News
Jovago.com Identifies 10 Costly Mistakes Hotel Owners Make

Hotel owners often make some basic mistakes when operating their hotels and then cannot understand why they either make no money or the hotel eventually closes down – below are just some general mistakes but these are not the only ones owners can make.
First there is the tendency to base room rates only on what competitors are doing instead of what is actually offered to the guest in relation to what it costs the hotel.
There has to be a balance between perceived value and the guests paying a fair value for what they are getting. Should a guest feel cheated the guest will never return.
It is very rare for a hotel to be premium in its reputation and location for it to charge what it wants.
Thus stated, where a hotel has no clear rate policy that dictates what the standard room type rates are and what is discounted to companies, groups or frequent guests can be costly for an owner.
Quoting on an individual negotiated basis can lead to mistakes. Some clients may abuse the discounts they are used to and if a hotel refuses to honour what they did before the guest may actually go elsewhere.
Though guest loyalty is a fallacy, if guests know how the hotel’s policy works and they know what to expect, they can actually become regulars and trust that for what they are paying for is fair in relation to what they are getting.
Such a rate policy is usually an internal document not shared with guests but highlights what the normal rates are and what a guest is offered for what they pay. Furthermore, it would also specify what discounted rate they would get based on a justification such as they are actually a group or a regular company or a regular guest. The guest is given the full rate and then the rate offered that best describes the qualification for such a discounted rate. No percentages should beused but rather the value of the discounted rates.
Writing on the mistakes hotelers make often times, Bruce Prins, notes that Hotels that misrepresent themselves as luxury or budget when in fact they are the opposite can alienate guests and cause the business to fail.
Services and facilities determine a hotel’s grading and status as either to be budget, economy, mid-scale, up-scale or luxury.
It is important for the owner to get professional advice on what grade their hotel is before making claims and deciding what rates to charge for their hotel rooms.
The practice of not doing preventative maintenance by checking all furniture, fittings and equipment daily or weekly and then using cheap labour or skills to conduct maintenance is destructive for a hotel.
The worst is when the hotel just plainly expects guests to stay in ahotel with paint peeling of walls, leakages everywhere and furniture and equipment either broken or not working at all.
A guest will realise they are being taken for a fool and move elsewhere. If it is a cheap hotel that chargescheap rates then this will attract guests that will go further to add to the deterioration of the hotel as an asset and its reputation.
Hotels that then add gimmicks to compensate for poor service, exorbitant rates or poorly maintained facilities, do so as a cheap attempt at making the guest feel that they are getting value for their money.
Gimmicks can be extra services, furniture or equipment added that actually do not really add value to the guest.
An example would be to place chocolates on the pillows at night time in a hotel where the air-conditioning does not even work. Hotels have to get the basics right such as cleanliness, hygiene, good service and working equipment before even attempting to add little touches to entice or appease guests.
Hotels do get old and money should be invested at least every five or ten years to ensurethe hotel is kept up to standard. That is if the hotel was properly thought out and built to begin with.
If no money hasbeen allocated for it or no investment is forthcoming, the hotel will lose out to its competitors and eventually go bankrupt.
In today’s world where competition is forever increasing no hotelier can afford to sitback and think the guest will just take it or leave it.
Owners that withdraw profits from the business on a continuous basis, especially during the first few years and then take loans when serious funds are needed are setting the hotel up for a disaster and wasting their money.
Profits should be kept in the business until all loans are paid and then these same profits should be used to either pay out as dividends or form part of future re-investment.
A hotel is a business but most of all its value is in its appreciation over time into an asset that can be sold at a high value, especially if it is successful and has a good brand name.
At least the building and land can be sold as is at a greater value when need be because property most of the time increases more in value than cash in the bank.
If staff in a hotel are exploited by either being paid far below what the average salary would be for their work, or not being given training or even being replaced at a whim without clear disciplinary policies applied consistently, it is a given that the hotel will lose business.
Staff would steal and in actual fact contribute to the hotel’s deterioration with a mediocre and apathetic attitude to their work, each other and the hotel guests.
It is common for anhotelier to also think that when the hotel pays to have people trained they will leave for better jobs. That may be so but then the question begs as to why the staff would be so eager to leave.
The fact that staff do leave hotels or move around is a normal situation in hotels world-wide and yet a lot of hotels that actually encourage staff turnover in a positive way find that they have better occupancies, happier customers and more profits.
The trick is to keep the staff that add the most value and show the most potential in ensuring the hotel is a success.
Lastly a hotel owner should be careful of who they encourage and even allow to stay in their hotel. When prostitutes are consciously allowed to operate in or from a hotel they draw in bad elements such as criminals and drug users.
Drug users or criminals then encourage kingpins to also frequent and then attract murderers and even entire gangs to take up residence.
Once the latter occurs the owner has no more control over his or her hotel and I subservient to the abuse and whims of the clandestine community he helps create within his or her own hotel.
News
FIRS Declares NIN, CAC Numbers as Tax IDs from 2026

Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) has announced that the National Identification Number (NIN) issued by the National Identity Management Commission (NIMC) will automatically serve as the Tax Identification Number (Tax ID) for all Nigerian citizens, while registered businesses will use their Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) registration numbers.

