All posts by kunleoyafajo

Kunle Oyafajo is Married

Keji and I are delighted to share the ceremony of our love and commitment. Words cannot express the joy that we feel remembering that you shared the beginning of our new life together. We would like to send our sincerest thanks for your love, your support, your wonderful gifts & your prayers in our lives. You will always be part of our fairy tale, God bless you richly. For pictures and other information about our wedding please visit

Understanding CSS3 Transitions

It was 1997 and I was sitting in a terribly run-down apartment in beautiful Allston, Massachusetts. A typical late night of viewing source and teaching myself HTML followed a day of packing CDs at a local record label for peanuts (hence the run-down apartment). I’m sure you can relate.

One triumphant night, I pumped my fist in sweet victory. I’d just successfully coded my first JavaScript image rollover. Remember those?

I still remember the amazement of seeing a crudely designed button graphic I’d cobbled together “swap” to a different one when hovered over by the mouse. I barely had a clue as to what I was doing at the time, but making something on the page successfully change, dynamically, was, well…magical.

We’ve come a long way over the past decade in regard to interaction and visual experience on the web. Historically, technologies like Flash and JavaScript have enabled animation, movement, and interaction effects. But recently, with browsers rolling out support for CSS transitions and transforms, some of that animation and experience enrichment can now be comfortably moved to our stylesheets.

My first JavaScript rollover back in 1997 took me several nights of head scratching, many lines of code that seemed alien to me at the time, and multiple images. CSS3 today enables far richer, more flexible interactions through simple lines of code that thankfully degrade gracefully in the browsers that don’t yet support it.

We can start to use CSS3 transitions right now as long as we carefully choose the situations in which to use them. They certainly won’t replace existing technologies like Flash, JavaScript, or SVG (especially without broader browser support)—but they can be used to push the experience layer a notch higher. And most importantly, they’re relatively easy to implement for the web designer already familiar with CSS. It only takes a few lines of code.

Tail wagging the dog

Initially developed solely by the WebKit team for Safari, CSS Transitions are now a Working Draft specification at the W3C. This is a nice example of browser innovation being folded back into a potential standard. I say potential since it’s merely a draft today. However, Opera has recently added CSS transitions support in version 10.5 and Firefox has pledged support for version 4.0. In other words, while it is a draft specification and evolving, it’s stable enough for Opera and Firefox to be taking it seriously and adding support for it. Most importantly, CSS transitions are no longer proprietary Safari-only experiments.

Let’s take a look at how transitions work, shall we?

What are CSS transitions?

I like to think of CSS transitions like butter, smoothing out value changes in your stylesheets when triggered by interactions like hovering, clicking, and focusing. Unlike real butter, transitions aren’t fattening—they’re just a few simple rules in your stylesheet to enrich certain events in your designs.

The W3C explains CSS transitions quite simply:

CSS Transitions allow property changes in CSS values to occur smoothly over a specified duration. This smoothing animates the changing of a CSS value when triggered by a mouse click, focus or active state, or any changes to the element (including even a change on the element’s class attribute).

A simple example

Here’s a simple example, where we’ll add a transition to the background color swap of a link. When hovered over, the link’s background color will change, and we’ll use a transition to smooth out that change—an effect previously only possible using Flash or JavaScript, but now possible with a few simple lines of CSS.

The markup is a simple hyperlink, like so:

 <a href="#">Transition me!</a> 

Next, we’ll add a declaration for the normal link state with a little padding and a light green background, followed by the background swap to a darker green on hover: { padding: 5px 10px; background: #9c3; } { background: #690; } 
Normal and Hover Link ExampleFig. 1: The normal and :hover state of the link.

Now let’s add a transition to that background color change. This will smooth out and animate the difference over a specified period of time.

Fig. 2: Here we can see the smooth transition of light green to darker green background.

For the time being, we’ll use only the vendor-prefixed properties which currently work in WebKit-based browsers (Safari and Chrome) to keep things simple. Later, we’ll add vendor prefixes for Mozilla and Opera. { padding: 5px 10px; background: #9c3; -webkit-transition-property: background; -webkit-transition-duration: 0.3s; -webkit-transition-timing-function: ease; } { background: #690; } 

You’ll notice the three parts of a transition in the declaration:

  • transition-property: The property to be transitioned (in this case, the background property)
  • transition-duration: How long the transition should last (0.3 seconds)
  • transition-timing-function: How fast the transition happens over time (ease)

Timing functions (or, I really wish I’d paid attention in math class)

The timing function value allows the speed of the transition to change over time by defining one of six possibilities: easelinearease-inease-out,ease-in-out, and cubic-bezier (which allows you to define your own timing curve).

If you slept through geometry in high school like I did, don’t worry. I recommend simply plugging in each of these timing function values to see how they differ.

For our simple example, the duration of the transition is so quick (just a mere 0.3 seconds) that it’d be difficult to tell the difference between the six options. For longer animations, the timing function you choose becomes more of an important piece of the puzzle, as there’s time to notice the speed changes over the length of the animation.

When in doubt, ease (which is also the default value) or linear should work just fine for short transitions.

We could simplify the declaration significantly by using the transition shorthand property: { padding: 5px 10px; background: #9c3; -webkit-transition: background 0.3s ease; } { background: #690; } 

Now we have a much more compact rule that accomplishes the same result.

All of this wonderful transitioning works just fine in WebKit browsers, but what about the others?

Browser support

As I mentioned earlier, transitions were initially developed by WebKit, and have been in Safari and Chrome since version 3.2, but Opera supports them as well in version 10.5 and support has been promised in Firefox 4.0. Because of that present and near-future support, it’s important to add the appropriate vendor prefixes so that our transitions will work in more browsers as support is rolled out.

Building the full transition stack

Here’s a revised declaration, adding the –moz- and –o- prefixes as well as the actual CSS3 transition property. We’re putting the non-prefixed property last in the stack to ensure that the final implementation will trump the others as the property moves from draft to finished status. { padding: 5px 10px; background: #9c3; -webkit-transition: background 0.3s ease; -moz-transition: background 0.3s ease; -o-transition: background 0.3s ease; transition: background 0.3s ease; } { background: #690; } 

With that stack, we’ll be smoothing out that background color change in current versions of Safari, Chrome, and Opera, as well as future versions of any browser that chooses to support it.

Transitioning states

I remember being slightly confused when I first started playing around with CSS Transitions. Wouldn’t it make more sense if the transition properties were placed in the :hover declaration, since that’s the trigger for the transition? The answer is that there are other possible states of an element besides :hover, and you’ll likely want that transition to happen on each of those without duplication.

For instance, you may want the transition to also happen on the :focus or:active pseudo-classes of the link as well. Instead of having to add the transition property stack to each of those declarations, the transition instructions are attached to the normal state and therefore declared only once.

