Connect with us

Broadcasting

Techpreneurs Must Avoid Jumia, Konga Strategies to Survive

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Prof. Evans Stevenson

E-commerce in Nigeria has often been touted as a difficult terrain and not for the faint-hearted.

This position is backed up by concrete facts and verifiable evidence, especially when one considers the well-documented struggles of several players in the sector. Despite the allure and glitter that the segment holds, one requires deep pockets and a strong dose of guts and bloody-mindedness to survive in e-commerce, especially in a very challenging market such as Nigeria.

Undoubtedly, the promise of e-commerce and its potential for investors to strike gold remains undeniable. The foregoing remains evident when you consider the predominantly youthful population that Nigeria possesses – arguably one of the most youthful in the world, the increasing exposure that education and the internet brings, growing data connectivity and teledensity rates as well as the burgeoning interest in the convenience and savvy that online commerce brings. Also worth mentioning is the rise in social commerce among youths in Nigeria, with many turning to entrepreneurs via trading on social media platforms such as Instagram and Facebook, among others.

But despite these promising markers, a few weighty obstacles remain for potential new entrants into the market, especially from a strategy standpoint.

Advertisement

I was a lead panelist at a recent Consumer Trends Research/Analysis session in Nairobi, the Kenyan capital where the conversation naturally dovetailed into the prospects of e-commerce in Africa. Crucially, the Nairobi event, which witnessed attendance from key experts, opened the eyes of many to some of the pressing challenges that have deterred investors from reaping the undoubtedly immense benefits from their portfolio investments in e-commerce platforms on the continent.

One of the few take-aways from the session was the fact that the Nigerian e-commerce market is unmistakably one of the biggest in Africa. This is hardly divorced from the fact that Nigeria, despite its struggles, still remains Africa’s biggest economy. Also, unlike in other African countries where you would nominally have one big e-commerce player, Nigeria has two giants in Jumia and Konga, both of which are understandably the dominant actors in a segment which also has a few other competitors.

But in focusing on the strengths of the Nigerian e-commerce market which remains very attractive to budding techpreneurs and other young people driven by the lure of wealth and privilege that entrepreneurship holds, it is critical to sound a cautionary note of warning: copying the strategies deployed by current market leaders, Jumia and Konga, may be an exercise in failure.

In breaking down this caution to future entrants into the market, it is essential to begin by, first of all, establishing that the Jumia strategy is a very expensive one, a suicide strategy, so to speak, that is very hard to sustain but one which, if it comes good, would turn its proponents into overnight superstars. Founded in 2012, Jumia initially raised $26 million from Summit Partners in March 2013. At the time Jumia did not specify how it will spend the fresh capital – a subtle indication of an absence of a clear-cut strategy – but back then, Jeremy Hodara — co-CEO of Africa Internet Group (AIG), which owns Jumia — said the funding was a validation of the company’s progress.

“We are very pleased to have been given this show of confidence, which acknowledges Jumia’s success. We consider this a recognition of the huge potential of e-commerce in Africa and the strong momentum of Jumia across the continent,” Hodara had stated back then in 2013.

Advertisement

Flush with cash and with no apparent strategy or clarity on what to spend it on, Jumia had embarked on a massive marketing splurge to outspend and out-hire its competitor, Konga, which had also entered the market in 2012. A year later and now backed by Rocket Internet, Jumia announced it had raised €120 million ($150 million) in new funding. The company confirmed that the round values it at €445 million ($555 million), adding that the new funding would boost its continent-wide expansion. Active in nine African markets — Cameroon, Egypt, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Uganda, and Tanzania — and also the UK at the time, Jumia’s strategy hardly altered until its rival, Konga pioneered the online marketplace structure that has become so popular today. After initially thumbing their noses at this innovative strategy as something bound to fail, Jumia later followed suit and launched its own marketplace after Konga.

