Customer satisfaction is one of the most important metrics you can track as a business owner because, simply put, a business with a low customer satisfaction rating likely won't be around for long. If people are not satisfied with your product or customer service, they won't buy from you again. You also risk users leaving bad reviews online and telling friends and family to avoid your brand. And once enough people take notice that your service is far from preferable, it's next to impossible to grow your lead list or boost sales. 

That said, there are plenty of actionable ways to improve customer satisfaction and build brand loyalty. Here are four strategies to help you create an engaging, seamless experience: 

Ask Users to Share Feedback

Asking casual visitors and customers to share feedback is a great way to keep your satisfaction rating high. People know what they want and are normally more than happy to share their thoughts if asked. As a business leader or marketer, you can discover countless details about your audience's needs and success gaps in your marketing strategy by encouraging visitors to speak up. 

The type of outreach you use to gather feedback will depend on where customers spend their time. For example, we send our email subscribers two sizable surveys a year. Meanwhile, our social media audience is treated to micro-surveys through weekly polls. Our website also has an "always on" questionnaire where users can share feature suggestions, alert us to bugs and more. 

It's worth mentioning that you need to follow through on customer requests if you want to see their satisfaction increase. If half of your audience requests one specific feature, adding it can dramatically impact their feelings about your brand.

Streamline Your Checkout Process

Have you ever left a website mid-order because the checkout process was clunky or slow? In my experience, you're not alone. The checkout process is a crucial part of building satisfaction. Visitors who make it to this part of your site intend to make a purchase, but a poor experience could cause them to leave and seek out a competitor. 

There are a few small changes that can have a tremendous impact on your checkout process:

Use a mobile-friendly theme, template and checkout page builder.  Add multiple payment options so users can pay their way.  Include a progress bar so customers can see how far they are in the process.  Enable "always-on" shopping carts.  Offer free shipping, plus gifts on orders that hit a certain price point. 

Invest in Multi-Channel Customer Support

People often use their experience with support to decide how satisfied they are with a business. It doesn't matter if you have the best product in the world; if your service team isn't responsive and doesn't help users with their problems, they may view your brand negatively. The best way to strengthen your customer service system is to make it easy for users to get in touch, regardless of how they try to contact a support agent. Make it easy for people to reach your brand through your website, social media, email and telephone. When your audience can get fast and friendly support, they are more likely to feel satisfied with their experience. 

Start a Success Team

Finally, let's talk about customer success teams. Success teams are not the same as support agents. The people on this team are responsible for contacting customers after they've made a purchase. Their goal is to find out if there's anything they can do to improve the customers' experience. Sometimes, your new customer may need a hands-on tutorial or a guide to see the value of your product or service. Instead of hoping they will reach out to you, take preemptive action and email them a week or two after receiving their order. 

This gesture shows the people behind the brand are truly committed to helping each customer find success. If someone is on the fence about your product, this outreach may be the deciding factor when it comes time for them to make a purchase.

In conclusion, customer satisfaction is vital to your business. If your audience isn't happy with your service or products, they will turn to one of your competitors. The good news is you can win over prospects and customers alike with these four tips.

Inc

Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, indicated on Wednesday to call three electoral officers to testify for him at the ongoing hearing of the Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja.

The three witnesses, who will appear on subpoena, were part of the ad-hoc staff engaged by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to conduct the 25 presidential election.

Atiku, who alleged widespread irregularities and manipulations of results during the election, filed his petition at the court in March to challenge President Bola Tinubu’s victory in the disputed poll.

He asked the five-member panel of the court to either declare him the winner of the poll or cancel it and order a fresh one. Peter Obi of the Labour Party, who came third behind Atiku, who was took the second position, also submitted a petition with similar prayers to the court.

Atiku, whose case came up for hearing Wednesday, called his 11th petitioner’s witness, and was about to call his 12th when the respondents – comprising INEC, Tinubu, and his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) – objected to it.

The respondents’ lawyers – Abubakar Mahoud for INEC, Akin Olujimi for Tinubu, and Lateef Fagbemi for APC, became unsettled immediately they were told the witness invited to the box was a member of INEC’s ad hoc staff involved in the conduct of the presidential election.

The lawyers took their turns telling the court they needed time to peruse the witness statement of the subpoenaed witness, which they said was only served on them just before proceedings started on Wednesday.

Mahmoud also said he needed to cross-check the status of the witness from his client’s records.

Atiku’s lawyer, Chris Uche, said the witness was only one among three members of INEC ad hoc staff that had been subpoenaed to testify for the petitioners.

He said there was nothing strange the witnesses were coming to say in court, as he also insisted he needed not to frontload the witness statement of subpoenaed witnesses.

But the respondents’ lawyers insistently called for the postponement of the testimony of the witness to afford them enough time to prepare for cross-examination.

With the defence lawyers’ insistence, Uche conceded to an adjournment of the case until Thursday.

He gave no indication of what the three subpoenaed INEC ad hoc staff members would be coming to say in court.

But the witnesses’ testimonies may be crucial to Atiku’s case, which includes a contention that failing to promptly upload results to the INEC portal, known as IReV, after votes were counted at polling units was detrimental to the whole electoral process. The point is one of the pivotal issues in Atiku’s petition.

The petitioner’s legal team is also expected to try to extract favourable lines of testimonies to support their allegations of manipulation of results and widespread irregularities at various levels during the election.

PT

A witness of Atiku Abubakar, the Peoples Democratic Party’s presidential candidate in the February 25th presidential elections, Ndubuisi Nwobu has revealed how his candidate was rigged out by Labour Party’s Presidential candidate, Peter Obi in Anambra state.

Nwobu told the presidential election tribunal, Wednesday that “magic happened to the votes of the PDP candidate at different collation centres.

In the results announced by the Independent Electoral Commission, Peter Obi scored 584,621 votes in Anambra; Atiku polled 9,036 votes in the state and Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress scored 5,111 votes.