FIRS
The disclosure was made during a public awareness campaign on the new tax laws posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Monday.
According to the Service, the Nigeria Tax Administration Act (NTAA), which comes into force in January 2026, mandates the use of Tax IDs for certain financial and commercial transactions, including bank account ownership.
FIRS explained that the measure is part of efforts to unify all previously issued Tax Identification Numbers (TINs) by both the federal and state revenue services into a single identifier.
“For individuals, your NIN automatically serves as your Tax ID, while for registered companies, your CAC RC number is used. You do not need a physical card; the Tax ID is a unique number linked directly to your identity,” the Service stated.
The agency noted that the requirement has been in place since the Finance Act of 2019 but has now been strengthened under the NTAA to ensure compliance and ease of administration.
Officials emphasized that the reform would simplify tax processes, reduce duplication, and improve transparency in Nigeria’s tax system.
The Service added that the integration of NIN and CAC numbers into the tax framework would also enhance data accuracy, curb tax evasion, and streamline the monitoring of taxable activities across the country.
Tax experts have described the development as a significant step toward modernizing Nigeria’s revenue administration, noting that it aligns with global best practices where national identity systems are linked to tax compliance.
The FIRS urged Nigerians to ensure that their NINs and CAC registration details are up-to-date, stressing that the identifiers would be required for transactions such as property purchases, contract awards, and access to certain financial services once the NTAA takes effect
News
US Begins Partial Visa Ban on Nigerians January 1

The United States will begin a partial suspension of visa issuance to Nigerians from January 1, 2026, following a new presidential proclamation aimed at strengthening border and national security.

The US Mission in Nigeria announced on Monday that the restriction will take effect at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time in accordance with Presidential Proclamation 10998, titled ‘Restricting and Limiting the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the Security of the United States.’
According to the mission, Nigeria is one of 19 countries affected by the measure.
Others listed are Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burundi, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Gabon, The Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Venezuela, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
The proclamation provides for a partial suspension of visa issuance covering nonimmigrant B-1/B-2 visitor visas, as well as F, M and J student and exchange visitor visas.
It also applies to immigrant visas, though with limited exceptions.
The statement read in part, “Effective January 1, 2026, at 12:01 a.m. EST, in line with Presidential Proclamation 10998 on “Restricting and Limiting the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the Security of the United States,” the Department of State is partially suspending visa issuance to nationals of 19 countries – Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burundi, Cote D’Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Gabon, The Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Venezuela, Zambia, and Zimbabwe – for nonimmigrant B-1/B-2 visitor visas and F, M, J student and exchange visitor visas, and all immigrant visas with limited exceptions.”
US officials clarified that the policy does not apply to all travellers. Exemptions include immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran, dual nationals applying with passports from countries not affected by the suspension, and Special Immigrant Visas for eligible US government employees.
Other exempted categories include lawful permanent residents of the United States and participants in certain major international sporting events.
The US government emphasised that the proclamation applies only to foreign nationals who are outside the United States on the effective date and who do not hold a valid US visa as of January 1, 2026.
“Foreign nationals, even those outside the United States, who hold valid visas as of the effective date are not subject to Presidential Proclamation 10998. No visas issued before January 1, 2026, at 12:01 a.m. EST, have been or will be revoked pursuant to the Proclamation,” the statement added.
Visa applicants from affected countries may continue to submit applications and attend interviews. However, the US Mission noted that such applicants “may be ineligible for visa issuance or admission to the US” under the new rules.
The announcement comes amid a series of recent US policy decisions that have raised concerns among Nigerians seeking to travel, study or migrate to the country.
In October, the United States added Nigeria back to its list of countries accused of violating religious freedom, citing persistent insecurity and attacks on Christian communities. This was followed by Nigeria’s inclusion on a revised US travel ban list that imposed partial entry restrictions on Nigerians.
The US has also tightened immigration and visa policies affecting Nigerians. Earlier this year, the validity of most non-immigrant visas issued to Nigerians was reduced to single-entry visas with a three-month duration.
News
DPLAN Threatens NDPC with Legal Action for Setting aside $32.8m Meta Fine


