MTN Nigeria Communications Plc swings to N1.11tn profit, proposes N15 dividend as balance sheet turns positive

By

-

February 28, 2026

MTN Nigeria has delivered its strongest financial rebound in years, returning to profitability in 2025 after a historic foreign exchange-driven loss in 2024, and proposing a total dividend of N20 per share for the year.

For the full year ended December 31, 2025, the telecom operator posted a profit after tax of N1.11 trillion, reversing a N400.4 billion loss recorded in 2024. Earnings per share rose to N53.07 from negative N19.05 a year earlier.

The performance was underpinned by robust service revenue growth, expanding margins, and a dramatic turnaround in foreign exchange dynamics. Total revenue climbed 54.9% year-on-year to N5.20 trillion, while service revenue — the company’s core top line metric — rose 55.1% to N5.17 trillion.

In the fourth quarter alone, pre-tax profit surged 248.8% to N569.6 billion from N163.3 billion in Q4 2024, reflecting sustained revenue momentum and improved cost efficiency.

Following the results, the board proposed a final dividend of N15 per share, bringing total dividends for the 2025 financial year to N20 per share. The dividend will be paid electronically to shareholders on the register on April 8, 2026, who have completed e-dividend registration.

Chief Executive Officer Karl Toriola described 2025 as a “significant turning point.”

“We closed the year with positive retained earnings of N400.4 billion (December 2024: negative N607.5 billion) and shareholders’ equity of N548.7 billion (December 2024: negative N458.0 billion),” he said, noting that improved macroeconomic conditions — particularly a more stable foreign exchange market and moderated inflation — helped ease margin pressure.

The company maintained its medium-term service revenue growth target of at least the low 20% range and revised EBITDA margin guidance upward from 53–55% to the mid-to-high 50% range, signaling confidence in operational leverage.

Data and fintech power revenue surge

MTN Nigeria’s recovery was driven primarily by data and fintech growth, reflecting the structural shift in consumer usage patterns.

Data revenue rose 74.5% to N2.78 trillion, becoming the largest contributor to service revenue. The growth was supported by a 34% increase in data traffic, an 11.6% rise in active data users to 53.2 million, and smartphone penetration climbing to 66.1%.

Voice revenue remained resilient, increasing 42.1% to N1.85 trillion, aided by subscriber growth and customer value management initiatives. Mobile subscribers rose 7.9% to 87.3 million.

Fintech revenue expanded 79.7% to N191.3 billion, driven by higher interest income and the expansion of advanced services. Active wallets increased to 3.7 million, reinforcing management’s push to diversify revenue beyond traditional connectivity.

Crucially, cost growth lagged revenue growth. Cost of sales increased 30.3%, well below the 55% rise in service revenue, while operating expenses rose 16.7%, reflecting efficiency gains and savings from tower lease renegotiations. The resulting operating leverage drove EBITDA up 108.9% to N2.74 trillion.

Foreign exchange, which had severely distorted 2024 earnings, became a tailwind. The company reported a net FX gain of N90.3 billion compared to a N925.4 billion loss in 2024, following the settlement of outstanding letters of credit and reduced dollar exposure.

Capital expenditure, excluding leases, rose 126.2% to N1.00 trillion, reflecting a significant investment in network capacity and quality. Even with this aggressive build-out, free cash flow jumped 215.5% to N1.2 trillion, underscoring improved cash generation and working capital discipline.

Balance sheet repair and market re-rating

The balance sheet shows a marked turnaround. Total assets increased 28.7% to N5.40 trillion, while shareholders’ funds rose 219.8% year-on-year to N548.7 billion, reversing the negative equity position recorded in 2024.

Retained earnings returned to positive territory at N400.4 billion, a dramatic shift from the N607.5 billion deficit a year earlier. The restoration of equity strengthens solvency metrics and supports dividend resumption.

Investors have responded decisively. As of the close of trading yesterday, the shares stood at N760, making MTN Nigeria the most capitalized company on the Nigerian Exchange with an approximate market value of N16 trillion.

