mosgoon:
haha..today has yet taken another turn..well, while everyone shouldn't take all claims serious about this Tfare-APL conundrum (remember yesterday someone said his source rubbished the idea, and now today the opposite..so different sources with contrasting feedback - a good sign of uncertainty)
but for fun lol, approaching this situation from a logical standpoint, why would NNPC re-imburse that early. Re-imbursement means expenses..so think of it this way, why would NNPC create expenses that early. All companies hate expenses/costs and try to reduce them at the slightest opportunity. So now let's assume there is a conspiracy theory (which i doubt) think this way ''HYPOTHETICALLY", as if you are NNPC.

why should we spend additional money that quickly for a certain number of applicants, remember we would like to cut cost. what could compel us to spend money on certain applicants this early. lets see our expenses at this stage concering Tfare and renumeration..

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates) + Tfare renumeration (for successful candidates)...

I want to cut cost, which is dispensable?

i'm going to spend twice on successful applicants, i can cut that cost by not giving them their Tfare since i would still spend on them with the renumeration and then spend on Tfare renumeration for unsuccessful candidates.expenses become

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates).

now this is assuming there is any such conspiracy which i once again doubt lol. The above is just for play ;Dthinking logically

Now you drop another bombshell LOL

flowwolf09:


What you don't know is that your name won't enter MIS if you don't pass. Thats how the shortlisting was done and the interview invite was sent. Do you know those not invited were not sent a message.
Now do the analysis. You pick the top 1% from each state and quickly reimburse their TP to reduce your work. FCC says you must employ the best from each state. You then barter and truck to select the remainder to join them.

All this theory because you received alert yesterday. Yesterday you felt you have been compensated, guess you didn't sleep last night, this morning, you are here with a new twist.

FCC does not say you must employ the best, FCC says every state must be equally represented.

Their are people here who are currently in the TOWERS and they are really laughing at your wonderful analysis.

Macgyver1:


All this theory because you received alert yesterday. Yesterday you felt you have been compensated, guess you didn't sleep last night, this morning, you are here with a new twist.

FCC does not say you must employ the best, FCC says every state must be equally represented.

Their are people here who are currently in the TOWERS and they are really laughing at your wonderful analysis.

preach my brother!
Local man observing!

You guys shouldn't turn this thread to a mail-dumping thread. Send a PM rather.

Did anyone really receive tfare this morning?

Macgyver1:


All this theory because you received alert yesterday. Yesterday you felt you have been compensated, guess you didn't sleep last night, this morning, you are here with a new twist.

FCC does not say you must employ the best, FCC says every state must be equally represented.

Their are people here who are currently in the TOWERS and they are really laughing at your wonderful analysis.

Why do I feel a sudden rush of ease reading this? I think I am happy

mosgoon:
haha..today has yet taken another turn..well, while everyone shouldn't take all claims serious about this Tfare-APL conundrum (remember yesterday someone said his source rubbished the idea, and now today the opposite..so different sources with contrasting feedback - a good sign of uncertainty)
but for fun lol, approaching this situation from a logical standpoint, why would NNPC re-imburse that early. Re-imbursement means expenses..so think of it this way, why would NNPC create expenses that early. All companies hate expenses/costs and try to reduce them at the slightest opportunity. So now let's assume there is a conspiracy theory (which i doubt) think this way ''HYPOTHETICALLY", as if you are NNPC.

why should we spend additional money that quickly for a certain number of applicants, remember we would like to cut cost. what could compel us to spend money on certain applicants this early. lets see our expenses at this stage concering Tfare and renumeration..

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates) + Tfare renumeration (for successful candidates)...

I want to cut cost, which is dispensable?

i'm going to spend twice on successful applicants, i can cut that cost by not giving them their Tfare since i would still spend on them with the renumeration and then spend on Tfare renumeration for unsuccessful candidates.expenses become

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates).

now this is assuming there is any such conspiracy which i once again doubt lol. The above is just for play ;Dthinking logically

but this logic doesn't hold bro. For this recruitment, a budget had already been made for such expense. NNPC didn't sit to decide just after the interview whether or not to pay travel expense. It is typical of most companies to only reimburse travel expense during interview stages of recruitment. More so, in their thinking, they didn't really have to reimburse anyone for travelling during the aptitude test as they (NNPC) had made efforts to conduct the CBT across the country with proximity to places of residences of the applicants being put into consideration.