During proceedings, Nwobu who is Anambra PDP chairman and also the state collation agent of the party told the court that after the counting of votes, presiding officers refused to upload the results.

He also said he visited about 30 polling units out of the 4,720 polling units in the state on election day.

He said he was forced to sign the result sheet of the election at the state collation centre because he wouldn’t have been given a copy if he didn’t.

“I signed the result sheet when it was obvious that without signing, a copy would not be made available to me,” Nwobu said.

Results were entered at polling units. But every effort made to get the presiding officer to upload it on IREV proved abortive.”

When asked if result sheets were signed by agents of the PDP at polling units before they were taken to the collation centre, Nwobu said “yes”.

“They were taken to the collation centre at the ward level. That is where magic started happening,” he said.

“There were problems at the polling units with presiding officers.”

He said in some instances, he had to intervene to prevent voters and other party agents from attacking INEC officials.

“Even in certain instances, I had to intervene to ensure that some of the polling officers were not attacked by voters and other political party agents,” Nwobu said.

Nwobu was Atiku’s eleventh witness to testify before the five-member panel headed by Haruna Tsammani.

Punch

Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, admitted the final presidential election results as exhibits in Peter Obi’s suit seeking to overturn President Bola Tinubu’s victory.

Obi, who was the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, is praying to the court to nullify the victory of Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as Nigeria’s president.

Obi alleges electoral fraud and breach of the constitution and electoral laws against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Tinubu during the polls.

At the resumed hearing of Obi’s petition on Wednesday, the five-member panel of the court led by Haruna Tsammani, the Labour Party candidate, tendered the collated final presidential election results relied upon by INEC in declaring Tinubu, winner of the polls.

Obi’s lawyer, Paul Ananaba, tendered the documents before the court on Wednesday.

The court admitted the results without opposition from the respondents, who have consistently objected to the admissibility of election results and other election documents used in the conduct of the election from the states of Nigeria.

The respondents – Tinubu, Kashim Shettima (the vice president), APC and INEC – consented to the admissibility of the final results.

Results from states tendered

Also, at the session on Wednesday, the collated results in the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) were tendered and admitted as exhibits.

Obi, his vice presidential pick, Datti Baba-Ahmed, and other party stalwarts have been attending the court’s proceedings since the hearing of the substantive suit began on 30 May.

The court admitted as exhibits ward collated results from 13 States comprising: Bayelsa, Benue, Cross River, Ebonyi, Edo, Lagos, Niger and Ondo states.

Other states are Oyo, Rivers, Sokoto, Ekiti and Delta.

The Labour Party flagbearer presented collated results in eight local government areas of Bayelsa, 23 in Benue, 18 in Cross River,10 in Ebonyi, 18 in Edo, 20 in Lagos and 25 in Niger States.

Other states include 18 in Ondo, 33 in Oyo, 23 in Rivers, 23 in Sokoto, 16 in Ekiti and 25 in Delta.

Expectedly, INEC, Tinubu, Shetima and the APC objected to the admissibility of this set of election documents.

However, the court admitted them as exhibits and would entertain hearing on written objection by lawyers to the respondents at the close of arguments in the case.

Subsequently, the court adjourned the suit until Thursday for further hearing.

With Obi drawing the curtains on tendering of documentary evidence in the petition, the stage is now set for him to call witnesses in full swing to prove his case.

He has only called one witness since the commencement of the hearing in the substantive suit, though he had indicated his intention to call 50 witnesses to substantiate his claims.

Obi’s lawyer, Ananaba, while speaking to journalists shortly after Wednesday’s proceedings, said his client would now begin to call the rest of his witnesses before the court.

The lawyer explained that witnesses would speak through the admitted documents to establish places where electoral fraud was allegedly perpetrated during the February election.

PT

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Ukrainians face homelessness, disease risk as floods crest from burst dam

Ukrainians abandoned inundated homes on Wednesday as floods crested across the south after the destruction of a huge hydroelectric dam on front lines between Russian and Ukrainian forces, with their presidents trading blame for the disaster.

Residents slogged through flooded streets carrying children on their shoulders, dogs in their arms and belongings in plastic bags while rescuers used rubber boats to search areas where the waters reached above head height.

Ukraine said the deluge would leave hundreds of thousands of people without access to drinking water, swamp tens of thousands of hectares of agricultural land and turn at least 500,000 hectares deprived of irrigation into "deserts".

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in a video address that it was impossible to predict how many people would die in Russian-occupied areas due to the flooding, urging a "clear and rapid reaction from the world" to support victims.

"The situation in occupied parts of the Kherson region is absolutely catastrophic. The occupiers are simply abandoning people in frightful conditions. No help, without water, left on the roofs of houses in submerged communities," he said.

Visiting the city of Kherson downstream from the dam, Deputy Prime Minister Oleksandr Kubrakov said over 80 settlements had been affected by the disaster, and that the flooding had released chemicals and infectious bacteria into the water.

The Nova Kakhovka dam collapse on Tuesday happened as Ukraine prepares a major counteroffensive against Russia's invasion, likely the war's next major phase. Both sides traded blame for continued shelling across the populated flood zone and warned of drifting landmines unearthed by the flooding.

Kyiv said on Wednesday its troops in the east had advanced more than a kilometre around the ruined city of Bakhmut in eastern Ukraine, its most explicit claim of progress since Russia reported the start of the Ukrainian counteroffensive earlier this week. Russia said it had fought off the assault.

Oleksiy Danilov, secretary of Ukraine's national security council, said assaults under way were still localised, and the full-scale offensive had yet to begin.

"When we start (it), everyone will know about it, they will see it," he told Reuters.

Kyiv said several months ago the dam had been mined by Russian forces that captured it early in their 15-month-old invasion, and has suggested Moscow blew it up to try to prevent Ukrainian forces crossing the Dnipro in their counteroffensive.