The stock has gained 33% in February alone, pushing year-to-date returns to 49%, following a 155.5% rally in 2025. The re-rating reflects renewed confidence in earnings stability, reduced FX risk, and sustained growth in high-margin data services.

The 2025 results signal more than a cyclical rebound. They point to a structural strengthening of MTN Nigeria’s operating model — one increasingly anchored on data monetization, fintech expansion, and disciplined cost management — at a time when macroeconomic headwinds have begun to ease.

Applying Tekedia EDIA Framework On Citrini Research’s “The 2028 Global Intelligence Crisis” Paper

By

Ndubuisi Ekekwe

-

February 27, 2026

0

This piece summarizes this research titled THE 2028 GLOBAL INTELLIGENCE CRISIS by Citrini Research with the application of Tekedia EDIA Play in the research’s thesis.

Core Thesis: The article is a forward-looking scenario (not a prediction) arguing that AI success itself could trigger a macroeconomic crisis because abundant machine intelligence may erode the human income base that modern economies depend on.

1. The Paradox of “Abundant Intelligence”

The piece imagines a near future where AI dramatically boosts productivity and corporate profits, yet simultaneously weakens the broader economy. Companies replace large portions of white-collar labor with AI systems that work continuously and at lower cost, causing wage growth to collapse even as output rises.

This creates what the authors call “Ghost GDP”, economic production recorded in statistics but not translating into household income or spending.

2. A Self-Reinforcing Displacement Loop

Firms rationally cut staff to adopt AI, then reinvest savings into more AI, enabling further layoffs—a feedback loop with “no natural brake.” Unlike past technological shifts, displaced workers cannot easily transition to new roles because AI increasingly performs the very cognitive tasks humans would reskill into.

3. Collapse of Friction-Based Business Models

AI agents remove market frictions—price comparison, search costs, switching inertia—that many industries historically monetized. As AI optimizes purchases, negotiates subscriptions, and bypasses intermediaries, sectors built on convenience premiums, commissions, or information asymmetry see margins compress or disappear.

In short, machines do not exhibit brand loyalty, fatigue, or behavioral biases, eliminating advantages companies once exploited.

4. From Sector Disruption to Systemic Risk

Initially viewed as a tech-sector issue, AI disruption spreads because white-collar workers drive a disproportionate share of consumption. When those incomes fall, consumer demand, the backbone of service economies, contracts sharply, pushing the economy into recession despite continued AI investment and infrastructure growth.

5. Financial Contagion Through Overbuilt Tech Financing

Private credit and leveraged bets tied to software and services assumptions begin to fail as AI undermines recurring-revenue models, exposing a chain of correlated financial risks embedded across insurers, asset managers, and credit markets.

The Big Idea

The essay’s warning is structural: If intelligence becomes cheap and scalable, capitalism—designed around scarce human expertise and wage-driven consumption—may face a demand shock rather than a productivity boom. The danger is not that AI underperforms, but that it works too well, faster than economic institutions can adapt.

Mapping the “2028 Global Intelligence Crisis” to the Tekedia EDIA Framework

The conversation around an impending “global intelligence crisis” driven by artificial intelligence is, at its core, not about technology but about market structure. Through the Tekedia EDIA Play lens, what appears to be disruption is actually a misalignment in how firms are executing the four strategic plays of markets—Efficiency, Differentiation, Innovation, and Aggregation.

Markets remain stable only when these plays evolve in balance. When one accelerates ahead of the others, value creation detaches from value distribution, and the economic system begins to strain. The AI era risks becoming such a moment if organizations pursue productivity gains without designing mechanisms that keep human participation economically relevant.