I really think we should stop this whole speculation of alert - APL relationship. The anxiety being created is uncalled-for

Abeg, has any UBA received? UBA people answer narr...

mosgoon:
haha..today has yet taken another turn..well, while everyone shouldn't take all claims serious about this Tfare-APL conundrum (remember yesterday someone said his source rubbished the idea, and now today the opposite..so different sources with contrasting feedback - a good sign of uncertainty)
but for fun lol, approaching this situation from a logical standpoint, why would NNPC re-imburse that early. Re-imbursement means expenses..so think of it this way, why would NNPC create expenses that early. All companies hate expenses/costs and try to reduce them at the slightest opportunity. So now let's assume there is a conspiracy theory (which i doubt) think this way ''HYPOTHETICALLY", as if you are NNPC.

why should we spend additional money that quickly for a certain number of applicants, remember we would like to cut cost. what could compel us to spend money on certain applicants this early. lets see our expenses at this stage concering Tfare and renumeration..

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates) + Tfare renumeration (for successful candidates)...

I want to cut cost, which is dispensable?

i'm going to spend twice on successful applicants, i can cut that cost by not giving them their Tfare since i would still spend on them with the renumeration and then spend on Tfare renumeration for unsuccessful candidates.expenses become

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates).

now this is assuming there is any such conspiracy which i once again doubt lol. The above is just for play thinking logically

U are spot on. This is what any financial analyst will do. Y the rush to pay the 1% successful candidate when u are still going to pay them big remuneration. I dnt even get Tha flow guys line of thought. It's the most irrational thought I have heard in a long time.

GospelEAPiano:
Abeg, has any UBA received? UBA people answer narr...

I want my money oooo

mosgoon:
haha..today has yet taken another turn..well, while everyone shouldn't take all claims serious about this Tfare-APL conundrum (remember yesterday someone said his source rubbished the idea, and now today the opposite..so different sources with contrasting feedback - a good sign of uncertainty)
but for fun lol, approaching this situation from a logical standpoint, why would NNPC re-imburse that early. Re-imbursement means expenses..so think of it this way, why would NNPC create expenses that early. All companies hate expenses/costs and try to reduce them at the slightest opportunity. So now let's assume there is a conspiracy theory (which i doubt) think this way ''HYPOTHETICALLY", as if you are NNPC.

why should we spend additional money that quickly for a certain number of applicants, remember we would like to cut cost. what could compel us to spend money on certain applicants this early. lets see our expenses at this stage concering Tfare and renumeration..

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates) + Tfare renumeration (for successful candidates)...

I want to cut cost, which is dispensable?

i'm going to spend twice on successful applicants, i can cut that cost by not giving them their Tfare since i would still spend on them with the renumeration and then spend on Tfare renumeration for unsuccessful candidates.expenses become

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates).

now this is assuming there is any such conspiracy which i once again doubt lol. The above is just for play thinking logically

There was a budget for this recruitment. From beginning to end please. I don't understand why you should delay action/complacent on something that's budgeted and already operational/active. Anyway wait for the events to unfold.

flowwolf09:


What you don't know is that your name won't enter MIS if you don't pass. Thats how the shortlisting was done and the interview invite was sent. Do you know those not invited were not sent a message.
Now do the analysis. You pick the top 1% from each state and quickly reimburse their TP to reduce your work. FCC says you must employ the best from each state. You then barter and truck to select the remainder to join them.

From your analysis, you are contradicting yourself.

1. You said those that weren't invited didn't receive a message. (Which means NNPC wants to reduce cost)

2. From your analysis, it means those who aren't successful will not receiving their transport allowance at all, since their names didn't enter the MIS. (How possible is that?)

If i was an NNPC staff, i would entertain myself daily with this thread

mosgoon:
haha..today has yet taken another turn..well, while everyone shouldn't take all claims serious about this Tfare-APL conundrum (remember yesterday someone said his source rubbished the idea, and now today the opposite..so different sources with contrasting feedback - a good sign of uncertainty)
but for fun lol, approaching this situation from a logical standpoint, why would NNPC re-imburse that early. Re-imbursement means expenses..so think of it this way, why would NNPC create expenses that early. All companies hate expenses/costs and try to reduce them at the slightest opportunity. So now let's assume there is a conspiracy theory (which i doubt) think this way ''HYPOTHETICALLY", as if you are NNPC.

why should we spend additional money that quickly for a certain number of applicants, remember we would like to cut cost. what could compel us to spend money on certain applicants this early. lets see our expenses at this stage concering Tfare and renumeration..

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates) + Tfare renumeration (for successful candidates)...