The following example adds the same background switch to the :focusstate. This enables triggering the transition from either hovering over or focusing the link (via the keyboard, for example). { padding: 5px 10px; background: #9c3; -webkit-transition: background 0.3s ease; -moz-transition: background 0.3s ease; -o-transition: background 0.3s ease; transition: background 0.3s ease; }, { background: #690; } 

Transitioning multiple properties

Let’s say that along with the background color, we also want to change the link’s text color and transition that as well. We can do that by stringing multiple transitions together, separated by a comma. Each can have their varying duration and timing functions (fig. 3).

Fig. 3: The normal and :hover states of the link. { padding: 5px 10px; background: #9c3; -webkit-transition: background .3s ease, color 0.2s linear; -moz-transition: background .3s ease, color 0.2s linear; -o-transition: background .3s ease, color 0.2s linear; transition: background .3s ease, color 0.2s linear; }, { color: #030; background: #690; } 

Transitioning all possible properties

An alternative to listing multiple properties is using the all value. This will transition all available properties.

Let’s drop all into our simple example instead of listing background and color separately. They’ll now share the same duration and timing function. { padding: 5px 10px; background: #9c3; -webkit-transition: all 0.3s ease; -moz-transition: all 0.3s ease; -o-transition: all 0.3s ease; transition: all 0.3s ease; }, { color: #030; background: #690; } 

This is a convenient way of catching all the changes that happen on :hover,:focus, or :active events without having to list each property you’d like to transition.

Which CSS properties can be transitioned?

Now that we’ve successfully transitioned the background and color of a hyperlink, there are many other CSS properties that can be transitioned, including widthopacity, position, and font-size. A chart of all the possible properties (and their types) that can be transitioned is available from the W3C.

Why not use JavaScript instead?

You might be wondering, with not all browsers supporting (or at least promising support for) CSS Transitions, why not use a JavaScript solution to handle the animation? Popular frameworks such as jQueryPrototype, and have enabled animations via JavaScript that work cross-browser for some time now.

It all depends on how crucial the transitions are to the experience. I’m stressing here in this little book that you can embrace the simplicity and flexibility of CSS3 if you choose the appropriate parts of the user experience to apply it: enriching the interactions that happen on the page. Quite often, the animation of these interactions when handled by CSS Transitions aren’t integral to the brand, readability, or layout of the website. Therefore, a few simple lines of CSS to trigger a simple animation that’s native to the browsers that support it (rather than tapping into a JavaScript framework) seems like a smart choice. And one I’m glad we have at our disposal.

Be smart, be subtle

Like all shiny new tools, it’s important to use transitions appropriately. One can easily go overboard adding transitions to everything on the page, resulting in some sort of annoying, pulsating monster. It’s key to decide where transitions rightfully enrich the user experience and when they are just extraneous noise. Additionally, making sure the speed of the transition doesn’t slow down an otherwise snappy action from the user is crucial. Use with care and caution. 

IQ isn’t fixed at birth, can increase with education

Although time spent in school has been linked with IQ, earlier studies did not rule out the possibility that people with higher IQs might simply be likelier to get more education than others, the researchers noted.

Now, however, “there is good evidence to support the notion that schooling does make you ‘smarter’ in some general relevant way as measured by IQ tests,” said study author Taryn Galloway, a researcher at Statistics Norway in Oslo.

Findings from the large-scale study appear in this week’s online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

IQ, or intelligence quotient, is a widely accepted measure of intelligence. The IQ score comes from several combined, standardized tests.

In 1955, Norway began extending compulsory middle school education by two years. Galloway and her colleague Christian Brinch, from the department of economics at the University of Oslo, analyzed how this additional schooling might affect IQ.

Using data on men born between 1950 and 1958, the researchers looked at the level of schooling by age 30. They also looked at IQ scores of the men when they were 19.

“The size of the effect was quite large,” she said. Comparing IQ scores before and after the education reform, the average increased by 0.6 points, which correlated with an increase in IQ of 3.7 points for an addition year of schooling, Galloway said.

“We are only able to study men, because we use data on IQ from the Norwegian military’s draft assessment, which basically all men undergo around the age of 19. Women are not included in the draft,” she explained.

Education has lasting effects on cognitive skills, such as those broadly measured by IQ tests, Galloway said.

“Cognitive skills are, in turn, related to a large range of social and economic outcomes. A large part of the relevance of the study derives from the fact that there has been some controversy related to the question of whether education has an independent effect on IQ or whether people with higher IQs simply choose, or are better able, to attain higher levels of education,” Galloway said.

By looking at a reform which increased mandatory schooling and prevented people from dropping out of school after the 7th grade, it is fairly certain that the effects seen are an effect of schooling on IQ, not vice versa, she explained.

“One subtle point of our findings is that we use IQ measures at roughly age 19, which is three to four years after the additional education generally was received. Thus, we are not simply picking up a short-lived effect that peters out shortly after people leave school,” Galloway said.


I woke up startled. Oh, it was a dream. Expansion of hell? How possible is that? I tried to remember the genesis of the dream. I was standing at the edge of a deep well; standing by my side was someone asking me what I would do if I fell into the well. I laughed and told him I would either trust God to make wings for me to fly out or provide a soft landing for me.

Suddenly, I found myself in the bottom of the well, fire glazing everywhere. I asked the person with me what was going on and a third person answered me and said “oh, we are expanding hell-fire, with the number of people pouring here everyday, we wont have space anymore very soon”. I became scared. How possible is that?  I asked. Does it mean a large sum of the seven billion people in the world won’t make it to heaven? Just as I wondered, the third person ordered someone to bring in a sword. He did and placed it on the floor and with his power made it blazing hot. Then he turned to me and said “to describe what it would look like to be here, anyone standing a mile away from this sword will feel the heat let alone of people the sword would be used to punish. I marvelled and then I woke up.

Friends, your destiny in life depends on the decisions you make. God longs lovingly for your soul, please give it to Him today. Live an honorable life. Speak to people about Christ.

Revelations 3 vs. 15-16, Choose you this day to be hot. Come over to the winning side. It is well with you in Jesus name.

With love,

Morenikeji (click here to visit my Facebook Page)

5 things we learned in the Champions League (Chelsea vs Valencia)

1 Lampard could be warming a few benches this season

As a message of where he figures in the André Villas-Boas project the placing of Chelsea’s once great ape among the replacements for a match that could define the club’s season and the coach’s tenure could not be clearer. At Newcastle United on Saturday Lampard started, then lasted just beyond the hour before being taken off, with the cameras zooming in on the 33-year-old’s thunderous face and a few hardly disguised shakes of the head.

Tonight Lampard was not trusted in the starting XI, Raul Meireles getting the nod. His Portuguese manager has clearly judged that the zip that made him Super Frank is no more. Lampard’s game sense and experience still remain, as they always do in any top professional. He now has to prove that Villas-Boas cannot afford to leave him out when it really matters: on this evidence it will be difficult. AndShould he fail, his place in the England squad may also be in doubt.

