All The NewsOpinionPerspective

OPINION: Sanwo-Olu Really Doesn’t Give a Hoot about LTV

4 Mins read

Besides being the mouthpiece of the government, LTV has over the years serenaded the Lagos community with bespoke contents, which many Lagos youngsters back then, including Sanwo-olu grew up with. Interesting programmes which particularly appealed to the grassroots and the middle class of the metropolis, were the order of the day on LTV back then. This, of course is possibly due to the fact that, competition was nearly non-existent as of then.

By Daniel Aladesehin (dannycrown@gmail.com)

In what appears like a full slap in the face, the Lagos State governor, Babajide Sanwo-olu has for the umpteenth time demonstrated his nonchalance to the growth of Nigeria’s first state-owned television station which ordinarily should be his baby. This is despite repeated calls on him to give due attention to Lagos Television (LTV) which is his government’s only TV station.

His latest action of launching a so-called world-class film and television institute by the privately owned Ebony Life TV shows that indeed, the governor gives no hoot about the struggling Lagos Television LTV right there under his nose in Agidingbi.

According to report, the Academy which the governor enthusiastically launched, offers state-of-the-art lecture rooms, projection and sound facilities, as well as practical studio workshop spaces and post-production facilities fitted with latest technology to ensure cohorts have a conducive learning environment and advance their skillset. 

Lagos Television

If Mr Sanwo-olu is to take a cue from his predecessor, Akinwunmi Ambode, he would have directed this same attention to LTV with the objective of giving a new lease of life to what was to be the pride of the state.

When the recently transited Alhaji Lateef Jakande mooted the idea of launching a TV station for the state, his mission was to create a brand that could be rallied as the primary source of audiovisual information and entertainment for the people of Lagos.

Besides being the mouthpiece of the government, LTV has over the years serenaded the Lagos community with bespoke contents, which many Lagos youngsters back then, including Sanwo-olu grew up with. Interesting programmes which particularly appealed to the grassroots and the middle class of the metropolis, were the order of the day on LTV back then. This, of course is possibly due to the fact that, competition was nearly non-existent as of then.

As of today however, that station is in a sorry state, particularly when measured with the ever-expanding competitive industry. No thanks to mismanagement in recent past and till today, wrongful composition of the workforce and the dilapidated state of the entire facility and equipment.

In his days as the chief executive of the state, Ambode made conscious efforts to reposition the station for the competitive Lagos market, albeit his advisors on such repositioning were not TV broadcast experts. Only jobbers who though, are journalists in their own right but never experts at TV business. You can’t blame the former governor, he was just an accountant and a TV viewer.

Ambode’s efforts which poached the likes of the multi-talented Oba Adeoye from Television Continental (TVC) and got the stations some new equipment plus a CNN training in United Kingdom (UK) for the staff, could not yield expected results before leaving office, due to the reasons highlighted above, and more. Some of the ex-governor’s immediate cabinet even cashed in on Ambode’s enthusiasm to reform LTV, to smuggle in some of their friends, without the governor’s knowledge or approval.

The rest, like they say, is history.

Expectedly therefore, one looked forward to a continuity of that effort by his successor, Babajide Sanwo-olu, but so far, it has been all disappointing, as far as Lagos Television was concerned.

Since his assumption of office as the state chief executive, Sanwo-olu has not deemed it fit, not even once to grace the station with an appearance on any of its programmes. Yet he junkets other private competitors across the state with ease at every given opportunity.

The state of the equipment at Lagos Television is another point of worry for those who understand the business of TV. Ordinarily this should also be a thing of worry to the governor but since he never visits the facility, there’s no way for him to know how outdated the equipment have been.

In the area of appointment, Mr. Governor needs to ensure that the right people are appointed to man strategic positions at the station. He needs to investigate the circumstances under which some of those who recently resigned, took their decisions. He should ask questions across the Industry but be wary about another set of jobbers who may want to feast on his resolve.

According to inside information, some of the directors who just left the station possess the prerequisite skills and expertise to fix it, but were stifled by needless bureaucracy and a workforce built on mere man-knows-man. The civil service structure as it is, is at variance with modern TV practice. Hence, there is a need for a review of that structure in the case of the TV station.

Rather than lavishing the state resources on the private TV enterprise (the Ebony Academy) in the guise of boosting creativity, Mr. Governor must roll up his sleeves and get serious with Lagos Television. He could have as well initiated such a programme on the platform of the public broadcaster (i.e LTV) with the objective of using such an initiative as Launchpad for the rebuilding process of LTV.

There is no time best for this process to start than now, as he is halfway into the completion of his 4-year tenure as governor. There is no assurance he will remain so, for another 4-years.

Aladesehin, a broadcaster writes from Ikorodu Lagos.

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
All The NewsCover StoryNewsPolitics

Musa Tsoken Congratulates Kalu on Daily Times’ Lawmaker of the Year Award

1 Mins read
The National Coordinator of the Asiwaju Again Renewed Hope Support Initiative 2027 and National President of the APC Initiative for Good Governance…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Abuja FileAll The NewsCover StoryEducationEntrepreneurshipFeaturesNews

2026/2027 Admission Begins @ AAT University: Where Modern Facilities, Academic Excellence and Global Citizenship Meet

7 Mins read
Why Abdulrasaq Abubakar Toyin University is emerging as a compelling destination for the next generation of Nigerian undergraduates By Abdulrahman Aliagan For…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com