The stage is set for OPEC+ to virtually meet on the 4^th of June to discuss the extension of output cuts. The previous agreement on curbs resulted in a historic reduction of 9.7m barrels per day. Compliance has been commendable even to the point where some nations started shutting production before the effective date. The meeting in April was an emergency meeting after the diplomatic intervention by Donald Trump, who needed to save the energy industry in the United States.

This week’s meeting does not have any dramatic buildup to it (although the date has been brought forward to factor certain fundamentals). Still, there is a consensus or belief that the meeting will be successful, which is why prices have soared in the last couple of days. On Tuesday, Oil prices closed in on three-month highs because of the positive anticipation that OPEC+ producers would conclude in the extension of the production cuts at the forthcoming meeting. Brent Oil broke the $39 range, which has not been feasible since March.

READ ALSO: Subsidy and PIB

But energy analysts and traders familiar with the history of OPEC meetings know very well that surprises and disagreements can spring up during the sessions and can negatively affect prices. To recall the last two meetings, the first meeting in March that led to the crash of prices from $50 to $32 after the discord between Russia and Saudi Arabia were Russia did not believe cuts were necessary to salvage the demand destruction caused by the coronavirus. The second meeting, which is the more recent, featured a Mexican standoff were Mexico would defiantly not accept their part in the global cuts. It took efforts by Trump (again) to agree to shoulder some of the cuts imposed on Mexico.

Skeptics believe Russia might be this week’s party pooper. Russia has always been the black sheep in the OPEC+ family as they tend to ever deviate from consensual commitment concerning the oil market. On Wednesday, Oil was observed to retreat by more than 4%, after reports suggested that Russia was mulling over easing production cuts as planned in July. Russian Minister, Novak expressed how the country expects global supply and demand to balance in June and July. This optimism is shared amongst Russian industry players who have felt the pains of output cuts, especially producers who must maneuver shutting down many wells without causing damage to the oil fields.  To be fair, Russia is responsible for about a quarter of the total OPEC+ cuts and prices at these levels still negatively impacts the Russian budget.

READ MORE: Global oil market to re-balance in 2 months’ time

Although scaling back curbs is line with the OPEC+ deal and demand picking up globally as expressed by the Russian Energy Minister is true, it would be a classic tale of Russian Roulette if countries ease back on production cuts. The market demand must fully recover. There is still a shortage demand for consumption for jet fuel as airlines are not operating at normal levels, with experts saying it would take years before the airline industry recovers. History suggests we should be cautious with Russia. Moscow is solely interested in increasing market share and winning its veiled rivalry with U.S shale oil.  In the short-term, Russia’s defiance in February is why we are at these levels.

It is no surprise that Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman and United States President Donald Trump individually have had calls with Russia’s President on the need for coordination and cooperation in the oil markets days before the OPEC+ meeting. It seems that these discussions have been positive, and prices have reacted in this manner. Head of Oil market analysis at Rystad Energy, Bjornar Tonhaugen affirmed that “at this stage, there are two only variables that can significantly move prices, which are “Hints on the direction at this meeting and the outcome, and the rate of the shut production’s reactivation.”

READ ALSO: Ajaokuta’s completion to kick off as Russia provides funds

Oil Bear traders would be monitoring this meeting; any sign of disagreement would be treated with selling pressure. However, a successful meeting does not mean an immediate rise in price because the success has already been “priced in.” Hopefully, we have a successful meeting. Oil prices need back to back rallies to sustain its ascension to the top. Nigeria needs this, the OPEC cartel needs this, Shale oil companies need this, and the Kremlin budget needs this too.

UAC of Nigeria Plc., today, notified the public that the next Annual General Meeting of the Members of UAC of Nigeria PLC will be held at UAC House (12th Floor), No. 1-5 Odunlami Street, Lagos, Nigeria on Wednesday, 15th July 2020 at 10.00 o’clock in the forenoon in order to transact the following businesses:

Here are the agenda for the meeting scheduled by UAC Of Nigeria Plc.

READ ALSO: Fines: NSE makes over N154 million from banks, others

1. To lay before the Members the Report of the Directors, the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position of the Company as at 31st December 2019, together with the Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income for the year ended on that date and the Reports of the Auditors and the Audit Committee thereon.
2. To declare a Dividend.
3. To elect & re-elect Directors.
4. To authorize the Directors to fix the remuneration of the Auditors.
5. To elect Members of the Audit Committee.
6. To fix the remuneration of the Directors.
7. To renew the general mandate authorizing the Company to enter into recurrent transactions which are of a trading nature or those necessary for its day to day operations with related parties or companies in accordance with the Rules of the Nigerian Stock Exchange governing transactions with related parties or interested persons.

It will be recalled that UAC of Nigeria Plc reported FY 2019 revenue of N79.2 billion while the reported Pre-tax Profit of N7.5 billion. A loss of N14.6 billion arising from discontinued operations (UPDC) led to a net loss of N9.3 billion in FY 2019. Excluding the loss from discontinued operations, the company made a Net Profit of N5.3 billion (up 26% y/y) in FY 2019.

Nigeria’s tier-1 banks — comprised of First Bank, UBA, GTBank, Access Bank, and Zenith Bank (FUGAZ) — generated a total of N18.4 billion from bank maintenance charges in Q1 2020. The sum is 17.12% more than N15.6 billion that was generated by the five banks during the comparable period in 2019.

This is according to recent checks by Nairametrics Research, a breakdown of which revealed that Zenith Bank generated the most income from account maintenance fees, followed by Access Bank and then, GTBank.

See the breakdown below.

• Zenith Bank Plc: N5.7 billion
• Access Bank Plc: N3.9 billion
• Guaranty Trust Bank Plc: N3.3 billion
• First Bank Plc: N3.1 billion
• United Bank for Africa Plc: N2.3 billion

READ MORE: Stocktaking: Ebenezer Onyeagwu’s year as CEO of Zenith bank

What you should know about account maintenance charges

Banks’ earnings from account maintenance charges, though low when compared to other revenue streams, still make up a significant portion of their non-interest income.

According to the latest directive by the Central Bank of Nigeria on bank charges, Nigerian banks are allowed to charge their customers a “negotiable” N1 per mille. What this means is that banks can charge N1 per N1000 debit transactions on current accounts. Banks’ account maintenance charges come in the form of COT (i.e., Commission on Turnover) which is a charge levied on customer withdrawals by their banks. In Nigeria, these charges are mainly applicable to current accounts.

“Current Account Maintenance Fee (CAMF): Applicable to current accounts ONLY in respect of customer-induced debit transactions to third parties and debit transfers/lodgments to the customer’s account in another bank. Note that CAMF is not applicable to Savings Accounts,” said part of the CBN directive.

(READ THIS: You must know these terms if you want to own a bank account in Nigeria)

Customers don’t like account maintenance charges

Interestingly, a lot of Nigerian bank customers are not keen on bank maintenance charges. After all, nobody likes to get debit alerts, especially so when such is coming from their banks. Perhaps, the main reason some customers dislike bank maintenance charges is because they tend to be higher than the interest capitalised entitled to such customers. Professor Ayobami Ojebode of the Department of  Communications and Language Arts, University of Ibadan, recently complained about this, saying:

“Dear bank, I see o! Don’t think I don’t see you! You credit me N50 interest on my savings and debit N150 for account maintenance & card fee etc! Come here, what do you really think you are doing?”