Artificial intelligence is the most powerful Efficiency Play humanity has ever deployed. Firms adopt it to execute the same tasks faster, cheaper, and more reliably, compressing operating costs and decision cycles. From customer service to coding, AI removes friction with extraordinary precision. But efficiency, when unchecked, eliminates wages faster than markets can regenerate new forms of income. Historically, efficiency displaced certain jobs while creating adjacent industries that absorbed labor. The concern today is that AI’s reach extends simultaneously across cognitive, creative, and analytical domains, reducing the space into which workers can transition. Efficiency succeeds operationally but risks weakening the very consumption base that sustains markets.

At the same time, AI represents a sweeping Innovation Play, redrawing competitive boundaries and redefining how value is produced. Yet innovation must expand opportunity, not merely substitute for it. When innovation compresses capability, shrinking the need for human expertise instead of amplifying it, it generates technological success without broad-based economic inclusion. This also weakens the Differentiation Play. Many industries have long relied on branding, experience, and emotional resonance to command premiums, but algorithmic agents optimize for utility, not perception. Machines do not exhibit loyalty or bias; they pursue price and performance. As AI increasingly intermediates transactions, differentiation erodes, and markets gravitate toward commoditization.

The most consequential gap, however, lies in the underdevelopment of the Aggregation Play. Aggregation is what transforms productivity into shared prosperity by coordinating demand, supply, and participation at scale. Every enduring technological revolution, from electrification to the internet, succeeded because it aggregated new economic actors, enabling more people to earn, transact, and consume. If AI enhances production without creating new pathways for individuals and firms to generate income, economies may experience growth without absorption: output expands while participation contracts. This is the risk scenario, an economy rich in intelligence but thin in demand.

The lesson from the Tekedia EDIA framework is that sustainable progress depends not on the dominance of one play but on their orchestration. Efficiency must release resources that Differentiation refines, Innovation expands, and Aggregation redistributes through new markets and roles. The AI age will therefore be judged not by the sophistication of its algorithms but by the ingenuity of its market design. The real strategic question for leaders is no longer how to build smarter systems, but how to ensure those systems enable broader economic belonging. Markets thrive when productivity and participation grow together; when they diverge, even the most intelligent economy risks becoming structurally fragile.

Anthropic Rejects US Government Demand for Unfettered Access to its Claude AI Model, Trump Responds

By

Paul Ugbede Godwin

-

February 27, 2026

0

Anthropic has rejected the US government’s specifically the Pentagon’s demand for unfettered access to its Claude AI model. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei publicly stated in a company blog post that the company “cannot in good conscience accede” to the Pentagon’s request.

This came after the Department of Defense (DoD), under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, issued an ultimatum giving Anthropic until 5:01 p.m. ET on Friday, February 27, 2026, to agree to remove certain safeguards and allow “all lawful uses” of Claude without restrictions.

The company has maintained red lines prohibiting Claude’s use for: Mass domestic surveillance of American citizens. Fully autonomous weapons; systems that can select and engage targets without human oversight.

Amodei emphasized that frontier AI systems are “simply not reliable enough” for such high-stakes applications and that these uses could undermine democratic values. Anthropic argued that recent contract language from the Pentagon offered little meaningful protection against these scenarios and could be overridden.

The DoD sought unrestricted access as part of a $200 million contract signed in 2025, under which Claude was the first frontier AI model deployed on classified US government networks for tasks like intelligence analysis and operational planning. The Pentagon rejected explicit carve-outs for Anthropic’s concerns, insisting on “all lawful purposes.”

Threats included: Canceling the contract.
Designating Anthropic a “supply chain risk”; a label typically reserved for foreign adversaries like Huawei, potentially barring US companies from partnering with Anthropic if they work with the military. Invoking the Defense Production Act to compel compliance.

Critics noted the threats were contradictory—one labels Anthropic a risk, while the other treats Claude as essential to national security.
Anthropic has been proactive in supporting US national security; deploying models to classified networks and national labs while restricting sales to entities linked to the Chinese Communist Party.

Other AI providers like Google, OpenAI, and xAI reportedly have similar DoD contracts with fewer restrictions. Replacing Anthropic’s tools on classified systems could take the Pentagon months, per sources. This standoff highlights tensions between AI companies’ ethical safeguards and government and military demands for unrestricted access to powerful models.