Subsequent fund raises which came from convincing its growing band of investors of the promise of investing in the potential e-commerce goldmine saw Jumia go public in 2019, listing its shares on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). A high point in the company’s history, Jumia would, however, fall from grace after being touted as Africa’s first unicorn. This came after it was discovered to have cooked its books and eventually being called out by a US-based firm, Citroen Research which described its shares as worthless. Also, it is important to cite the huge losses that have trailed Jumia from inception and which many experts see as a black hole it can never fill with the way the business is currently structured.

Till date, the Jumia strategy is one that has seen it refrain from building any form of infrastructure in Nigeria, its biggest market. Investigations reveal the same applies across the other countries in which it operates. Hardly can the company count on owning office spaces, retail stores, warehouses or core logistical or physical presence in Nigeria. For years, Jumia has run on a cash-intensive strategy which has seen it burn through investors’ funds at a fast rate and racking up monumental losses to boot. But while it can claim to have regularly grown Gross Merchandise Volume (GMV) – described as total value of merchandise ordered over a given period of time – it can hardly gloss over the deficits in its books.

From a revenue standpoint, Jumia currently relies on three main areas: first party revenue from direct sales business of inventory owned by the business, revenue from its marketplace (which is currently its highest earner) and other revenue, which currently includes revenue from its logistics-as-a-service activity launched in 2020.

Its recently released 2022 Q1 results show that Jumia is currently valued at about $778m, a figure which falls way short of its all-time valuation of about $5.8 billion achieved in February 2021. Also, its shares are down 32%, despite being recently up by 44%.  And while it claims GMV has risen by 27% per year boosting revenue by 44% year on year – a nine-quarter high – Jumia still reported a total comprehensive loss of $41 million and has a net asset of just $413 million after a massive accumulated loss of $1.7 billion.

Advertisement

Clearly, the biggest gainers were Jumia’s early-stage founders and investors who cashed out in time when other investors came calling. It is clear to global analysts that Africa is a tough continent and Jumia’s strategy may now be to find a buyer, but where it fails, it will be a disaster for investors.

It, therefore, came as a surprise when news recently made the rounds of a potential acquisition of Jumia by the Zinox Group, a technology conglomerate which I understand have acquired years of outstanding experience as a leading light on the continent. Such an acquisition would only make sense if the share price crashes to record lows, justifying such an investment as Jumia, today, is unarguably a loss-making venture that would require intense work to turn it around on the path of profitability. It could also be that Konga and its backers at the Zinox Group wants to use Jumia’s current network to expand to other African countries where Jumia is still recording losses.

But has its rival, Konga, fared any better?

Marginally, yes.

When it entered the Nigerian market in 2012, same year as Jumia did, Konga was also keen on raising money from investors as validation of their standing. The management of the company also burnt through a lot of cash to remain competitive in the face of Jumia’s bullish spending. So, the first few years witnessed both brands going head-to-head and racking up huge losses in the process. To its credit, Konga was a bit more conservative in its spending but that is not to say it recorded much more significant head-way than Jumia at the time.

Advertisement

The company, did, however, do much better in building essential infrastructure. It launched its own internally owned logistics vehicle – Konga Express – to overcome the thorny challenge of last mile deliveries, while also securing a license from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to float its own mobile money wallet known today as KongaPay. This is in addition to pioneering the marketplace structure known back then as the Konga Mall – a first in the African e-commerce market and beyond and which was later replicated by other local and international players. Konga also stood out for its investment in warehousing structures which helped it retain huge inventory.

Successive fund raises from perennial investors Swedish-based AB-Kinnevik and South African-headquartered Naspers, however, failed to save the company from almost running aground before its current owners, the Zinox Group, stepped in.