2 Stamford Bridge can rock if it needs to

Before this game Villas-Boas and John Terry exhorted the Stamford Bridge crowd to create an atmosphere as electric as Anfield famously is on a European night. Within three minutes the voltage jumped when Juan Mata laid off for Didier Drogba to smash home, and a few thousand hearts stopped when moments later Jordi Alba cruised down the left and smacked the ball back off Petr Cech’s right post.

Vibrancy flowed from the stands to the pitch and back again and when Ramires burst into the visitors’ area to double Chelsea’s advantage Stamford Bridge erupted. Two minutes before the break a cry of “Come on Chelsea!” urged the team to close down the opposition as there was a sense of intensity slipping, and that a goal now would presage the fraught second half no one in blue desired. Villas-Boas and Terry got their wish, but whether this was a one-off remains to be seen.

3 Oriol Romeu’s audition was unconvincing


The Barcelona old boy has the mean look and squat build of a midfield enforcer, but has yet to prove he can solve the problem created by Mikel John Obi’s sluggishness and lack of steel in the position. After 10 minutes Romeu, who has a senior Barcelona appearance to his name, harried David Albelda well but he did not continue and stopped to watch as Jonas unloaded a 30-yard rocket that Cech did well to tip behind. Another questionable moment occurred later in the half when Romeu dawdled before dangerously ceding possession near his goal, and with his side two goals up at the break there was a case for bringing on Lampard to ensure proceedings were closed down. Though he was nearly caught in possession (one of Mikel’s main crimes) early in the second half, when Villas-Boas, below, made his first change it was Ramires who was taken off, suggesting the manager has faith in the 20-year-old.

4 Swagger can be hard to find in a Chelsea shirt these days

In Villas-Boas’s redraw of Roman Abramovich’s team the strut of the José Mourinho and Carlo Ancelotti title-winning sides is no more. With Lampard benched, Michael Essien a long-term absentee, and John Terry hobbled by seasons of defensive attrition and a back-catalogue of off-field incident, only Didier Drogba looks like he still remembers how to own a football field.

His surge-then-pass to Ramires that created Chelsea’s second, after the Ivorian had scored the opener, was a reminder of his and this team’s golden years. On a crucial night, Drogba was Chelsea’s Mr Total Football, dropping off the front – as Wayne Rooney loves to do for Manchester United – to ensure his side would not be eliminated from the competition. In Juan Mata, Meireles, Romeu and Daniel Sturridge, Villas-Boas has identified his new breed. In time, if they work the blueprint successfully, they will find their own swagger.

5 David Luiz was not a wise choice as penalty taker

As a £50m striker, Fernando Torres should surely be the go-to man when a penalty is awarded in any game. But a spot-kick in a Champions League group match against a Belgian side that should yield a regulation three points?Especially when still on the horizon is a tricky trip to Germany (to play Bayer Leverkusen, a game Chelsea went on to lose 2-1), and a final match against a Spanish side who the Blues could only draw with earlier in the group phase.

At the Cristal Arena on 1 November Nicolas Anelka was due to take the kick, but he had missed a penalty at Everton a week earlier. So there was even further onus on Torres to do the right thing and convert to claim a win that would not have left Chelsea’s hopes in the competition as precarious as they were ahead of Valencia’s visit. Instead, David Luiz took responsibility and missed, which as a central defender (even a Brazilian one), is forgivable.

What’s Luck Got to Do With It?

BETTER to be lucky than good, the adage goes.

And maybe that’s true — if you just want to be merely good, not much better than average. But what if you want to build or do something great? And what if you want to do so in today’s unstable and unpredictable world?

Recently, we completed a nine-year research study of some of the most extreme business successes of modern times. We examined entrepreneurs who built small enterprises into companies that outperformed their industries by a factor of 10 in highly turbulent environments. We call them 10Xers, for “10 times success.”

The very nature of this study — how some people thrive in uncertainty, lead in chaos, deal with a world full of big, disruptive forces that we cannot predict or control — led us to smack into the question, “Just what is the role of luck?”

Could it be that leaders’ skills account for the difference between just meeting their industry’s average performance (1X success) and doubling it (2X)? But that luck accounts for all the difference between 2X and 10X?

Maybe, or maybe not.

But how on Earth could we go about quantifying something as elusive as “luck”? The breakthrough came in seeing luck as an event, not as some indefinable aura. We defined a “luck event” as one that meets three tests. First, some significant aspect of the event occurs largely or entirely independent of the actions of the enterprise’s main actors. Second, the event has a potentially significant consequence — good or bad. And, third, it has some element of unpredictability.

We systematically found 230 significant luck events across the history of our study’s subjects. We considered good luck, bad luck, the timing of luck and the size of “luck spikes.” Adding up the evidence, we found that the 10X cases weren’t generally “luckier” than the comparison cases. (We compared the 10X companies with a control group of companies that failed to become great in the same extreme environments.)

The 10X cases and the control group both had luck, good and bad, in comparable amounts, so the evidence leads us to conclude that luck doesn’t cause 10X success. The crucial question is not, “Are you lucky?” but “Do you get a high return on luck?”

Return on luck: We call it ROL.

SO why did Bill Gates become a 10Xer, building a great software company in the personal computer revolution? Through one lens, you might see Mr. Gates as incredibly lucky. He just happened to have been born into an upper-middle-class American family that had the resources to send him to a private school. His family happened to enroll him at Lakeside School in Seattle, which had a Teletype connection to a computer upon which he could learn to program — something that was unusual for schools in the late 1960s and early ’70s.

He also just happened to have been born at the right time, coming of age as the advancement of microelectronics made the PC inevitable. Had he been born 10 years later, or even just five years later, he would have missed the moment.

Mr. Gates’s friend Paul Allen just happened to see a cover article in the January 1975 issue of Popular Electronics, titled “World’s First Microcomputer Kit to Rival Commercial Models.” It was about the Altair, designed by a small company inAlbuquerque. Mr. Gates and Mr. Allen had the idea to convert the programming language Basic into a product that could be used on the Altair, which would put them in position to be the first to sell such a product for a personal computer. Mr. Gates went to college at Harvard, which just happened to have a PDP-10 computer upon which he could develop and test his ideas.

Wow, Bill Gates was really lucky, right?

Yes, he was. But luck is not why Bill Gates became a 10Xer. Consider these questions:

• Was Bill Gates the only person of his era who grew up in an upper middle-class American family?

• Was he the only person born in the mid-1950s who attended a secondary school with access to computing?

• Was he the only person who went to a college with computer resources in the mid-’70s? The only one who read the Popular Electronics article? The only one who knew how to program in Basic?