Anthropic appears to be standing firm, potentially risking significant penalties but prioritizing its principles on AI safety. Anthropic’s “red lines” refer to the strict, non-negotiable restrictions the company places on how its AI model, Claude, can be used—particularly in high-stakes or sensitive applications like those involving the U.S. military or government.

These red lines stem from Anthropic’s core commitment to responsible AI development, as outlined in its Acceptable Use Policy (embedded in contracts), its Constitutional AI framework for Claude, and public statements by CEO Dario Amodei.

They represent explicit prohibitions designed to prevent misuse that could cause catastrophic harm, undermine democratic values, or violate ethical principles. In the context of the ongoing 2026 dispute with the Pentagon, Anthropic has consistently highlighted two bright red lines that it will not cross.

No use for mass domestic surveillance of American citizens. This prohibits Claude from being deployed in systems that conduct large-scale monitoring or surveillance of U.S. persons (citizens or residents on American soil). Anthropic views this as a threat to privacy, civil liberties, and democratic norms.

The restriction is specifically focused on domestic (U.S.-based) mass surveillance; it does not categorically ban foreign surveillance or other national security intelligence activities. The company has sought explicit contractual assurances that Claude won’t enable such uses, arguing that frontier AI models are not reliable enough for these applications without risking abuse.

No use in fully autonomous weapons or lethal autonomous weapon systems without meaningful human oversight. This bans deployment of Claude in weapons systems that can autonomously select, target, and engage without human intervention or “in the loop” decision-making.

Examples include AI-driven drones, missiles, or other systems making final lethal decisions independently. Anthropic emphasizes that current AI is “simply not reliable enough” for life-or-death choices at this level of autonomy, and such uses could lead to unintended escalation, errors, or ethical violations.

The company has indicated some flexibility for defensive scenarios, but draws a hard line against fully autonomous offensive or lethal applications. These red lines are contractual guardrails in Anthropic’s agreements including its $200 million DoD contract from 2025, part of its Acceptable Use Policy.

They align with Anthropic’s broader AI safety philosophy: prioritizing long-term risk mitigation, constitutional principles, and avoiding contributions to existential or catastrophic risks. Amodei stated that Anthropic “cannot in good conscience accede” to demands for unrestricted “all lawful uses,” as recent Pentagon contract language offered insufficient protections against these scenarios and could be overridden.

The Pentagon has pushed for removal of these restrictions to enable “all lawful purposes,” rejecting explicit carve-outs. This has led to threats of contract cancellation, “supply chain risk” designation, or invoking the Defense Production Act.

Notably, other AI companies; OpenAI via Sam Altman’s statements have expressed alignment with similar red lines on mass surveillance and autonomous lethal weapons, potentially complicating the DoD’s alternatives. These positions reflect Anthropic’s founding ethos as a safety-focused AI lab, even as it engages with national security partners.

The company supports many military uses—like intelligence analysis or operational planning—but insists on these boundaries to avoid enabling dystopian or uncontrollable outcomes. Anthropic remains firm on these red lines despite mounting pressure.

Trump Responds

Trump instructed all U.S. federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s Claude AI immediately, following the company’s refusal to ease safeguards against fully autonomous weapons and mass surveillance. He allowed a six-month phase-out for the Department of War and dependent agencies, while warning of severe consequences if Anthropic resists. The dispute arose when Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth demanded full access by Friday’s deadline; Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei rejected it, offering R&D collaboration instead. Supporters hailed it as protecting national security, while critics like Sam Altman and Sen. Mark Kelly warned it weakens U.S. AI edge against rivals like China.

Morgan Stanley to Expand Its Digital Asset Offerings with Yield and Lending at Core

By

Paul Ugbede Godwin

-

February 27, 2026

0

Morgan Stanley has confirmed plans to expand its digital asset offerings significantly, including Bitcoin custody, trading, yield, and lending services for its clients.