Russian President Vladimir Putin accused Ukraine of destroying the dam at the suggestion of Western supporters, saying it was a "barbaric" war crime that escalated the conflict with Moscow. Putin described the incident as an "environmental and humanitarian catastrophe", according to a Kremlin read-out.

Neither side has presented public evidence demonstrating who was responsible. Some experts say the dam may have collapsed due to earlier war damage and poor Russian management.

'THEY HATE US'

Residents on the Ukrainian-controlled side of the flood zone in the south, a fertile, marshy region stretching to the Dnipro estuary on the Black Sea, blamed the bursting of the dam on Russian troops who held it on the eastern bank of the Dnipro.

"They hate us," said riverside villager Oleksandr Reva. "They want to destroy a Ukrainian nation and Ukraine itself. And they don't care by what means because nothing is sacred for them."

Russia imposed a state of emergency in the areas of Kherson province it controls, where many towns and villages lie in exposed lowlands below the dam.

In the town of Nova Kakhovka next to the dam, brown water submerged main streets largely empty of residents.

Over 30,000 cubic metres of water were gushing out of the dam's reservoir every second and the town was at risk of contamination from the torrent, Russia's TASS news agency quoted the Russian-installed mayor, Vladimir Leontyev, as saying.

Zelenskiy said he was "shocked" at what he called the lack of U.N. and Red Cross aid so far for victims of the disaster.

Shortly afterward, President Emmanuel Macron of France said on Twitter that "within the next few hours we will send aid to meet immediate needs".

The U.N.'s humanitarian affairs office said a team was in Kherson to coordinate relief efforts. Access to drinking water was a major concern and around 12,000 bottles of water and 10,000 purification tablets had been distributed so far.

Ukraine expects the floodwaters will stop rising by the end of Wednesday after reaching around five metres (16.5 feet) overnight, presidential deputy chief Oleksiy Kuleba said.

Two thousand people have been evacuated from the Ukrainian-controlled part of the flood zone and waters had reached their highest level in 17 settlements with a combined 16,000 people.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

NATO states may send troops to Ukraine – ex-chief

Former NATO secretary general-turned-Ukrainian presidential adviser, Anders Rasmussen, has claimed that some member states may volunteer to send their soldiers to Ukraine, if the country is not offered security assurances on a wide range of issues at an upcoming summit.

Rasmussen, who has served as an adviser to Ukrainian presidents Vladimir Zelensky and Petro Poroshenko, said Kiev should be given written guarantees before NATO leaders meet in Vilnius, Lithuania next month, including for Western intelligence-sharing, weapons transfers and joint military training.

“If NATO cannot agree on a clear path forward for Ukraine, there is a clear possibility that some countries individually might take action,” he said on Wednesday, according to the Guardian. 

I think the Poles would seriously consider going in and assemble a coalition of the willing if Ukraine doesn’t get anything in Vilnius.

After touring Europe and the United States in recent weeks to help gin up military support for Ukraine, Rasmussen argued that foreign troop deployments would be legal under international law if requested by Kiev.

While NATO’s current secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, recently confirmed that some security assurances would be discussed at the summit, he stressed that full guarantees could only be offered to member states. The bloc first pledged to grant Ukraine membership back in 2008, and Kiev formally applied to join last September, but little progress has been made on the issue since.

Several NATO members have become increasingly vocal about Ukraine’s future in the bloc, urging other Western countries to outline a clear path to membership. Earlier this week, sub-grouping of Eastern European NATO states known as the ‘Bucharest Nine’ issued a statement urging the bloc to “launch a new political track that will lead to Ukraine’s membership in NATO” at the Vilnius event, as well as a “more robust, multi–year, and comprehensive support package.”

Though Washington has also repeatedly affirmed that Ukraine will someday join the military collective, it has placed greater focus on the current conflict with Russia, hoping to resolve the issue of membership later on. However, US Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith told the Guardian on Wednesday that officials are now “looking at an array of options to signal that Ukraine is advancing in its relationship with NATO,” though did not specify what that might entail.

Zelensky rejected any “substitute for NATO” and reportedly told Western partners that he would not attend the summit in Lithuania in July unless the bloc offers Ukraine “concrete” guarantees or a roadmap to full membership. 

Russia views NATO’s continued eastward expansion as a threat to its security and has cited member states' aid to Ukraine as one of the reasons it launched the military operation in the neighboring state in February 2022. Moscow repeatedly said that Ukraine’s neutrality would be one of key conditions for a lasting peace.

** 'Were you aware?': Russia wants US to answer about how its weapons used in Ukraine

The US authorities must give a concrete answer as to whether or not they know how American weapons are being used on the territory of Ukraine, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told a briefing in comments on the attack on the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant.

Against the backdrop of the recent attack on the Kakhovka HPP, she pointed to a statement made last December by Ukrainian General Andrey Kovalchuk in an interview with The Washington Post, in which he said that the Ukrainian army had already conducted a test strike from a US HIMARS system on one of the dam's gates to punch it and see how high the water level of the Dnieper River rises.

"Now, the question for [White House National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John] Kirby, [White House Press Secretary] Karin Jean-Pierre, all the people who are in charge of communications at the White House. <...> Were you aware of how American weapons, the weapons that are being supplied to Ukraine, are used?" she asked.

"That trial tests of a terrorist attack against civilian infrastructure in third countries are being made? These are the questions that we directly pose in the public space before the White House; you must answer them," she said, adding that the attack on the Kakhovka HPP "is certainly an act of terrorism."

On Tuesday night, Ukrainian forces delivered a strike on the Kakhovka hydropower plant, presumably from an Olkha multiple launch rocket system (MLRS). The shelling destroyed the hydraulic sluice valves at the HPP’s dam, triggering an uncontrolled discharge of water. In Novaya Kakhovka, the water level exceeded 12 meters at one point, but is now receding. There are currently 15 population centers in the flood zone; residents of nearby towns and villages are being evacuated. The collapse of the hydro plant's dam has caused serious environmental damage. Farmlands along the Dnieper River have been washed away, and there is a risk that the North Crimean Canal will become shallow.