The pre-action notice was signed by Emmanuel Okpara, Esq., Litigation and Compliance Director, and Mus’ab Awwal Mu’az, Esq., secretary of the Association’s Steering Committee.
The dispute stemmed from a consent judgment delivered on November 3, 2025, by Justice J.K. Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CC/355/2025 between Meta Platforms, Inc. and the NDPC.
Following investigations conducted under the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA), 2023, the NDPC had issued a Final Order against Meta Platforms, Inc., finding “widespread violations of the data protection and privacy rights of approximately 61 million Nigerians,” and imposing a remedial fine of USD 32,800,000.
The pre-action notice was signed by Emmanuel Okpara, Esq., Litigation and Compliance Director, and Mus’ab Awwal Mu’az, Esq., Secretary of the Association’s Steering Committee.
The dispute stemmed from a consent judgment delivered on November 3, 2025, by Justice J.K. Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CC/355/2025 between Meta Platforms, Inc. and the NDPC.
Following investigations conducted under the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA), 2023, the NDPC had issued a Final Order against Meta Platforms, Inc., finding “widespread violations of the data protection and privacy rights of approximately 61 million Nigerians,” and imposing a remedial fine of USD 32,800,000.
The NDPC investigation stemmed from a petition filed at the commission on August 14, 2023, against Meta Platforms Inc. by the convener of Personal Data Protection Awareness Initiative, Ozoemena Nwogbo, regarding violation of the Nigeria Data Protection Act.
After its investigation, NDPC found Meta Platforms Inc. wanting and, on February 18, 2025, issued nine Final Orders against Meta Platforms Inc.
NDPC’s Order
The NDPC’s order nine reads, “Meta shall pay the naira equivalent of 32,800,000 USD (Thirty-two million, eight-hundred thousand United States Dollars) as a remedial fee. The naira equivalent shall be at the rate determined by the Central Bank of Nigeria.
“The details of the account for payment of the remedial fee are as follows: Account Name: Nigeria Data Protection Commission Fund Account. Account Number: 0020331265048 (300131267). Use RTGS for payment.”
The NDPC added, “Note that Meta has a right to seek a judicial review of this decision. The Commission will closely monitor Meta’s remediation process and its impact on data subjects for upwards of six months.”
However, the Final Order was subsequently set aside through Terms of Settlement, which were adopted by the court as a consent judgment on November 3, 2025, following a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/355/2025, filed by Meta Platforms Inc. against the NDPC.
Part of the Terms of Settlement entered between NDPC and Meta Platforms Inc. reads, “The applicant (Meta Platforms Inc.) and the respondent (NDPC) have come to a mutual settlement agreement that resolves the dispute underlying the applicant’s originating Summons.
“Pursuant to this agreement: (I) the applicant has agreed to provide specific remedial consideration to the respondent in support of protecting the rights of data subjects in Nigeria; and (II) the respondent has inter alia agreed to set aside and waive any rights to enforce or take steps to enforce the Final Orders against the applicant.”
The settlement terms specifically read, “In the light of the foregoing: The applicant wholly and completely terminates, abandons, withdraws, and discontinues the Originating Summons as well as any and all claims against the respondent connected to or arising from the matters or the subject matter thereof, except as the parties have otherwise agreed.
“The respondent: (I) sets aside the Final Orders against Meta; and (II) save and except as the parties have otherwise agreed, fully and firmly releases and discharges Meta from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, contracts, obligations, suits, debts, costs, liabilities, which the respondent ever had, may now have, or May hereafter claim to have against Meta in respect of the matters.”
Association Alleges Illegality In Settlement
But the Data Privacy Lawyers Association contended that the consent judgment was entered into unlawfully, arguing that it was done without lawful statutory authority, in violation of the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, and in derogation of the constitutional right to privacy guaranteed under Section 37 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
The Association further said the action was taken “to the grave prejudice of millions of affected Nigerians and the public interest, as well as the Federal Government of Nigeria.”
In the notice, the Association warned that unless the issues raised are urgently addressed within the statutory notice period, it would approach the Federal High Court to seek multiple reliefs.
These include an order setting aside, vacating, and nullifying the consent judgment on grounds of fraud, collusion, material non-disclosure, lack of statutory authority, and violation of the NDPA, 2023.
It is also seeking a declaration that the consent judgment is “null, void, unconstitutional, and of no legal effect,” as well as a declaration that the NDPC lacks statutory authority to waive, compro
Other reliefs sought include an order restoring and reviving the Final Order against Meta Platforms, including the $32.8 million fine, and an order restraining any further reliance on or enforcement of the consent judgment.
The Association also asked the court for other orders the Court may deem fit in the interest of justice, public accountability, and the protection of constitutional rights.
In the interest of transparency and accountability, the Association urged the NDPC to provide a written explanation of the legal basis for entering into the Terms of Settlement, clarify the statutory authority relied upon to waive the remedial fine and set aside the Final Order, and take steps to remedy the issues raised.
The letter, the Association said, constitutes the requisite pre-action notice under applicable law.
It warned that unless the concerns are satisfactorily addressed within 30 days of receipt of the notice, it will proceed to institute legal proceedings without further recourse.
mise, or extinguish liabilities, sanctions, or remedial fines arising from established violations of the Act.
News2 days agoUS Begins Partial Visa Ban on Nigerians January 1
News2 days agoDPLAN Threatens NDPC with Legal Action for Setting aside $32.8m Meta Fine
News2 days agoGlo Extends Christmas Greetings, Urges Unity and Care for Others
E-Financial2 days agoNOVA Bank Opens Regional Office in Owerri
E-Financial1 day agoFIRS says NIN, CAC Numbers to Serve as Tax IDs from 2026
E-Financial2 days agoNaira Stability, Lower Borrowing Costs Expected in 2026 — CBN Survey
Telecom1 day agoOyedele Dismisses Claims Bank Accounts Without TIN Will Be Frozen
E-Financial1 day agoAfDB Group Mobilises Global Private Capital to Close Africa’s Financing Gap
