This announcement comes from Amy Oldenburg, the bank’s Head of Digital Asset Strategy, who spoke at the Bitcoin for Corporations conference (also referred to as Strategy World) in Las Vegas.

She stated that the firm “absolutely” intends to provide these services, with the bank building its own in-house technology infrastructure rather than relying on third-party solutions to ensure reliability, control, and alignment with client expectations.

Morgan Stanley is developing a native custody and exchange platform for Bitcoin and potentially other digital assets. This would allow clients to hold legal custody of their Bitcoin under the bank’s oversight. The firm noted that many clients currently hold crypto off-platform and aims to bring those assets in-house.

An initial phase may build on existing spot trading access via the E*Trade app which already supports Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana in some capacity. These are under active exploration and discussion as natural next steps.

The bank is looking at products that could generate yield on crypto holdings or enable lending against them, drawing from trends in decentralized finance (DeFi) and traditional finance. Oldenburg expressed strong support for including these, though no specific timelines were provided beyond the custody and trading rollout expected over the coming year or so.

Morgan Stanley manages nearly $9 trillion in client assets. A significant portion of client crypto remains outside the platform, and these new services aim to capture that by offering a trusted, regulated one-stop solution. This reflects growing institutional demand, especially post-Bitcoin ETF approvals and broader mainstream adoption.

This move signals deeper integration of Bitcoin into traditional finance, with other major banks like Citigroup also advancing similar infrastructure. It’s part of a broader trend where Wall Street institutions are building full-stack crypto capabilities to meet client needs for secure, accessible exposure.

Morgan Stanley’s plans for Bitcoin yield and lending services remain in the exploratory and discussion phase, with no concrete product details, timelines, rates, or specific structures announced yet. These features are positioned as logical extensions following the rollout of core custody and trading infrastructure.

Oldenburg addressed yield and lending directly: When asked if the bank would offer Bitcoin-based yield and lending services, she responded affirmatively: “Absolutely… That’s part of the discussion and exploration. It’s a natural part of the roadmap to continue to explore.”

She described the firm as being in the “very early stages” or “early journey,” noting they are tracking momentum in decentralized finance (DeFi) lending and other crypto products. Oldenburg emphasized that these would build on in-house custody and trading capabilities, allowing clients to generate returns on holdings or borrow against them in a regulated, institutional-grade environment.

Yield products could involve earning interest or returns on Bitcoin holdings through staking-like mechanisms, if applicable to Bitcoin via wrapped or protocol integrations, or other yield-generating strategies inspired by DeFi. This would appeal to clients seeking passive income on idle crypto assets, similar to traditional securities lending or money market yields.

Lending services would likely enable clients to borrow fiat or other assets against Bitcoin collateral (over-collateralized loans) or lend Bitcoin to earn interest. This mirrors crypto lending platforms but with Morgan Stanley’s emphasis on reliability, compliance, and “no-fail” infrastructure for high-net-worth and institutional clients.

These would help bring off-platform crypto assets in-house, creating a full-stack solution and recurring revenue opportunities. Yield and lending are expected to follow the launch of native custody and trading; anticipated over the next year or so, potentially late 2026 onward.

Initial spot trading for Bitcoin and others like Ethereum and Solana is already expanding via the E*Trade app; partnered with third parties like Zero Hash, serving as a stepping stone. No exact launch dates, APYs, loan-to-value ratios, or regulatory approvals have been disclosed. The bank is prioritizing building proprietary tech to ensure control and meet client standards.

This reflects broader Wall Street trends toward integrating Bitcoin as a core asset class, with lending ans yield expanding utility beyond mere holding. The announcement has been viewed positively in crypto circles as a sign of deepening institutional adoption, though details will likely emerge gradually as infrastructure matures.

South Korean Tax Agency Posts Seedphrase Online leading to $4.8M Theft

By

Paul Ugbede Godwin

-

February 27, 2026

1

South Korea’s National Tax Service (NTS) accidentally leaked the seed phrase (also called mnemonic phrase or recovery phrase) of a seized cryptocurrency wallet in an official press release.