Reuters/RT/Tass

Massive fire as Sudanese factions battle for control of arms factory

A massive fire broke out on Wednesday near a military complex containing an arms factory in southern Khartoum that Sudan's army has battled to defend in some of the fiercest fighting for weeks in its conflict with a rival faction, witnesses said.

The paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), in the eighth week of a power struggle with the army, attacked the heavily protected, sprawling Yarmouk complex on Tuesday, witnesses said. The group on Wednesday posted videos in which it claimed to have taken over a warehouse filled with weapons and ammunition as well as several entry points to the site.

The army used air strikes to try to repel the RSF advance, witnesses said.

Fighting across the three cities that make up Sudan's greater capital region - Khartoum, Bahri and Omdurman - has picked up since a 12-day ceasefire between the army and RSF formally expired on June 3 after repeated violations.

"Since yesterday there has been a violent battle with the use of planes and artillery and clashes on the ground and columns of smoke rising," Nader Youssef, a resident living near Yarmouk, told Reuters by phone.

Due to the proximity of fuel and gas depots, "any explosion could destroy residents and the whole area", he said.

A fire that began in the morning suddenly grew in size before sunset on Wednesday as explosions were heard, another resident living close to the depots said.

Local activists said the fires were caused by the bombing of the fuel and gas depots, and that houses in the area had been hit by shells and stray bullets.

Residents in Omdurman and Bahri, about 15 km (9 miles) away, reported that towering flames were visible after nightfall from Yarmouk.

The RSF quickly seized swathes of the capital after war erupted in Khartoum on April 15. Army air strikes and artillery fire have not dislodged them, but the RSF may face a challenge restocking with ammunition and fuel as the conflict drags on.

The violence has derailed the launch of a transition towards civilian rule four years after a popular uprising ousted strongman President Omar al-Bashir. The army and RSF, which together staged a coup in 2021, fell out over the chain of command and military restructuring plans under the transition.

WATER SHORTAGES

The conflict has wreaked havoc on the capital, reignited deadly violence in the long volatile western region of Darfur and displaced more than 1.9 million people.

Most health services and the banking system have collapsed, power and water is often cut and looting has spread. Food supplies have been dwindling.

UNICEF said on Wednesday that some 297 children were evacuated from Khartoum's Mygoma orphanage, which has been in the midst of heavy fighting. Reuters previously reported that dozens of babies had died there since the war began due to dehydration and malnutrition, and that the orphanage had housed about 400 children before the conflict started.

In Bahri, north of the Blue Nile from Khartoum, local activists said that more than 50 days of water cuts had driven many people from their homes and that they could be caught in the crossfire if they searched for water.

More than 1.4 million people have been displaced within Sudan and a further 476,800 have fled into neighbouring countries, most of which are already struggling with poverty and internal conflict, according to estimates from the International Organization for Migration (IOM).

Sudan's health ministry has recorded at least 780 civilian deaths as a direct result of the fighting. Hundreds more have been killed in the city of El Geneina in West Darfur. Medical officials say many bodies remain uncollected or unrecorded.

In Jeddah, a mediation source said negotiations were continuing in an effort to ensure safe passage for humanitarian assistance. Saudi Arabia and the United States brokered the ceasefire that ended on Saturday in talks there.

Consultations for a new truce deal, which had been reported by Saudi TV station Al Arabiya on Tuesday, were at an early stage and complicated by continued fighting, the source said.

"We urgently call on the warring parties to adhere to their commitments ... and to return to the Jeddah dialogue to resolve issues around violations and reach a ceasefire that is respected fully," countries including the United States, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the European Union said.

The United Nations says some 25 million - more than half Sudan's population - are in need of humanitarian assistance and that aid that could help about 2.2 million people had been delivered since late May.

Reuters

No matter how we pare it, the 2012 #OccupyNigeria protests will remain pivotal in our sociopolitical history. Its significance lies in how much the pushback against government insensitivity resounded nationwide and even among the Nigerians in the Diaspora. It started as protests against the fuel subsidies removal, but it soon culminated in other disquieting issues such as government profligacy. #OccupyNigeria was the crucial juncture where the “breath of fresh air” that supposedly ushered in the Goodluck Jonathan administration—elected less than a year then—was putrefied. Nothing else he did afterward could stop the doomsday clock of his administration that started ticking. He got stuck with the label of corruption, and it defined his image all through.

In light of the present administration of Bola Tinubu’s removal of the same fuel subsidies, but with far less dramatic effects, it is understandable that people would question why the public intellectuals, social advocates, labour unions, and other third-sector activists who turned the tables against Jonathan have been nearly mute this time. How did it happen that Jonathan was “wicked,” but Tinubu’s doing the same in the tardiest manner is an exhibition of “leadership”?

While the difference in the responses then and now can be easily chalked down to factors such as tribalism, a sheer dislike for Jonathan, or even the benefit of hindsight, the critics make a strong case by raising the issue of the moral contents of public advocacy. Do the class of opinion entrepreneurs—from the public intellectuals, social advocates, social commentators, and even the so-called influencers—even have a moral anchor, or do they merely speak just so they too can be heard? Given that Tinubu himself was one of the several opportunists who hijacked the mood of dissatisfaction driving that protest to flaunt his own populist credentials, what does it say about his character that he would be the one to eventually remove the fuel subsidies without as much as creating a cushioning effect for the people who would expectedly be diminished by the multiplier effects of higher fuel prices? Tinubu, by writing that infamous letter to Jonathan to criticise him on the fuel subsidies, created a document that now testifies to his moral unscrupulousness.