In assessing where both latter-day e-commerce pioneers went wrong in their strategies, it is easy to cite the absence of a core understanding of the local dynamics, an almost foolhardy ignorance of the complex interplay that defines the Nigerian market. Although I am not a Nigerian, I have spent enough years in the country to be able to identify the Nigerian market as a tricky customer. You need foresight, guts, experience borne out of years of navigating policy somersaults, keen awareness of the infrastructural deficiencies and influence of state actors, as well as other peculiarities that shape this market in order to make a success of e-commerce in Nigeria.

I think the Zinox Group’s experience of the Nigerian market and Konga’s strategies in investing in sustainable assets in Africa like warehouses, delivery trucks and more, instead of pouring all her money into marketing shows a commendable understanding of this tough market. It also shows that the new owners of Konga want to be in business for a long time and this could be why they have not yet hit the market to raise money.

Perhaps, that is why it hardly came as a surprise when Konga, which was almost comatose and on the verge of exiting the market at its point of acquisition, is today and under new ownership, the first e-commerce firm to achieve profitability in Africa.

Advertisement

The lesson for aspiring entrepreneurs in Africa here is simple.

Copying the strategies that made Jumia and Konga popular may seem like an easy deal but it may not be sustainable in the long run. Hype is good and necessary. However, it is very important to thoroughly understand your market, while situating your strategies within the context or existential realities of the society and not just relying on importing foreign concepts or business school models. In the same vein, you must put in the hard work to fill the content or deficiency gaps, while also making efforts to own your own infrastructure, especially considering the country’s challenges in this area.

 

Prof. Evans Stevenson, a Kenyan-born e-commerce researcher, writes from Abuja.

 

Advertisement

 

 

Kindly share this post

Ugo Onwuaso is an ICT enthusiast. He believes technology should be used for general good. He holds a Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree from the Lagos state University. Dear Reader, Your support matters. But we believe that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. That is why, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and finance and how they affect lives. Our incisive and analytical view of how technology news affects the daily life help individuals and organizations make up their minds. Quality journalism costs money. Today, we're asking that you support us to do more. Kindly support our effort to deliver technology and finance journalism to everyone in the world. Donate as little as N1,000. Bank transfers can be made to: UBA Plc 1017156876 Communication Week Media Ltd

Broadcasting

From Scarcity to Scale: What Africa Can Learn from India’s Agricultural Transformation 