No, no, no, no and no.

Lakeside may have been one of the first schools to have a computer that students could use during those years, but it wasn’t the only such school.

Mr. Gates may have been a math and computer whiz kid at a top college that had computers in 1975, but he wasn’t the only math and computer whiz kid at Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, M.I.T., Caltech, Carnegie Mellon, Berkeley, U.C.L.A., theUniversity of Chicago, Georgia Tech, Cornell, Dartmouth, Southern Cal, Columbia, Northwestern, Penn, Michigan or any number of other top colleges with comparable or even better computer resources.

Mr. Gates wasn’t the only person who knew how to program in Basic; the language was developed a decade earlier by Dartmouth professors, and it was widely known by 1975, used in academics and industry. And what about all the master’s and Ph.D. students in electrical engineering and computer science who had even more computer expertise than Mr. Gates on the day the Popular Electronics article appeared? Any could have decided to abandon their studies and start a personal computer software company. And computer experts already working in industry and academia could have done the same.

But how many of them changed their life plans — and cut their sleep to near zero, essentially inhaling food so as not to let eating interfere with work — to throw themselves into writing Basic for the Altair? How many defied their parents, dropped out of college and moved to Albuquerque to work with the Altair? How many had Basic for the Altair written, debugged and ready to ship before anyone else?

Thousands of people could have done the same thing that Mr. Gates did, at the same time. But they didn’t.

The difference between Mr. Gates and similarly advantaged people is not luck. Mr. Gates went further, taking a confluence of lucky circumstances and creating a huge return on his luck. And this is the important difference.

Luck, good and bad, happens to everyone, whether we like it or not. But when we look at the 10Xers, we see people like Mr. Gates who recognize luck and seize it, leaders who grab luck events and make much more of them.

This ability to achieve a high ROL at pivotal moments has a huge multiplicative effect for 10Xers. They zoom out to recognize when a luck event has happened and to consider whether they should let it disrupt their plans. Imagine if Mr. Gates had said to Paul Allen after seeing the Popular Electronics article: “Well, Paul, I’m kind of focused on my studies here at Harvard right now. Let’s wait a few years, and then I’ll be ready to start.”

When we examined less successful companies, we saw a generally poor overall return on luck. Some of the comparison cases had extraordinary sequences of good luck yet showed a spectacular ability to fritter that luck away. When the time came to execute on their good fortune, they stumbled. They didn’t fail for lack of good luck. They failed for lack of superb execution.

WHILE getting a high return on good luck is an essential skill for 10Xers, getting a high return on bad luck can be a truly defining moment. Consider the 10X case of Progressive Insurance.

On Nov. 8, 1988, Peter Lewis, the chief executive, received news that shocked the insurance industry. California voters had passed Proposition 103, a punitive attack on car insurance companies. Prop 103 required 20 percent price reductions and refunds to customers, plunging a huge auto insurance market into chaos. Progressive had significant exposure, with nearly a quarter of its entire business from that one state — bang! — severely damaged by a 51 percent vote on a single day.

Mr. Lewis zoomed out to ask, “What the heck is going on?” He placed a call to a former Princeton classmate, Ralph Nader. Mr. Nader had long been a consumer rights activist, at one point leading a sort of special forces unit nicknamed Nader’s Raiders, and he had championed Proposition 103. The message that Mr. Lewis heard: People hate you. Or, in other words, people simply hated dealing with insurance companies, so they revolted, screaming with their votes.

“People were saying, ‘We hate your guts. We’re going to kill you. And we don’t give a damn,’ ” Mr. Lewis said.

Chastened by what he had heard, he called his staff together and told everyone, “Our customers actually hate us.” He challenged his team to create a better company.

Mr. Lewis came to see Proposition 103 as a gift, and he used it to deepen the company’s core purpose and to reduce the economic cost and trauma caused by auto accidents. The company would create its “immediate response” claims service: No matter when you had an accident, Progressive would be available — 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Claims adjusters would work from a fleet of vans and S.U.V.’s dispatched to policy holders’ homes or even directly to an accident scene.

By 1995, Progressive could note this achievement: in 80 percent of cases, its adjusters would have visited the customer, ready to issue a check within 24 hours of an accident.

In 1987, the year before Proposition 103, Progressive ranked No. 13 in the American private-passenger auto insurance market. By 2002, it had reached No. 4. Years later, Mr. Lewis called Proposition 103 “the best thing that ever happened to this company.”

Progressive and Mr. Lewis illustrate how 10Xers shine when clobbered by setbacks and misfortune, turning bad luck into good results. They use difficulty as a catalyst to deepen purpose, recommit to values, increase discipline, respond with creativity and heighten productive paranoia — translating fear into extensive preparation and calm, clearheaded action. Resilience, not luck, is the signature of greatness.

Nietzsche wrote, “What does not kill me, makes me stronger.” We all get bad luck. The question is how to use it to turn it into “one of the best things that ever happened,” to not let it become a psychological prison.

WE came across a remarkable moment at the very start of the history of Southwest Airlines, described by its first chief executive, Lamar Muse, in his book, “Southwest Passage.”

“The very first Sunday morning of Southwest’s life, we narrowly escaped a disaster,” Mr. Muse wrote. “During the takeoff run, the right thrust-reverser deployed. Only the captain’s instantaneous reaction allowed him to recover control and make a tight turn for an emergency landing on one engine.”

What if the jet had smashed into the ground in the first week of building the company? Would there even be a Southwest Airlines today? If we all have some combination of both heads (lucky flips) and tails (unlucky flips), and if the ratio of heads to tails tends to even out over time, we need to be skilled, strong, prepared and resilient to endure the bad luck long enough to eventually get good luck. The Southwest pilot had to be skilled and prepared before the thrust-reverser deployed.

There’s an interesting asymmetry between good and bad luck. A single stroke of good luck, no matter how big, cannot by itself make a great company. But a single stroke of extremely bad luck, or an extended sequence of bad-luck events that creates a catastrophic outcome, can terminate the quest.

The 10Xers exercise productive paranoia, combined with empirical creativity and fanatic discipline, to create huge margins of safety. If you stay in the game long enough, good luck tends to return, but if you get knocked out, you’ll never have the chance to be lucky again. Luck favors the persistent, but you can persist only if you survive.

After finishing our luck analysis for “Great by Choice,” we realized that getting a high ROL required a new mental muscle. There are smart decisions and wise decisions. And one form of wisdom is the ability to judge when to let luck disrupt our plans. Not all time in life is equal. The question is, when the unequal moment comes, do we recognize it, or just let it slip? But, just as important, do we have the fanatic, obsessive discipline to keep marching, to push the opportunity to the extreme, to make the most of the chances we’re given?