But it has become typical that when the history of that moment is told in recent times, people redact the larger context and allege that the whole #OccupyNigeriaaffair was sponsored by politicians like Tinubu. That misattribution is unsurprising because our society does not put enough premium on memory, whether personal, collective, or even institutional. The #OccupyNigeria protests were far more spontaneous. They were instigated by reports of parliamentary investigations that revealed startling corruption in the payments between 2009 and 2011 (about $6.8bn). It was also the era of the Arab Spring and the Occupy Protests where protesters in different regions of the world were taking on their governments.

For us in Nigeria, it also seemed like the right time to question our government on its profligacy. The fuel subsidy issue under Jonathan could not have evaded the unrest that was roiling the rest of the world (just like the former President Muhammadu Buhari administration that succeeded him also took a hit from the #BlackLivesMatter protests that became #EndSARS in Nigeria). Each time someone points out to me that nobody has tried to organise another fuel subsidy protest like #OccupyNigeria since then, the question I ask them is if they would join such a gathering. If we were asked to go to Ojota now and protest, would you go? So much water has passed under the bridge of Nigerian sociopolitics since 2012; even the bridge has been carried away. What will be the point of investing energies into protests when the best the last one achieved was to catapult the same politicians who routinely suck Nigeria dry into Aso Rock?

Merely writing off the chicanery of the 2012 players as part of the game of politics will not do. The seeds of discontent that those dissemblers sow eventually grow into distrust and disquiet. The manner some elements in the South-West and the northern regions of the country were quick to opt out of any planned protests of the fuel subsidy removal itself was also disturbing. I should also recall that in 2012, those who opted out of the #OccupyNigeria protests were groups from the South-East and the South-South. That people could persuade themselves to suppress any dissent that threatens their kinsman’s political legitimacy shows how much Nigerians overly invested in the symbolism of the presidency. People will give up on advocating their own interests just so their tribesman in Aso Rock can survive. Getting Nigerians to form a multi-ethnic and multi-religious coalition and insist on the government working for us will require another level of political savviness.

That said, whatever is wrong with the implementation of the fuel subsidies removal is no argument for their retention. Whatever hypocrisy Tinubu and his minions in the so-called civil society might have manifested on this issue does not justify the payments. Outing these people as charlatans does not vindicate escalating the error of retaining the fuel subsidies. It is not worth matching hypocrisy for hypocrisy simply to point out the crookedness of our social commentators.

For one, it does not take much to see that every description of dystopia that will be occasioned if the fuel subsidies were ever removed happened even when it was sustained. We were told that the costs of goods and services would shoot up if they ever removed fuel subsidies, and the prices of everything did so immensely even without the removal. They said many people will fall into poverty if fuel subsidies were to be removed, but Nigerians fell into multi-dimensional poverty even though the costs of fuel subsidies rose astronomically. So what else can possibly go wrong that has not, many times and over?

Those who argue that even the USA gives fuel subsidies tend to overlook that what that country subsidises is production, not mere consumption. Besides, one cannot glibly compare an economy that is diversified, productive, and coherent with Nigeria’s voodoo capitalism that produces nothing yet consumes everything! As for those who argue that Tinubu should fight corruption in the sector instead of ending the subsidies, I hope they know how ridiculous that proposal sounds? If Buhari, who got into power by pretending to be the very embodiment of incorruptibility could not fight corruption, how do you expect Tinubu to fare better? How?

Tinubu himself knows he does not have the moral legitimacy to challenge anyone on corruption. The few times he opened his mouth to talk about corruption, he induced serious laughter. I am sure he is smart enough to not overreach himself by pursuing his fellow politicians on corruption. Doing so quickly opens him up to many vulnerabilities. He will promptly face another battle from those who have his dossier. They will not hesitate to tank whatever moral legitimacy he still has by producing the sordid revelations of his untoward affairs. He cannot fight the corruption in the fuel subsidies. The best he can afford is to seize the opening between two government transitions and cut off that umbilical cord forever.

If there is an important lesson to take away from the moral clarity that defined the fuel subsidy protests in 2012 and which is now hazy in post-Jonathan Nigeria, it is how much even the enterprise of truth-telling through social commentary is tainted with ethnic and religious sentiments. Going forward, some people will rightly be more cynical while others will show more circumspection in listening to the class of public intellectuals, activists, and the so-called social advocates, especially those whose ideas of right and wrong are dictated by how closer their opinions can get them to Aso Rock.

Punch

The rugged, chilly coast of northern Norway, beyond the Arctic Circle, is not usually thought of as prime agricultural land. But far down a dead-end road on the shores of Skjerstad Fjord sits Salten Smolt, one of the most advanced farms in the world. Rather than crops or cows, though, the firm produces fish. Inside its 7,000 square metre main building are tanks capable of producing 8m smolt—juvenile Atlantic salmon—every year.

Fish farming is the fastest-growing form of food production in the world. Seafood accounts for around 17% of the world’s protein intake (in some parts of Asia and Africa, the number is nearer 50%). The OECD, a rich-country club, reckons that, thanks to population growth and rising incomes, global consumption of fish will reach 180m tonnes by the end of the decade, up from 158m tonnes in 2020.

But the ocean has only so much to give. The World Bank reckons that 90% of the world’s fisheries are being fished either at or over their capacity. Aquaculture has therefore accounted for nearly all the growth in fish consumption since 1990 (see chart). It will have to account for almost all the growth to come, too.

As with farming on land though, aquaculture can cause environmental damage. Many farmed fish are grown in net pens, either in rivers or the open ocean. Uneaten food and fish waste can pollute the surrounding waters. When net pens break, escaped farmed fish can damage the local ecosystem. Inland “flow-through” farms require continuous streams of freshwater from rivers or wells, competing with those who might wish to drink it instead. Rearing lots of fish in close proximity risks outbreaks of diseases and parasites, which sweep in from the open water. That requires antibiotics and other drugs to keep the fish healthy.