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Alice Ruhweza and Dr Purvi Mehta
Food security is often framed as a question of production. Yet at its core, it is about something far more fundamental: how societies organise themselves to ensure that food remains reliably available, accessible, and affordable. In that sense, food is not only a commodity. It is a public good, central to economic stability, social cohesion, and national resilience. Food sector also continues to remain the largest employment generator across developing countries.
India’s transformation from a food deficit nation to one of the world’s largest agricultural producers is frequently linked to the Green Revolution. Focusing too narrowly on that moment misses the broader lesson, aligning policy, institutions, markets, and science around a clear national objective. That alignment moved India from vulnerability to resilience, and increasingly to economic strength.
For Africa, the question is not whether that journey can be replicated. It is what can be learned from how it was built, and how those lessons inform a different context.
A transformation shaped by leadership and systems
India’s agricultural progress reflects decades of political commitment, public investment, and institutional development.
Scientific advances mattered, but so did procurement systems, rural infrastructure, financing mechanisms, farmer participation and research networks. These elements worked together to stabilise food supply and support rural livelihoods. Agriculture was treated as a national priority linked to economic and political stability.
Governments invested in increasing production and ensuring food systems delivered broader outcomes, including stability, price predictability, and social protection. Public grain reserves, price support mechanisms, and distribution systems built food security and underpinned national resilience.
Shared foundations, different realities
Agriculture plays a central role in India’s economy supporting a large workforce and remains closely tied to food security and economic stability. Africa shares structural similarities – agriculture remains central to livelihoods and large rural populations depend on it for income and stability.
The differences are equally significant. Africa’s agricultural systems are diverse, spanning multiple agroecology and climate conditions. Climate exposure is acute, markets fragmented and the pace of population growth faster. The pressure to generate jobs and economic opportunity is immediate. This is not a case of one region following another along a fixed path. It is a different starting point with different pressures. Africa must design its own pathway rather than replicate a historical model.
What the transformation journey reveals
India’s experience offers a set of principles about how transformation happens. First, transformation is built over time, requires sustained political commitment and consistent investment. Progress is cumulative and depends on alignment across multiple parts of the system.
Second, institutions matter as much as innovation. Research systems, extension services, market structures, and financing mechanisms all ensure that productivity gains translate into stable outcomes for farmers.
Third, agriculture must be treated as an economic system. Producing more food is one part of the equation. Markets, value chains, storage, and price realization determine farmers’ benefit. Fourth, food systems require public purpose. Left entirely to market forces, they may not deliver stability, equity, or resilience. Public policy ensures food systems serve broader societal goals.
Fifth, technology development is important, but the impact comes from how well the technology is disseminated and adopted. Affordability and access to technology optimizes the potential of technology.
Finally, inclusion must be deliberate. Even successful transformations can produce uneven outcomes unless access to resources and opportunities is designed to reach smallholders, women, and young people.
From productivity to farmer prosperity
The important shift for Africa is to move beyond a narrow focus on productivity towards a clearer focus on farmer prosperity. Agriculture remains the primary source of livelihood for millions, yet many farmers operate below viable economic thresholds, with limited access to markets, finance, and value addition opportunities.
The next phase of transformation must focus on converting agricultural activity into stable and growing incomes. This requires systems that connect production to markets, strengthen participation in value chains, and support farming as a viable economic enterprise.
Farmer prosperity is not simply a social ambition. It is an economic imperative. When farmers generate reliable incomes, they invest more, produce efficiently and participate fully in markets, strengthening economies and long-term development.
An evolving approach across Africa
Institutions such as AGRA work with governments, research systems, and private actors to strengthen these foundations. The emphasis is on aligning evidence, markets, finance, and policy for agricultural systems to function coherently and deliver measurable outcomes, shifting away from isolated interventions to coordinated efforts that link productivity, market access, and income growth.
Africa’s opportunity is different
Africa enters this moment with advantages such as digital connectivity is expanding, regional markets are growing, national and regional institutions are strengthening. Access to knowledge and technology is greater than ever before.
These conditions create the possibility not only to accelerate progress, but to design it differently. Climate resilience, diversification, and market participation can be integrated from the outset to build inclusive, adaptive and more sustainable food systems.
A new phase of agricultural transformation
India’s journey demonstrates large scale agricultural transformation is possible. It shows how it is built through leadership, institutions, and long-term commitment. Africa’s path will not be identical, but the ambition is similar: to ensure agriculture functions not only as a source of food, but as a driver of economic growth and stability.
The question is no longer whether transformation can happen. It’s whether leadership, systems, and partnerships will align to make it happen at scale.
Ms Ruhweza is the current AGRA President and Dr Mehta is an international development expert and advisor

Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Broadcasting

BON Establishes Six Ad Hoc Committees to Modernize Broadcasting

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Broadcasting Organization of Nigeria (BON) has established six committees to help strengthen and modernize the country’s broadcasting industry.

The committees will focus on content creation, skills development, digital transformation, sustainability, policy and commercial opportunities

The initiative aims to support industry growth and improve collaboration between broadcasters, regulators and media experts

The official launch recently, was led by Tony Akiotu, president, BON and attended by media professionals, program directors, former journalists and heads of specialized media organizations.

The event brought together several prominent figures in Nigeria’s media industry, including veteran broadcaster and trainer Bimbo Oloyede, Tony Uyah of M4S TV, Kingsley Uranta of Channels Television, Ismael Sani of Platinum TV and Ibrahim Shehu of Trust TV.

Advertisement

Together, they are expected to help drive innovation and support the growth of Nigeria’s broadcasting sector.