Getting a high ROL requires throwing yourself at the luck event with ferocious intensity, disrupting your life and not letting up. Bill Gates didn’t just get a lucky break and cash in his chips. He kept pushing, driving, working — and sustained that effort for more than two decades. That’s not luck — that’s return on luck.

Jim Collins is the author of the worldwide best seller “Good to Great.” This article was adapted from “Great by Choice: Uncertainty, Chaos, and Luck — Why Some Thrive Despite Them All,” which was written with Morten T. Hansen and published this month.

Steve Jobs Quotes

He turned  innovation to  ovation
He turned creativity to productivity
He made a mere fruit the most expensive commodity!
Apple become jealous in the committee of fruits!
You came to  change our world
You came to define new path
New definition to technology
New orientation to ICT
You came, you tame, you fame!

Sleep well job
Sleep well Apple
You have taught our world
You have taught the word
The lesson of Global productivity
That a man is not a man until he can man an idea to become an ideal!
Good night steven Jobs!

Here are some key quotes from Steve Jobs, who died on Wednesday after a long battle with cancer.

AllThingsD conference, 2010

There’s nothing that makes my day more than getting an e-mail from some random person in the universe who just bought an iPad over in the UK and tells me the story about how it’s the coolest product they’ve ever brought home in their lives. That’s what keeps me going. It’s what kept me five years ago, it’s what kept me going 10 years ago when the doors were almost closed. And it’s what will keep me going five years from now whatever happens.

Commencement speech at Stanford University, 2005

Remembering that I’ll be dead soon is the most important tool I’ve ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything – all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure – these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.

Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of others’ opinions drown out your own inner voice.

Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven’t found it yet, keep looking. Don’t settle. As with all matters of the heart, you’ll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don’t settle.

Interview with Business Week, 2004

Innovation comes from people meeting up in the hallways or calling each other at 10:30 at night with a new idea, or because they realised something that shoots holes in how we’ve been thinking about a problem. It’s ad-hoc meetings of six people called by someone who thinks he has figured out the coolest new thing ever and who wants to know what other people think of his idea.

And it comes from saying no to 1,000 things to make sure we don’t get on the wrong track or try to do too much. We’re always thinking about new markets we could enter, but it’s only by saying no that you can concentrate on the things that are really important.

Interview with Fortune magazine, 2000

In most people’s vocabularies, design means veneer. It’s interior decorating. It’s the fabric of the curtains and the sofa. But to me, nothing could be further from the meaning of design. Design is the fundamental soul of a man-made creation that ends up expressing itself in successive outer layers of the product or service.

My position coming back to Apple was that our industry was in a coma. It reminded me of Detroit in the 70s, when American cars were boats on wheels.

Interview with Business Week, 1998

That’s been one of my mantras – focus and simplicity. Simple can be harder than complex: you have to work hard to get your thinking clean to make it simple. But it’s worth it in the end because once you get there, you can move mountains.

Interview with Wired, 1996

These technologies can make life easier, can let us touch people we might not otherwise. You may have a child with a birth defect and be able to get in touch with other parents and support groups, get medical information, the latest experimental drugs. These things can profoundly influence life. I’m not downplaying that. But it’s a disservice to constantly put things in this radical new light – that it’s going to change everything. Things don’t have to change the world to be important.

Interview with Wall Street Journal, 1993

Being the richest man in the cemetery doesn’t matter to me… Going to bed at night saying we’ve done something wonderful… that’s what matters to me.”

Interview with Playboy magazine, 1985

The most compelling reason for most people to buy a computer for the home will be to link it to a nationwide communications network. We’re just in the beginning stages of what will be a truly remarkable breakthrough for most people – as remarkable as the telephone.

Steve Jobs Biography

The Biography

Youth (1955-75)

Steven Paul Jobs was born in San Francisco, California on February 24 1955. His biological parents, unwed college graduates Joanne Simpson and Abdulfattah Jandali, had him adopted by a lower-middle-class couple from south of the Bay Area, Paul and Clara Jobs.

Young Steve grew up in a valley of apricot orchards that was already turning into the world center of computer technology: Silicon Valley. It was not uncommon to see engineers fill their garages with all kind of electronic devices in that part of California. Steve Jobs was fascinated by these, and that’s why, in 1969, he met with a computer whiz kid who shared his interests in electronics: Stephen Wozniak — commonly known as Woz. Steve and Woz quickly became friends even though Woz was five years older.

When Steve Jobs reached college age, he decided he would go to Reed College in Oregon. It was an expensive liberal arts college, way too pricey for his modest parents; but they had to keep their promise to Steve’s biological mother, and therefore paid for the tuition. Steve only stayed at Reed for one semester though, after which he dropped out. He then spent a lot of time learning about Eastern mysticism and adopted strange diets, fasting or eating only fruits: it was his hippie period. He even traveled to India with a friend to seek enlightenment at age 19.

Apple’s early years (1975-81)

After Steve came back to the Valley, he focused on Woz’s work on a computer board. Woz was attending a group of early personal computer hobbyists called the Homebrew Computer Club, where he got the idea of designing his own computer (which consisted only of a circuit board at the time). Steve Jobs saw that many people were interested in his friend’s brilliant work: he suggested they sell the board to them. Apple Computer was born.

Apple’s first year in business consisted of assembling the boards in Steve’s garage and driving to local computer stores to try and sell them. Meanwhile, Woz worked on a new, much improved computer, the Apple II, which he basically finished in 1977. Both Woz and Steve knew the Apple II was a breakthrough computer, much more advanced than anything the market had ever seen. That’s why Steve set out to find venture capitalists to fund Apple’s expansion. After a while, he made a deal with Mike Markkula, an enthusiastic former Intel executive who invested $250,000 in their business and assured them their company would enter the Fortune 500 list in less than two years.

Mike was right. The Apple II soon became the symbol of the personal computing revolution worldwide. It crushed all competition both because of its breakthrough hardware features (including its color graphics) and its very large supply of compatible software. The key to Apple II’s success was actually VisiCalc, the first spreadsheet program ever brought to market. Thousands of people bought Apple IIs just to use it. As a result, the company grew at a very fast rate, and went public after just four years of existence, in December 1980. Steve Jobs’ net worth passed the $200 million mark on that day — he was only 25.

But Apple’s success was threatened, as industry giant IBM was planning to enter the personal computer market in 1981. Apple had to fight back or they would go out of business in a couple of years’ time. Their Apple III computer had already bombed on the marketplace. They focused all their energy on a project headed by Steve Jobs: Lisa. He had named it after his ex-girlfriend’s daughter, although he denied all paternity (that difficult situation actually caused him to miss Time Magazine’s Man of the Year 1982). The Lisa computer was a breakthrough because it used a graphical user interface instead of a command-line interface. This technology, like many others that would revolutionize computing, was invented at Xerox PARC — but Apple was the first company to bring it to market.

Macintosh (1981-85)

Yet Steve Jobs was soon thrown out of the Lisa project because he was considered too temperamental a manager. Deeply angry, he took revenge by taking over a small project called Macintosh, determined to make it a cheaper GUI computer that would cannibalize sales of Lisa. Macintosh was in development since 1979 and its concept was “a computer as easy to use as a toaster.” Steve Jobs recruited brilliant young engineers in his Mac team and invigorated them by insufflating a spirit of entrepreneurship and rebellion, calling them “pirates”, unlike the rest of the company,“the Navy.”

Even though the Mac project was controversial as it threatened both Apple II and Lisa, and because Steve Jobs antagonized it against the rest of the company, it soon became crucial to Apple’s future because Lisa proved yet another market failure. Steve was supported in his mission by John Sculley, Apple’s CEO, whom he hired in 1983 to help him run the company and groom him into a top executive. In January 1984, he introduced Macintosh in great fanfare.

Although Mac’s first months were encouraging, sales soon started to plummet. There was growing fear in the company that this third flop in a row would put Apple out of business. Besides, Steve Jobs’ continued arrogance drove everyone nuts, starting with CEO John Sculley. After a failed board coup initiated by Jobs in mid-1985, Sculley announced he and the directors had agreed on a new org chart for Apple, in which Steve had no managerial duties whatsoever. He was only to remain chairman of the board.

Steve was stunned. Apple was his life, and he was kicked out of it. He started traveling around looking for new ways to spend his energy. It was actually in that second half of 1985 that he was introduced to a small team of brilliant computer graphics experts that George Lucas was trying to sell. They all shared a common dream of making animated movies with computers. Steve was interested and he eventually bought the company for $10 million in 1986, incorporating it as Pixar.

The NeXT years (1985-95)

Yet his main passion was still to make great computers. In September 1985, he announced to the Apple board that he was going to found a new company, called NeXT, to build an advanced computer for higher education and scientific research. He was going to take with him some of the best engineers and salesmen from the Mac team. Apple disapproved and threatened to sue him. It was at that point that Steve left his company for good and sold almost all of his stock in disgust.

NeXT started work on its computer in early 1986, after Apple dropped its lawsuit. Steve aimed at the highest possible standards for his new machine: he wanted the best hardware, built in the world’s most automated factory, and running the most advanced software possible. He decided the computer’s operating system, NeXTSTEP, would be based on UNIX, the most robust and most complex system in the world — but that it would also be as easy to use as a Macintosh, thanks to its own graphical user interface. In addition, it would make software development real easy with its object-oriented programming technology. These ambitious plans put off the release date of the computer — called the NeXT Cube — to October 1988.

However great it was, the NeXT Cube didn’t sell. It was overpriced and missing useful software. NeXT struggled for years to sell it, expanding its target from just education to businesses, and introducing a cheaper box, the NeXT Station. Yet the number of computers they sold each month remained in the hundreds. The company was bleeding money and all its co-founders left one after the other, as well as its first outside investor, Texan billionaire Ross Perot. By 1993, NeXT had to give up its hardware business and focus only on promoting its advanced software technology. NeXT Software, far from beating Apple, had turned into a niche software development business. Steve was devastated.

In addition, his investment in Pixar also seemed to lead nowhere. The small company had tried to sell advanced graphic workstations to specialized markets since it had been founded, without success. Jobs shut down Pixar’s hardware operations in 1990, decided to focus on developing an advanced 3D language called RenderMan. He kept the animation division, headed by John Lasseter, only because its work on TV commercials were one of the company’s only source of revenues. Hope was brought by a contract with Disney to make a full feature film with computers in 1991. But by the end of 1993, the contract was canceled by Burbank. With both his ventures failing, Steve had reached the nadir of his career. He spent most of his days at home with his young son Reed and his wife Laurene, whom he had married in 1991.

Comeback (1995-97)

Fortunately, as John Lasseter came back to Disney with an improved script for the feature film, called Toy Story, the project got back on track. The movie was to be released for Thanksgiving 1995. As the date approached, Steve Jobs realized what an incredible power the Disney brand was. He decided Pixar would go public the week after the release of Toy Story, cashing in on the media hype surrounding the first computer-generated animation movie of all time. It worked wonders: Toy Story’s box-office success was only surpassed by the Pixar stock’s success on Wall Street. Steve Jobs, who owned 80% of the company, saw his net worth rise to over $1.5 billion — five times the money he had ever made at Apple in the 1980s!

Speaking of Apple, the fruit company was in the midst of his worst year ever. After the release of Windows 95, the Mac, which had turned profitable but had failed to evolve for a decade while Steve Jobs was away, started losing market share at an alarming rate. By 1996, the company’s newly appointed CEO, Gil Amelio, was looking for new software to replace the old and bloated Mac OS. He eventually chose Steve’s NeXTSTEP. Apple paid $400 million to acquire NeXT, and Steve was back to the company that had thrown him out a decade earlier. His official title was that of “informal adviser to the CEO.”

But when Amelio announced Apple’s losses of $700 million for the first quarter of 1997, the board decided it was time to get rid of this terrible manager. Steve Jobs organized a board coup and was named interim CEO of Apple in July 1997. He immediately started an extensive review of the whole company, cutting the number of projects from hundreds to a dozen. The number of hardware products would be cut down to just four. He also made a shocking announcement at Macworld Boston in August: Apple would be teaming up with its arch-rival Microsoft, in an unprecedented deal that would put an end to interminable patent disputes.

Apple back on track (1998-2001)

Steve Jobs quickly gave confidence back to the Apple community. The company launched a revolutionary marketing campaign around a new slogan: Think Different, spreading the idea that people who used Macs were dreamers who could change the world. As the Apple brand grew stronger, the company launched a couple of new successful products, the Power Mac G3 and the PowerBook. Six months after he had come back, Steve Jobs had led the company to profitability.

Yet Apple’s resurgence really came a little later, when Steve introduced a new, amazing consumer desktop computer: iMac. Introduced in May 1998, it was Apple’s first really innovative product basically since the original Macintosh in 1984. The iMac’s stunning translucent design blew away the whole personal computer industry, which had failed to produce anything but black or beige boxes for over a decade. Moreover, iMac was a hot seller, and it was essential in bringing back tons of developers to the Mac platform. Design innovations continued throughout 1998 and 1999 with the colored iMacs and iBook, Apple’s consumer notebook. After three years in charge, Steve Jobs had brought Apple back to greatness. That’s why he finally accepted to become full-time CEO of Apple in January 2000 — the first time one man became CEO of two public companies at the same time.

Still, the very reason Steve Jobs was brought back to Apple had not yet materialize — it was to bring NeXT’s software technology to the Mac platform. This eventually happened in early 2001, as Apple released the first version of its breakthrough operating system, Mac OS X. Mac OS X was really NeXTSTEP with a Mac facade. But it turned out an essential asset to Apple as the company developed breakthrough applications for its Macs as part of the digital hub strategy.

The digital hub strategy was unveiled by Steve Jobs at Macworld San Francisco in January 2001. It was a vision for the future of the personal computer. Although many analysts and self-appointed experts were proclaiming PCs would disappear within a couple of years to be replaced by Internet terminals, Apple believed they would evolve into digital centers or hubs for our new digital lifestyles. In other words, the PC would become the centerpiece of our new lives filled with digital cameras and camcorders, MP3 players, smart phones and other digital devices. The digital hub strategy led Apple to develop a suite of applications designed to manage our new lifestyle, the so-called iApps: iMovie (1999), iTunes (2001), iDVD (2001), iPhoto (2002), iCal and iSync (2002), GarageBand (2004) and finally iWeb (2006). The iApps were a strategic move in Apple’s greater plan to gain market share over the PC, as there was simply no equivalent solution on the Windows platform. Other moves included an aggressive ad campaign (Switchers) and the start of Apple’s retail operations in mid-2001.

The iPod revolution (2001-2006)

However the greatest momentum for Apple came from an unexpected source: the iPod. iPod was an integral part of the digital hub strategy. It was started in early 2001, when Steve Jobs realized that he had misplaced his enthusiasm for “desktop video”, i.e. the ability to edit movies on the computer — which was still far from mainstream. What was really hot at the turn of the century was not movies but digital music, as exemplified by the success of Napster. He focused on catching up and bought an outside hardware developer to work on Apple’s own MP3 player, which was brought to market in record time, just in time for 2001’s holiday season.

iPod’s breakthrough features — its beautiful design, its brilliant user interface and click wheel, its fast FireWire connectivity and its ability to sync with iTunes seamlessly — made it a hot seller from the start. For the first time, people were buying Macs just so they could use this little music player the size of a cigarette box. Apple cashed in on that success and went further in the following years, first by making iPod Windows-compatible in 2002, then by opening the iTunes Music Store and developing a Windows version of iTunes in 2003.

As of 2006, after Apple had continually pushed innovation in its music business by introducing iPod mini in 2004, iPod shuffle then iPod nano in 2005, and expanded its Music Store internationally, it had become the undisputed leader of the new digital music era. A significant landmark was passed in 2006 when Apple’s revenues from iPod equaled those made on computers. For the first time in its history, the firm from Cupertino had left its niche markets to become as influential a player in consumer electronics as Microsoft was in the PC space. iPod’s market share was close to 75%!

The Pixar-Disney merger (2003-2006)

Interestingly enough, iPod also played a critical role in setting Pixar’s future. After having released success after success (A Bug’s Life (1998), Toy Story 2 (1999), Monsters Inc. (2001) and Finding Nemo (2003)), the animation studio had decided to let go of its distribution deal with Disney, mainly because of increasing tensions between Steve Jobs and Disney CEO Michael Eisner. Steve Jobs openly said he would not make another deal with the Magic Kingdom until Eisner was out. Turns out his opinion was shared by many an executive at Disney — including Walt’s own nephew, Roy Disney, who started a public campaign to oust the company’s CEO. This led to the nomination of Bob Iger as new CEO in March 2005.

Steve Jobs and Bob Iger started working together because Apple decided to sell TV shows on its iTunes store. In October 2005, in front of an audience of stunned journalists, Steve Jobs shook hands (as Apple’s boss) with the new CEO of Disney — implying a renewed cooperation with Pixar in the near future. This eventually led to no less than the merger of both companies, announced in January 2006. Steve Jobs, who still owned half of Pixar’s stock, became Disney’s largest individual shareholder (owning 7% of the company’s stock). As for Pixar executives Ed Catmull and John Lasseter, they were given critical roles in the new studio.

Apple Inc. (2006-today)

2006 was a critical year for Apple in three respects.

The first was the success of the Mac. Mac sales were finally taking off, and after years of struggle to gain market share, its growth rate was exceeding that of the PC. Several factors accounted for this historic change: the success of iPod of course, and the positive side effect it had on the Apple brand. The move to Intel as well: after years of fighting the so-called Wintel monopoly, Steve had announced in 2005 that the company would start using Intel processors in their Macs form then on. The entire product line was transitioned over in less than a year. Intel Macs were faster and cheaper, but their main advantage was their ability to run Windows — which was a key argument in making Windows users switch, afraid as they were not to find their favorite software on the Mac. Finally, Apple was encountering unexpected success with its chain of retail stores, the fastest growing in the US.

The second crucial development from 2006 was the full acceptance by Apple of its new status of consumer electronics powerhouse, thanks to the success of iPod, the walkman of the digital age. It became obvious in February 2006, when the company released iPod hi-fi, a boom-box designed to work only with iPod (which was discontinued the following year), and Apple TV less than a year later. But the biggest move of course came in January 2007, when Steve Jobs introduced iPhone at Macworld. iPhone was arguably the ultimate Apple product. Its beautiful hardware ran no less than Apple’s full operating system, OS X. Its multi-touch technology, Web surfing and iPod capabilities, easy-to-use interface, and more, made it a smartphone “light-years ahead of its competition”, as Steve Jobs said. It shook the phone industry to its core, down to the exclusive deal that Apple cut with AT&T for subscription plans. Three years after it was introduced, it is already fair to say that iPhone will go down in history as the first digital convergence device, equivalent to putting a computer, an iPod and a phone in your pocket. It was such an obvious part of Apple’s move outside the PC business that Steve announced at the end of Macworld 2007 that the company’s name would be changed from Apple Computer Inc. to Apple Inc.

Finally, the third major event of 2006 for Steve was the so-called backdating scandal. Backdating consists of picking a date in the past, when a stock’s value is lower, to assign the exercise price of options. It is an illegal practice that was commonplace in Silicon Valley until it was exposed by a Wall Street Journal article in 2006. Apple swiftly hired lawyers to lead an internal investigation of its own records. They did find irregularities, which were confirmed by the SEC in mid-2007. Two big frauds were unveiled that took place in 2000 and 2001, under Steve Jobs’ leadership. However he was cleared the following year as the SEC found out he had no idea of the legal or accounting implications of the matter. The SEC only charged Apple’s former CFO and legal counsel with fraud. The scandal was significant in the sense that it raised the issue of Apple’s future without Steve Jobs… But the main occasion this issue was raised was not the SEC investigation, it was unfortunately after Steve’s health problems.