I want to cut cost, which is dispensable?

i'm going to spend twice on successful applicants, i can cut that cost by not giving them their Tfare since i would still spend on them with the renumeration and then spend on Tfare renumeration for unsuccessful candidates.expenses become

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates).

now this is assuming there is any such conspiracy which i once again doubt lol. The above is just for play thinking logically

mosgoon:
Look over my Shoulder. It's a case interview tutorial material for management consulting firms done by Victor Cheng, the very popular former management consultant at Mckinsey (the top management consulting firm in the world) and case inteview tutor. But it's really expensive (100k in naira) and i found out it was critical to me getting the Mckinsey job in Mck Nigeria as a business analyst. My time at Mck also made me know how valuable the material is due to several case studies i was exposed to and how many applicants to Mck don't prepare well. So in summary LOMS includes both candidate-led case style dialogues and interviewer-led/command and control formats and it's very beneficial for all levels including associate level above which allows only applicants with MBAs

Wow... You're so kind. Thank you for this Concised description. I really appreciate.

yungmin:


but this logic doesn't hold bro. For this recruitment, a budget had already been made for such expense. NNPC didn't sit to decide just after the interview whether or not to pay travel expense. It is typical of most companies to only reimburse travel expense during interview stages of recruitment. More so, in their thinking, they didn't really have to reimburse anyone for travelling during the aptitude test as they (NNPC) had made efforts to conduct the CBT across the country with proximity to places of residences of the applicants being put into consideration.

I really think we should stop this whole speculation of alert - APL relationship. The anxiety being created is uncalled-for

lol, don't take it serious oh..it was just for fun..i don't agree with any conspiracy theory since i don't have any sources lol.
but i agree, i hope everyone gets their tfare to put an end to this

pflourish:


Look over my shoulder

Thanks dear.

yungmin:


but this logic doesn't hold bro. For this recruitment, a budget had already been made for such expense. NNPC didn't sit to decide just after the interview whether or not to pay travel expense. It is typical of most companies to only reimburse travel expense during interview stages of recruitment. More so, in their thinking, they didn't really have to reimburse anyone for travelling during the aptitude test as they (NNPC) had made efforts to conduct the CBT across the country with proximity to places of residences of the applicants being put into consideration.

I really think we should stop this whole speculation of alert - APL relationship. The anxiety being created is uncalled-for

Its better we stop the conspiracy theories. It would not help anyone here. However, if at all, there is, mooson reasoning is logical.
There is no law in Nigeria that says everybody must be paid tfare for an interview. Nnpc reserve the right to do as they please and u can't take them to court. Whether budgeted or not. If they decide to pay those Dat didn't get APL and dnt pay those that are employed, there won't be any litigation. because all have been compensated.

datascience:


LO- Local
M- Man
S- Sauce

Lol... International Man had broken it down to me.

OptimistBrain:
I don't often post here o. But from your analysis, you are contradicting yourself.

1. You said those that weren't invited didn't receive a message. (Which means NNPC wants to reduce cost)

2. From your analysis, it means those who aren't successful will not receive their transport allowance at all, since their names didn't enter the MIS. (How possible is that?)

3. In summary, your analysis depict that NNPC

Sending a mail is saving cost. When they sent to 60,000 it was not cost then. Who told you that you will receive remuneration with TFare. Please don't follow that line of thinking. Remuneration is for work done and Tfare is Tfare. Biko

Do you know how beautiful it would be to have about 100 mill in FD for like 1 or 2 weeks

flowwolf09:


There was a budget for this recruitment. From beginning to end please. I don't understand why you should delay action/complacent on something that's budgeted and already operational/active. Anyway wait for the events to unfold.

flowwolf09:


There was a budget for this recruitment. From beginning to end please. I don't understand why you should delay action/complacent on something that's budgeted and already operational/active. Anyway wait for the events to unfold.

i understand, it was just for fun. but remember companies no matter how big try to cut costs instantaneously..i have worked on top clients - think multinationals, during my short time in management consulting to know this happens a lot. They adjust expenses regardless of budget..lots of operational adjustments are made.

but like i have said.. i highly doubt there's anything involved..i'm just cruising with the fun on the thread lol. I hope things get clearer to dispel every conspiracy theory

I don't agree with the analysis. If that were true, more people would have been credited. Ofcourse, unsuccessful should be more than successful, so only a few wouĺd be left uncredited which will be the successful.
I think all should calm down and wait till events unfold.