According to Akiotu, the committees are intended both to help shape industry policy and to provide a forum for dialogue between BON and broadcasting experts.

Akiotu said the ad hoc committees were intended to strengthen BON’s work and ensure that the umbrella body for Nigeria’s broadcasters played a more direct and meaningful role in developing the country’s broadcasting sector.

The six committees reflect the sector’s main priorities. The first focuses on collaboration and innovation to promote content creation.

The second is dedicated to training and talent development, while the third focuses on industry sustainability by improving the sector’s long-term financial viability.

Advertisement

A fourth committee will focus on digital transformation and work with the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) on regulatory issues.

The remaining two committees will oversee public policy advocacy and the development of sports and commercial rights to help broadcasters increase revenue and attract more investment. Together, the committees are expected to guide BON’s efforts to modernize and strengthen Nigeria’s broadcasting industry.

The committees, chaired by members of BON’s General Assembly and supported by the organization’s Secretariat, have an initial 12-month mandate that may be renewed if necessary.

They are required to submit a progress report within three months and implement approved recommendations within the following six months.

The arrangement is intended to ensure close oversight and the timely implementation of their work.

Advertisement

Akiotu also reminded committee members that Nigeria pioneered television broadcasting in Africa and urged them to carry out their work with greater effectiveness and efficiency.

Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Broadcasting

NELFUND Investigates 34 Universities Over Students’ Missing Tuition Refunds

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) says it is investigating about 34 tertiary institutions over allegations that they failed to refund students whose tuition fees were paid twice under the Federal Government’s student loan scheme.

The Managing Director of NELFUND, Mr Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed this during an interview on Arise Television.

Sawyerr said the agency had deployed a five-member investigative team, including operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and internal auditors, to examine the allegations.

According to him, the investigation was prompted by numerous complaints received from affected students.

“As of right now, there are 34 institutions that we are looking at closely with respect to this issue,” he said.

Advertisement

Sawyerr explained that the double payment issue arose because President Bola Tinubu directed that the student loan scheme commence in the middle of an academic session instead of at the beginning.

He said the decision compelled many students to pay their tuition fees to meet registration deadlines while awaiting approval of their loan applications.

“What happened is that a lot of schools got double payment; some from the students and some from us,” he said.

“The refund process is entirely out of our hands. It is the recipient of the double payments that is obliged to make refunds to the students.”

The NELFUND boss noted that many students had borrowed money from family members, friends and other sources to pay their tuition with the expectation of receiving refunds once the loans were disbursed.

Advertisement

He said while some institutions had promptly refunded affected students, others had failed to do so.

“Some have been very good at this. Others haven’t been so good at it,” Sawyerr said.

“I reserve judgement on the intentionality around it because, for some of them, they just didn’t have the process to make refunds.”

Sawyerr disclosed that NELFUND was exploring a tokenised payment system that would enable students to authorise tuition payments directly to their institutions, thereby reducing the likelihood of duplicate payments.

He said the agency deliberately chose not to disburse tuition loans directly to students to minimise the risk of fund diversion.

Advertisement

“Paying the funds to the students could really lead to the temptation for them to divert and do other things,” he said.

The managing director, however, acknowledged that NELFUND lacked the statutory powers to compel institutions to refund students or prosecute officials found culpable.

He added that many frustrated students had submitted complaints not only to NELFUND but also to anti-corruption agencies, including the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

Sawyerr also expressed concern over increases in tuition fees by some institutions following the introduction of the student loan scheme.

He said NELFUND had declined to pay institutions that increased their tuition fees beyond acceptable levels.

Advertisement

“Some schools, because they get paid easily, started to put up their fees. We refused, point blank, to pay institutions who had hiked their fees beyond a certain level,” he said.

He reaffirmed the agency’s commitment to investigating every reported irregularity and strengthening the implementation of the student loan programme through continuous monitoring and internal reviews.

Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending