, followed by University of Ibadan, University of Ilorin and Covenant University respectively. Below is the list of the top 30 Nigerian universities in the Webometrics 2016 Openness ranking for world universities. Their respective world ranks are those enclosed within brackets. The July 2016 edition of the Webometrics ranking of world universities (overall ranking of all parameters); of which openness rank constitute 10% by weight of is expected to be released next week.

1. University of Nigeria, Nsukka. UNN (1433)

2. University of Ibadan, Ibadan. UI (1613)

3. University of Ilorin, Ilorin. UNILORIN (2114)

4. Covenant University, Ota. CU (2161)

5. Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka. UNIZIK (2173)

6. University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt. UNIPORT (2190)

7. University of Lagos, Lagos. UNILAG (2243)

8. University of Calabar, Calabar. UNICAL (2333)

9. University of Agriculture, Abeokuta. UNAAB (2364)

10. Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria. ABU (2372)

11. Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. OAU (2473)

12. Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso. LAUTECH (2585)

13. University of Uyo, Uyo. UNIUYO (2655)

14. Federal University of Technology, Minna. FUTMINNA (2682)

15. University of Benin, Ugbowo. UNIBEN (2703)

16. Federal University of Technology, Akure. FUTA (2835)

17. Bayero University, Kano. BUK (2909)

18. Redeemer’s University, Mowe. RUN (2937)

19. Lagos State University, Ojo. LASU (2939)

20. Osun State University, OSU (3074)

21. University of Jos, Jos. UNIJOS (3173)

22. Federal University, Ndufu-Alike Ikwo. FUNAI (3242)

23. Rivers State University of Science & Technology, Port Harcourt. RSUT (3295)

24. Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti. ABUAD (3330)

25. Landmark University, Omu-aran LU (3422)

26. Federal University of Technology, Owerri. FUTO (3423)

27. Enugu State University of Technology, Enugu. ESUT (3433)

28. University of Maiduguri, Maiduguri. UNIMAID (3465)

29. Federal University of Dutsin Ma, Dutsin-Ma (3478)

30. Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike. MOUA (3515).

The National Information and Technology Development Agency (NITDA), while relying of data from the National Office for Technology Acquisition and Promotion (NOTAP) revealed that Nigeria spends $1 billion yearly on software imports, many of which have local substitutes. This was said during the TechPlus conference in Lagos this week.

NITDA’s Femi Adeluyi, who revealed this at another panel session at the event, further disclosed that 80 per cent of the request made to Nigeria’s NOTAP is for foreign software.

According to him, the time has come for Nigeria to disrupt the technology world by inventing technologies that innovate and disrupt the existing way of doing things.

The first wave of cost cutting at banks was straight-forward: layoffs, bonus reductions, curbing employee travel, renegotiating vendor contracts etc.. These days it’s increasingly difficult to find fat to trim! Brian Moynihan (CEO BoA) recently told investors that the bank spends “about $1 billion a year just moving cash around the bank”. A cost that is hard to get rid of.

Stiff costs go beyond employees. Each lost, stolen or corrupted debit or credit card costs 20 cents to replace, according to A.T. Kearney. Sending out paper checking account statements for one customer costs $9 a year. ATM maintenance runs $165 a month, according to Deloitte. And each new ATM costs $15,000 to $65,000, depending on how sophisticated the technology, says Diebold Inc (DBD.N), which sells the machines to banks and other businesses. Those costs may seem insubstantial, but with millions of customers and tens of thousands of ATMs, they add up.

It is looking like those little costs banks cannot ask customers to pay directly is adding up.

Goldman Sachs revealed on Tuesday’s earnings call that they have surveyed thousands of consumers on what they look for in an online lender, and that they plan to launch their own platform this fall. The platform will likely focus on unsecured loans and may compete directly with Lending Club.

And so here comes Goldman tiptoeing into the business with what Schwartz calls a “very deliberate and methodical approach” as LendingClub’s reputation lies in rubble — indeed with the reputation of the entire fintech marketplace-lending startup world still somewhat covered in its dust. Goldman has the experience and contacts to securitize consumer loans and sell them to investors if that’s the route it wants to take. And with 20,000 customers opening up new savings accounts on top of the $16 billion in deposits it acquired from General Electric’s online bank in the second quarter, Goldman theoretically should be able to fill in the gaps easily at times when investor demand gets skittish.

In a world with many “paper” unicorns but few actual unicorn exits, Unilever’s acquisition of Dollar Shave Club for $1b of cash is a huge win for venture investors.

In just five years, DSC captured 15% of the men’s razor cartridge market and achieved one of the largest private e-commerce exits in recent years. So who were the biggest winners and how do venture investors think about returns?

Dollar Shave Club raised $163.5m in total venture funding, most recently last November at a $539m valuation. According to PitchBook, seed-round participants garnered the greatest returns, earning an eye-popping 49.7x multiple on invested capital (MOIC). In other words, a $250k seed check would have returned $12.4m. As an entrepreneur it is important to remember that early stage investors are aiming for these outsized returns with each check that they write.

Later stage investors (Series C through D), including Technology Crossover and Comcast Ventures, invested with greater visibility into Dollar Shave Club’s business and proven market traction. Still, Series D investors returned a 1.6x MOIC, and a 100% annualized return in just 8 months!

Overall, this was a remarkable outcome for both the company and its venture investors.

Dollar Shave Club to continue trajectory under new parent – A pioneer in online D2C subscription businesses, DSC expects to generate approximately $200m in revenue in 2016. CEO Michael Dubin plans to stay on