Kevlala:


U are spot on. This is what any financial analyst will do. Y the rush to pay the 1% successful candidate when u are still going to pay them big remuneration. I dnt even get Tha flow guys line of thought. It's the most irrational thought I have heard in a long time.

mosgoon:
haha..today has yet taken another turn..well, while everyone shouldn't take all claims serious about this Tfare-APL conundrum (remember yesterday someone said his source rubbished the idea, and now today the opposite..so different sources with contrasting feedback - a good sign of uncertainty)
but for fun lol, approaching this situation from a logical standpoint, why would NNPC re-imburse that early. Re-imbursement means expenses..so think of it this way, why would NNPC create expenses that early. All companies hate expenses/costs and try to reduce them at the slightest opportunity. So now let's assume there is a conspiracy theory (which i doubt) think this way ''HYPOTHETICALLY", as if you are NNPC.

why should we spend additional money that quickly for a certain number of applicants, remember we would like to cut cost. what could compel us to spend money on certain applicants this early. lets see our expenses at this stage concering Tfare and renumeration..

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates) + Tfare renumeration (for successful candidates)...

I want to cut cost, which is dispensable?

i'm going to spend twice on successful applicants, i can cut that cost by not giving them their Tfare since i would still spend on them with the renumeration and then spend on Tfare renumeration for unsuccessful candidates.expenses become

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates).

now this is assuming there is any such conspiracy which i once again doubt lol. The above is just for play thinking logically

Guy, you will kee somebori o...
This thread is quite informative and at the same time, very lively.

Las Las which ever one of the two logics here works for me and my family.. I received alert and my brother didn't receive. So at the end of the day one person must receive APL in my house. Is God not wonderful like this.

flowwolf09:


What you don't know is that your name won't enter MIS if you don't pass. Thats how the shortlisting was done and the interview invite was sent. Do you know those not invited were not sent a message.
Now do the analysis. You pick the top 1% from each state and quickly reimburse their TP to reduce your work. FCC says you must employ the best from each state. You then barter and truck to select the remainder to join them.

Bruv you don't know what you are saying

Stop confusing yourself

Black11:
Do you know how beautiful it would be to have about 100 mill in FD for like 1 or 2 weeks

Now I know you don't know what FD is? Do you think banks want FD that's above their cost of funds or borrowing from the pool. You want to fix for 2 weeks at what rate? What's the terms and conditions and volatility for the balance sheet when that money goes. Please spare me the headache with your baby analysis.

Please help send the LOMS to dapson_2008@yahoo.com

mosgoon:
lol. a lot of people would start believing the theory small...small.. if nothing drops today

mosgoon:
Look over my Shoulder. It's a case interview tutorial material for management consulting firms done by Victor Cheng, the very popular former management consultant at Mckinsey (the top management consulting firm in the world) and case inteview tutor. But it's really expensive (100k in naira) and i found out it was critical to me getting the Mckinsey job in Mck Nigeria as a business analyst. My time at Mck also made me know how valuable the material is due to several case studies i was exposed to and how many applicants to Mck don't prepare well. So in summary LOMS includes both candidate-led case style dialogues and interviewer-led/command and control formats and it's very beneficial for all levels including associate level above which allows only applicants with MBAs

Pls send to me dmasterpice@yahoo.co.uk thanks.

EmmyteeTosin:
Las Las which ever one of the two logics here works for me and my family.. I received alert and my brother didn't receive. So at the end of the day one person must receive APL in my house. Is God not wonderful like this.

This alert or no alert analysis is beginning to look like rapture to me

mosgoon:
haha..today has yet taken another turn..well, while everyone shouldn't take all claims serious about this Tfare-APL conundrum (remember yesterday someone said his source rubbished the idea, and now today the opposite..so different sources with contrasting feedback - a good sign of uncertainty)
but for fun lol, approaching this situation from a logical standpoint, why would NNPC re-imburse that early. Re-imbursement means expenses..so think of it this way, why would NNPC create expenses that early. All companies hate expenses/costs and try to reduce them at the slightest opportunity. So now let's assume there is a conspiracy theory (which i doubt) think this way ''HYPOTHETICALLY", as if you are NNPC.

why should we spend additional money that quickly for a certain number of applicants, remember we would like to cut cost. what could compel us to spend money on certain applicants this early. lets see our expenses at this stage concering Tfare and renumeration..

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates) + Tfare renumeration (for successful candidates)...

I want to cut cost, which is dispensable?

i'm going to spend twice on successful applicants, i can cut that cost by not giving them their Tfare since i would still spend on them with the renumeration and then spend on Tfare renumeration for unsuccessful candidates.expenses become

successful applicants renumeration + Tfare renumeration(for unsuccessful candidates).

now this is assuming there is any such conspiracy which i once again doubt lol. The above is just for play thinking logically

Exercise .

You are right, I didn't think too far

flowwolf09:


Now I know you don't know what FD is? Do you think banks want FD that's above their cost of funds or borrowing from the pool. You want to fix for 2 weeks at what rate? What's the terms and conditions and volatility for the balance sheet when that money goes. Please spare me the headache with your baby analysis.

Whatever is fixed can be liquidated though.