In late 2003, Steve was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Fortunately, his tumor was not of the deadly type: Steve would be saved if he agreed to have surgery. But he didn’t, and for nine long months, followed a special type of diet that he thought would cure him from the disease. It was only in August 2004 that he agreed to have the surgery. Everybody thought the troubles were over, as he claimed he was “cured”. Of course there is no such thing as being cured from cancer, and in 2008, people started commenting heavily on Steve’s being increasingly thinner. Although he and Apple kept on denying any serious problem, in December 2008, they announced to everyone’s surprise that the CEO would not go on stage for the last Macworld keynote in history in January 2009. Steve Jobs took six months off (the first half of 2009), as he was awaiting a liver transplant — which he got in April 2009. The whole story of Steve’s cancer raised many a discussion about a public company’s necessary transparency regarding its CEO’s health, especially when that CEO is as essential to its market value as Steve Jobs is to Apple’s.

2010 has seen the incredible rebirth of Steve Jobs as a very active CEO. In sharp contrast with 2009, he came back on stage for many Apple events that year, and surprised the world many times over with insanely great new Apple products. The biggest announcement of all was undeniably iPad, Apple’s iOS-based tablet, which Steve unveiled on January 27, 2010. At the industry conference D8 in June 2010, Steve Jobs clearly stated that in his opinion, iPad had started the post-PC era, and that PCs would eventually become “like trucks”, a marginal part of a market dominated by portable tablets… If this comes true, this one man Steve Jobs will have played a crucial part in both giving birth and putting an end to the personal computer industry.


Steve Jobs is undeniably an extraordinary man by any standard. He has left his mark on no less than five industries: personal computers with Apple II and Macintosh, music with iPod and iTunes, phone with iPhone, and animation with Pixar. The middle-class hippie kid with no college education that he was built a computer empire and became a multi-millionaire in a few years, was fired from his own company before coming back a decade later to save it and turn it into one of the world’s most influential corporations, with millions of fans around the world. He has also contributed to the creation of the new leader in animated movies for decades to come. He has been called a fluke for years, but is now widely acknowledged as one the world’s most eminent business executives and an unrivaled visionary. He has changed millions of lives by making technology easy-to-use, exciting and beautiful.… And you know what the best part is? He’s not done yet.


Bishop Oyedepo’s Greatest Message ever (Happy Birthday)

WOW! It’s Papa’s Diamond Jubilee (60 years) and I really feel the urge to share this message again.

Happy Birthday! Bishop David Oyedepo

It is no doubt that Papa received a mandate from God through an 18 hour long vision in May 1981 to “liberate the world from all oppression of the devil through the preaching of the word” of faith’, I am a living proof of his ministry and teachings. I have been consuming Bishop’s inspirational materials since leaving high school; my life has never remained the same. I am not a pastor, just a simple fellow who has found out some principles through the teachings of Papa; take for example, I cannot say when last I borrowed or lacked anything. I remember an incident that happened years back, it was an encounter with death, thank God that I overcame. The emphasis is not on the incident but my response at that youthful age, simply because I had consumed a lot of Bishop’s materials, I could speak like him (mimicking) and used most of his keywords.  I remembered my friends and folks found it amusing especially how I could speak like him. My favourite then was the definition of faith ” Faith is a vital spiritual force that makes a natural man to operate in the realm of supernatual; operating in the very class of God, people marvelling at you, what a manner of man is this”. Coming back to the incident; that day I shouted “We don’t die like chicken”, very funny isn’t it; I didn’t say “Jesus.. Jesus…” I knew at that moment that I could not die without fulfilling my purpose here on earth and it was borne out of revelations I’d received listening and reading his materials.

I have not had any face to face encounter with Bishop but I can tell you that he’s my father, pastor, mentor and coach. I love you so much Bishop and pray that God will increase His anointing and wisdom upon your life. I celebrate you, your ministry and the impact you have had on the youths all over the world.

These are my favorite quotes from Bishop messages;

  • The difference between developed and developing countries of the world is the number of the empowered in the economy; I quote Bishop David Oyedepo.
  • You must know where u’re going now and keep going there
  • If you miss it in d 20s, you may never find it again.
  • 20 yrs and upward is the season of enlistment.
  • Whatever you found doing, be there full length.
  • You can’t know where you’re going and not package yourself to arrive there.
  • If you sow sleeping and waking up, you’ll reap poverty plenty
  • Life is a business; you are either loosing or succeeding.
  • Timely discovery is the only security of your stardom
  • Every leader is a reader, except for position occupants
  • Wisdom is never far from wealth

Back to the main thing, my greatest Bishop Oyedepo message of all time is “Timely Discovery For Striking Accomplishment”. Please and pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, download and listen to this message. I have made it available in this article. It is essentially for young people, parents can hand it over to your children, younger ones and everyone around you. I have purposed in my mind to bless lives that comes my way through this message. This message has blessed me so richly and I want it to do same to you.


Some of His Best Selling books include:

  • Pillars of Destiny
  • Exploits in Ministry
  • Walking in Dominion
  • Possessing your possession
  • Exploits of Faith
  • Anointing for exploits
  • Walking in the Newness of life
  • Maximise destiny
  • Commanding the supernatural
  • Winning invisible battles
  • Success Strategies
  • Success systems
  • Towards Excellency in life and Ministry
  • Excellency of Wisdom
  • Breaking Financial Hardship
  • The Release of Power
  • Excellency of Wisdom
  • Born to Win
  • The Miracle Meal
  • The Healing Balm
  • The Blood Triumph
  • Keys to Divine Health
  • Fulfilling Your Days
  • Breaking the Curses of Life
  • All You Need to Have All Your Needs Met
  • Emergence Of The Glorious Church


Fifa to investigate Nigeria head coach, Eucharia Uche over homophobia

Fifa is to open an inquiry into the issue of homophobia in women’s football and Nigeria head coach, Eucharia Uche could be in line for investigation.

Three international bodies – AllOut, the Federation of Gay Games, and the International Gay and Lesbian Football Association – having secured 46,000 signatures for petition to condemn homophobia has forced Fifa to open an inquest.

“Today we are excited to see FIFA take a first, critical step,” AllOut co-founder, Andre Banks is quoted on Tuesday’s edition of Daily News.

“By launching an immediate probe into coach Uche’s homophobic statements, the international governing body of soccer is sending a clear and important message: homophobia has no place in football, on or off the field.”

The world soccer governing body through its head of women’s competition, Tatjana Haenni, had said in June it will talk to the Nigerian coach about her comment.

“FIFA is against all forms of discrimination,” Haenni told German television channel, ARD.

The Nigerian trainer had caused a stir in a New York Times interview on the eve of the Fifa Women’s World Cup in Germany this year by calling homosexuality “dirty.”

“Yes, the lesbians in our team were really a big problem. But since I’m coach of the Super Falcons, that has been cleared up.

“There are no more lesbian players on my team. I cannot tolerate this dirty life,” Uche had told the New York Times.

Her comments were perceived in many quarters as targeting the German squad that had reserve keeper, Ursula Holl being married to a woman and first-choice Nadine Angerer believed to be bi-sexual.