This catastrophic slip-up directly led to the theft of approximately $4.8 million worth of tokens. The wallet in question held seized assets, specifically around 4 million PRTG tokens.

The seed phrase was inadvertently included and exposed in a photo or document within the NTS’s public press release materials; likely a screenshot or embedded image of wallet recovery info. Attackers (likely automated bots or quick-acting hackers monitoring official channels) spotted the leak almost immediately.

They accessed the wallet, first deposited a small amount of ETH to cover gas fees, then drained the entire balance by transferring out the PRTG tokens. The theft happened rapidly—reports mention the funds were moved within hours (one source notes a “10-hour liquidity drain”).

Blockchain transactions being irreversible means the stolen tokens are likely unrecoverable unless the thief voluntarily returns them which is extremely unlikely. The incident highlights major concerns around government handling of seized crypto assets—institutions often lack the same opsec rigor as private crypto holders or exchanges, leading to risks when dealing with sensitive info like seed phrases.

South Korea has been ramping up crypto tax enforcement and seizures in recent years, collecting billions in won equivalent from virtual assets, which makes proper custody even more critical. No official statement from the NTS but the story is spreading fast in the crypto community as a stark reminder: never expose seed phrases, even accidentally in official docs.

Attackers acted fast: They deposited a small amount of ETH for gas fees, then transferred everything out to unknown addresses. Blockchain transactions are irreversible, so recovery is virtually impossible without the thief returning funds (highly unlikely).

This represents a total wipeout of the seized crypto value, turning a “successful” enforcement action into a major embarrassment and financial hit for the state. Highlights catastrophic opsec lapses in government handling of crypto assets. Seized wallets require military-grade custody (multi-sig, air-gapped environments, audited processes), yet a photo of a handwritten seed phrase next to a Ledger device was publicly released.

Exposes a lack of basic crypto awareness among officials — seed phrases are the “master keys” to wallets, equivalent to handing over full bank account control. This wasn’t a sophisticated hack; it was preventable human error amplified by poor redaction protocols.

Raises questions about broader NTS procedures for managing seized digital assets, especially as South Korea has aggressively seized crypto; over $100M+ in prior years from tax delinquents, including cold wallets via home raids. Erodes public trust in government crypto enforcement.

South Korea has ramped up seizures to combat tax evasion (targeting exchanges, cold wallets, and hidden holdings), but this incident shows even authorities can mishandle keys catastrophically. If the NTS can’t secure seized assets, it undermines arguments for mandatory disclosures, forced liquidations, or expanded tracking powers.

May prompt immediate policy reviews: Expect calls for stricter guidelines on seized asset handling, mandatory training, or third-party custodians for government-held crypto. Could accelerate or complicate South Korea’s ongoing crypto tax regime rollout; repeatedly delayed, with debates over reporting infrastructure and enforcement.

Incidents like this highlight risks in scaling government involvement in digital assets. PRTG token likely suffered severe damage — the theft overwhelmed its tiny daily liquidity ~$331 USD, causing a potential price crash and loss of confidence in the project.

Serves as a stark, real-world reminder for everyone in crypto: Never expose seed phrases, even in “official” contexts. It reinforces best practices like never photographing and photocopying them, using hardware wallets properly, and avoiding any public sharing.

Sparks memes, outrage, and schadenfreude in the crypto community, but also serious discussions on institutional custody risks. May influence global regulators — similar to past exchange hacks or phishing incidents involving authorities — pushing for higher standards in how seized crypto is managed worldwide.

In short, this isn’t just a “$4.8M theft”; it’s a high-profile demonstration of how fragile crypto security remains when institutions treat it like traditional assets without understanding its unique risks. The fallout could lead to accountability measures at the NTS, renewed scrutiny of South Korea’s crypto tax crackdown, and a lasting cautionary tale for anyone dealing with digital wallets.