It is these sorts of problems that newer fish farms, like Salten Smolt, hope to solve. It makes use of a technology called “recirculating aquaculture systems”, or RAS for short (pronounced “Rass”). Rather than relying on a constant flow of natural water to keep fish healthy, a RAS system grows fish on land in tanks whose water is continuously cleaned and recycled. That offers three big advantages. Compared with standard aquaculture systems, RAS farms use far less water, can take better care of their fish, and can allow picky species to be raised anywhere in the world.

RAS farms are, in essence, much bigger versions of home aquariums. Each consists of a tank in which the fish swim, and a set of water-cleaning components to dispose of the waste that they produce. Much of the technology is recycled from the sewage-treatment industry.

Reduce, re-use and recycle

Unwanted solids—fish faeces and uneaten feed, mostly—are removed first. This is done mechanically, using a conical tank, gravity and a series of increasingly fine mesh filters. Most of the remaining waste is ammonia. Fish secrete the stuff through their gills, as a byproduct of their metabolisms, and too much is toxic. The ammonia-laden water is therefore pumped through colonies of bacteria which, given enough oxygen, will convert the ammonia into nitrite and nitrate. Further steps can remove other contaminants such as phosphorus and heavy metals.

The cleaner the water, the more can be recirculated, and the less is needed from outside. A completely closed loop is impractical, at least for now. But state-of-the-art systems, such as Salten Smolt’s, can reduce water usage by more than 99%. Standard salmon-farming consumes about 50,000 litres of water for each kilogram of salmon produced. A RAS system might need just 150. The upshot, says Steve Sutton, the founder of TransparentSea, a RAS shrimp farm near Los Angeles, is that RAS farms “leave the wild environment alone so that [farmed fish] don’t spread pathogens or pollute the waterways”.

Concentrating the waste in one place offers advantages of its own. One of the biggest missed opportunities with standard aquaculture, says Kari Attramadal, head of research at Nofitech, another Norwegian aquaculture firm, is that the waste released into the environment from standard fish farms contains plenty of valuable nutrients. Nitrates can be used as food for hydroponically grown crops. John Sällebrant, Salten Smolt’s production manager, says that the firm recovers and dries fish faeces, as well as uneaten feed, for conversion into agricultural fertiliser.

Keeping fish alive in artificial tanks relies on keeping tight control of the entire system. Errors can be costly. If the oxygenation system fails, says Attramadal, fish can start to die within eight minutes. But that need for careful monitoring also offers the ability to fine-tune the environment in which the fish are being raised. That allows ras systems to perform an aquatic version of what, on land, is called precision agriculture.

Salmon, for instance, prefer cold water. A climate-controlled tank is able to provide the ideal temperature at all times, without worrying about currents, tides or weather, boosting the speed with which the fish grow. ReelData, a startup based in Nova Scotia, uses data from cameras and sensors in RAS tanks to estimate how hungry fish are, how much they weigh and even to assess how stressed they are. The firm says its technology can raise a farm’s productivity by up to 20%.

And because they do not rely on the natural environment, RAS systems can, in principle, be built anywhere. Atlantic Sapphire, another Norwegian firm, has built an Atlantic salmon farm near Miami, a thousand miles south of the fish’s natural range. Being close to big cities reduces the distance that fish have to travel before arriving on a dinner plate. Pure Salmon Technology, a Norwegian ras provider, is building a farm in Japan. It reckons that lower transport costs will more than halve the carbon footprint of each kilogram of salmon, despite the extra energy costs involved in running a RAS system.

As with any new technology, there have been teething troubles. Half a million fish, or about 5% of the total, died at Atlantic Sapphire’s plant in Florida in 2021, for instance, after problems with its filtration systems. (The firm describes the incident as a piece of “expensive learning” to be “seen in the context of RAS having been in the early stages of its rapid development”.)

Small fry

The biggest downside is cost. All those pipes, pumps and monitoring systems mean that capital costs are significantly higher for ras farms than for standard ones. (That is one reason why many existing systems focus on salmon, a comparatively pricey fish.) Even in Norway, where about half the country’s salmon farms use RAS, it is limited to the first stage of the fish’s life. Juvenile fish are still grown into adults in standard open-water pens.

Tax changes in Norway may change that, says Matt Craze of Spheric Research, a firm of aquaculture market analysts. And there are other ways to keep costs down. Some firms are experimenting with hybrid systems. These dispense with the more expensive bits of waste-management kit, but can still cut overall water usage significantly. Economies of scale will help, too. Craze reckons that, while smaller RAS farms might produce fish at twice the price of standard aquaculture, bigger ones should, if they can iron out the gremlins, eventually be able to match them.

For now, though, RAS remains a tiddler. Kathrin Steinberg, head of research at the Aquaculture Stewardship Council, a Dutch non-profit organisation, says that less than 5% of the farms certified by her organisation make use of it. But with the world’s demand for fish rising inexorably, that share, she says, is growing.

The Economist

When asked, a Harris poll found that six out of ten people say they would like to be billionaires. (Four out of ten say they despise billionaires; no gray area here.)

Interestingly, 44 percent of respondents said they "have the available tools" to become billionaires.

Even though, as Ryan Holiday writes:

Clearly Holiday has figured out how to write great -- and bestselling, which don't always go hand in hand -- books. How to produce an extremely popular podcast. How to launch and run an independent bookstore.

And he's figured out more than a few things about money, as described in his recent article 31 Lessons I've Learned About Money.

Here are some of my favorites, and how you can apply them.

You'll never reach your number

Ask, and just about everyone has a number: the "if I had $X, then I would be set" number. 

But no one ever seems to reach their number, if only because, as Holiday writes, they constantly move the goal posts.

Take the guy I know who splashed a cool $450 grand on a Lexus LFA with the Nürburgring package. His everyday car is a Porsche 911 Turbo S. I was sure he was rich.

Then he told me what he wants most in life is a Bugatti Veyron, but he'll need to spend well over $1 million to snag one of those. "I have money," he told me, "but not that kind of money." It bums him out. He thinks about it all the time.

Even though, by any objective standard, he's rich... he doesn't feel rich.

The better approach? Stop thinking about the number you want to hit -- a number that, as you get close, you'll inevitably increase -- and start thinking about the life you want to live. How you want to spend your time. Who you want to spend your time with. The impact you want to make, especially on the people you care about.

And work on hitting that.

Always pick the low-hanging fruit.

One example: Holiday has had to remind employees to sign up for the 401k match his company offers. That's low-hanging fruit; anyone who doesn't max out on the match leaves free money on the table. 

If you set up a normal 401(k) plan, roughly speaking you must offer the same plan benefits to your employees as you receive. So you may not want to establish a plan with a huge match.

But if you are your only employee, then you can feel free to match to your heart's -- and business's resources' -- content.

That's what I do. My plan is set up to match 100 percent of employee contributions, which means I match 100 percent of my contributions. Since I'm over 50 and can make "catch up" contributions, this year I can contribute up to $30,000 a year as an employee (if you're under 50, the annual limit is $22,500), and my employer (me) can match that amount. And since the total allowable amount is $66,000, my employer (me) can toss in an additional $6,000 in profit sharing.

While that's not free money -- my company clearly has to earn at least that much -- it is tax-deferred money. And it's low-hanging fruit.

Make sure you pluck some of your own low-hanging fruit. Call your cable company, tell them you're thinking about cutting the cord, and see what discounts they offer. Tell your insurance agent you're thinking about shopping around. Look for things you spend money from out of habit, not necessity. 

As Holiday says, always do the easy things first.

Favor investments that are dependable

As Holiday writes:

My wife and I have a similar approach. As I recall from a conversation we had, Holiday favors making real estate loans that generate monthly payments. (He'll tell me if I'm wrong.) In our case, we own rental properties that generate monthly income.

We couldn't quit working tomorrow -- shoot, we don't want to quit working tomorrow -- but if we did, the real estate spigot wouldn't get turned off. 

Which is a good thing, if only because...

If you have a problem that can be solved by money, you don't have a problem

Relieving stress is often a simple matter of perspective. If your car breaks down and you have the money to fix it, the solution may be painful... but it's not a problem.

Having no way to get to work for the foreseeable future? That's a problem.

The same is true for business; if sales are down this month but you have a solid reserve to fall back on, the problem shifts from worrying about making payroll -- which is super-stressful -- to finding new ways to increase sales.

Money can do a lot of things, but arguably the most important thing is to create choices.

Which is especialy true when you...

If it makes you a worse person (parent, neighbor, writer, whatever), it's not success

Why? Here's Ryan:

As you plan a business or embark on a new career path, take the time to decide what "success" really means to you. If your goal is to become wealthy, the economics of the industry might mean a level of effort and commitment that could leave you feeling unhappy and unfulfilled.

Make sure that what you really want reflects what you design your business -- and your life -- to deliver. 

To you.

Inc

At a ceremony in November, the Nigerian government celebrated the discovery of as many as 1 billion barrels of oil in the country’s arid northeast, almost 1,000 kilometers (621 miles) away from the crude-rich Niger Delta.

The state’s partners in the multi-billion dollar project in the impoverished, landlocked corner of the country is a company founded by two brothers from India. The siblings have built the largest independent oil company in Africa’s biggest crude producing nation even as India pursues them as criminals — accusing them of perpetrating “one of the largest economic scams in the country.”  

Now, as newly elected President Bola Tinubu sets ambitious targets for Nigeria’s hydrocarbons sector, companies created by the brothers, Nitin and Chetan Sandesara, seem poised for an increasingly prominent role — especially as international oil giants such Shell Plc and ExxonMobil Corp. retreat from the West African country.

“This discovery will provide a multiplicity of opportunity and great prosperity for Nigeria,” Tinubu said at the November event. Sworn in on May 29, he was the ruling party’s presidential candidate at the time. 

The selection of a firm owned by the family of the duo branded as fugitives by India to drill wells for the project is just the latest sign of how Nigeria has provided the brothers a haven, effectively insulating them from troubles back home. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has accused the tycoons of absconding after defrauding public banks of more than $1.7 billion. Nigeria has refused India’s request to extradite them.

The Sandesara brothers, Gujarati businessmen who left India in 2017, deny cheating their lenders and say they are victims of political persecution. Having ventured into the Nigerian oil industry almost 20 years ago when they won two onshore licenses in the delta, the brothers — faced with problems in India — have shifted their focus to Lagos. They even applied for Nigerian citizenship, according to India’s Central Bureau of Investigation, or CBI, the country’s top investigating agency.  It’s not clear if they succeeded. The brothers’ lawyer and Nigerian authorities didn’t respond to queries on the matter.

While the brothers fight fraud charges and non-bailable warrants from India, the Sandesara businesses are flourishing in Nigeria. The African nation refused to arrest them four years ago saying the Indian allegations “appeared to be political in nature,” according to a letter published by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project.

In India, the brothers’ private jet, swanky cars and star-studded parties at a 60,000-square-foot farmhouse in Ampad village in Gujarat routinely provided fodder for tabloids and social media sites, according to news outlet The Print. From a sanctuary on Lagos’ upscale Victoria Island, one of their Nigerian companies has continued that glitzy tradition, sponsoring annual Diwali celebrations that are the talk of the city’s small Indian community, even flying in Bollywood singers like Shreya Ghoshal to perform.

The family’s Nigerian oil and gas business — with the slogan “Success is Natural” — is thriving. The group’s subsidiaries — Sterling Oil Exploration & Production Co. and Sterling Global Oil Resources Ltd. — pump about 50,000 barrels of crude a day in the delta via contracts with the state-owned Nigerian National Petroleum Co. Another unit expects to bring a third block into production this year that will eventually raise total daily output to above 100,000 barrels. 

Other than the international majors such as Shell and Chevron Corp., the Sandesara family is the top exporter of oil from Nigeria. Its firms’ taxes contributed 2% of the Nigerian government’s revenue, Nitin said in 2019. An export system of transporting crude on barges to a floating storage vessel in the Atlantic Ocean — rather than relying on pipelines that are vulnerable to thieves — has enabled the family’s companies to maintain a consistent performance as other producers have floundered.

The brothers have hired the plugged-in former head of the Nigerian government’s oil regulator to head their energy operations, and concluded major contracts with the state. Two years ago, Sterling Oil sealed a separate deal with the NNPC for the commercialization of the gas within one of its oil blocks in a project designed to boost the anemic power supply in Africa’s biggest economy.

“You are a very reliable partner because when you say things, you get them done,” NNPC Chief Executive Mele Kyari said of Sterling Oil, announcing the deal.

Indian authorities take a less rosy view of the Sandesaras’ practices. 

Beginning in the 1980s, the brothers transformed a family tea-trading business into a Mumbai-headquartered conglomerate spanning oil and gas, health care, construction and engineering and owning one of the world’s largest manufacturers of pharmaceutical grade gelatin. By the early 2010s, the group said it was valued at almost $7 billion. 

Some of that expansion was bankrolled by a “well calculated economic fraud” that left the group owing more than 140 billion rupees ($1.71 billion) to public lenders including State Bank of India, Bank of Baroda and Union Bank of India, the CBI told the country’s Supreme Court a year ago. 

Among accusations leveled against them include the use of “false and fabricated documents” to secure bank loans and the diversion of funds overseas. The same lenders also provided credit lines to the entity that owned the Nigerian oil business, the CBI said in a December 2019 charge sheet. 

State-backed lenders, including Bank of India, won two judgments from UK courts — in 2018 and 2021 — ordering Sandesara companies providing services to Sterling Oil to pay almost $60 million after they defaulted on loans.

India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED), which investigates money laundering and forex violation cases, said in 2019 that it wanted to seize the brothers’ overseas assets, including a Nigerian oil field, four drilling rigs and a Gulfstream aircraft. The group’s flagship business Sterling Biotech Ltd was sold to California-based alt-dairy firm Perfect Day Inc. in November for about $78 million in a transaction approved by India’s bankruptcy court.  

Following a petition by the Sandesaras to quash the CBI and ED cases against them, India’s Supreme Court paused proceedings last year. The brothers said they wanted to reach a financial resolution with creditors. But the investigating agencies have said any settlement “cannot absolve the criminal liability of the accused.” 

The brothers, who told the court their Indian companies have repaid more than was disbursed to them in loans, say the agencies’ “sole aim is to browbeat, harass, harangue and humiliate” them, and claimed they were declared fugitives in “a grossly illegal manner.” They say the Modi government has a vendetta against the Sandesaras because of their ties to opposition and Muslim politicians, according to media reports that cite their filings in other court cases.

An Indian lawyer for the Sandesaras didn’t respond to multiple emails requesting comment. The group chairman and two directors of the Nigerian oil companies didn’t reply to questions sent by Bloomberg. The CBI, ED and the Sandesaras’ main creditors also didn’t address 

queries on the status of the proceedings against the brothers.

Ironically, even as the Indian government was building its case against the pair, their Nigerian companies supplied cargoes of crude worth almost $1.5 billion to India’s state-owned refineries in the seven years to January 2020, the brothers said in court filings.

With their troubles in India showing no signs of abating, the brothers’ ties in Nigeria are deepening.

In Indian court filings in September 2022, the brothers claim ownership of Sterling Oil, the subsidiary responsible for most of the group’s crude production, touting it as a “very prominent company of Nigeria.” An online registry for Nigerian natural resources companies lists another family member — Devak Patel, the 31-year-old son of Chetan Sandesara’s brother-in-law — as the owner. Patel didn’t respond to queries seeking clarity on the company’s ownership.

Where the brothers currently spend their time is unclear. The ED accused them in 2020 of “shifting their base from one country to another to escape the clutches of law” and said they were presumed to be in Nigeria, the UK, the US or the UAE. They have also obtained Albanian passports, according to The Wire and other Indian media outlets. The brothers have neither confirmed nor denied the reports. Chetan signed an affidavit for the Indian court from Lagos in August.

Meanwhile, the Sandesaras’ participation in the new development in Nigeria’s north — a pet project of former President Muhammadu Buhari, who stepped down last month — may be yet another sign that their future lies in the West African country. 

Sterling Oil will carry out the venture with the NNPC and another public company controlled by Nigeria’s 19 northern states to bring oil production to the upper part of the country for the first time. Almost all of Nigeria’s crude currently comes from the Niger Delta and off its shores.

“It is to the credit of this administration that at a time when there is near-zero appetite for investment in fossil fuel energy, coupled with the location challenges, we are able to attract investment of over $3 billion to this project,” Buhari said at the November ceremony.

His successor Tinubu has promised to increase daily oil output by more than 60% to 2.6 million barrels by 2027 and to 4 million barrels by 2030 – an aspiration many analysts believe to be implausible. If the new government intends to achieve these goals, it will have to lean on independent producers such as Seplat Energy Plc and Sterling Oil since the likes of Shell and Exxon are trying to sell their onshore and shallow water assets. 

At the ceremony last year, Sterling Oil Chief Operating Officer Mohit Barot told Buhari that the company had secured funding to drill the wells and build a complex to produce fuel, fertilizer and electricity.

“We assure you, Mr. President, that we will deliver on our commitments and your expectations...,” Barot said. “Today is just the start of our long journey together.” 

Bloomberg