Social Media Rage and Banking Realities: Why GTBank Will Weather the Ratel Storm
By Prince Tony Ogbetere. | May 4, 2025.
The recent arrest of self-acclaimed activist Martins Vincent Otse, better known as VeryDarkMan, has once again highlighted the growing intersection of social media influence and Nigeria’s socio-political space.
Known for his controversial commentaries and fearless approach to public discourse, VeryDarkMan’s sudden detention has stirred a storm across digital platforms. While official sources remain vague about the charges against him, several narratives have emerged. Some blame law enforcement agencies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) or the Department of State Services (DSS), while others claim a gospel singer might have played a role. Among the most curious accusations, however, is the one aimed at Guaranty Trust Bank (GTBank), which has unexpectedly become a target of outrage.
In a rather theatrical reaction, members of VeryDarkMan’s loyal online following, known as The Ratel Gang, have launched what appears to be a grassroots financial protest. Videos and posts have surfaced of individuals cutting up their GTBank ATM cards and vowing to close their accounts.
According to the Ratels, GTBank is either complicit in the arrest or has otherwise aligned itself against their cause. As the movement gathered digital momentum, calls to boycott the bank spread, with a number of youths claiming that they were withdrawing their funds en masse. But the central question remains: can this movement genuinely hurt GTBank?
To answer this, one must consider the scale and structure of GTBank’s operations. As of 2023, GTBank had 32.8 million retail customers. This impressive number reflects a strong consumer banking presence, but it is important to understand the distribution of funds within the system. Despite the volume of retail accounts, the overwhelming percentage of actual deposits and financial influence lies with a much smaller subset of clients—state governments, multinational corporations, government agencies, and employees with mandatory salary accounts dictated by employer banking policies. These clients represent the lion’s share of the bank’s capital base. Simply put, the people who hold the majority of the money in GTBank are not destroying their cards or closing their accounts in protest.
Moreover, even from a symbolic standpoint, the financial consequence of the card-cutting campaign is relatively small. The cost of an ATM card is about ₦1,000. If 10% of GTBank’s 32.8 million customers—about 3.28 million individuals—destroy their cards and eventually replace them, that equates to ₦3.28 billion. While this might seem like a significant number on the surface, it is inconsequential when viewed in context.
In 2023, GTBank recorded a profit before tax of ₦609.3 billion. Compared to that, ₦3.28 billion is a financial hiccup, not a hemorrhage. Furthermore, many of the same individuals destroying their cards will likely pay to replace them when the emotional dust settles. In the meantime, the bank continues to earn charges on every transaction, including withdrawals made during the so-called protest.
Adding to the bank’s resilience is its diversification and technological evolution. GTBank has invested heavily in digital banking infrastructure, although its recent migration to a new core banking system—Finacle—experienced some initial hiccups. Despite customer frustrations, this upgrade is a strategic step toward long-term efficiency and scalability. Nigerian banks have evolved far beyond traditional deposit-and-withdrawal models. They are now embedded in fintech, lending, mobile banking, and even international remittance platforms. GTBank, in particular, has built a brand that many institutional clients and financially literate individuals still trust.
At the end of the day, the viral theatrics of card destruction and hashtag campaigns may generate attention, but they rarely translate into substantive institutional disruption—at least not for banks as established and diverse as GTBank. Social media can amplify grievances, but it cannot replace the hard logic of finance, structure, and market trust.
Emotions are valid, but banking decisions governed solely by sentiment are rarely sustainable. The Ratels may trend online for a while, but unless there is a coordinated, large-scale, and economically substantial exit by top-tier clients, GTBank will remain unshaken.
This entire episode is a textbook example of what happens when digital activism collides with corporate inertia. It raises important questions about accountability, transparency, and the role of financial institutions in civic affairs. However, it also serves as a cautionary tale about the limits of mob-driven narratives. As the digital noise fades, GTBank will continue its operations, unbothered, and Nigeria’s complex relationship with social media outrage will continue evolving.
The real loss, perhaps, lies not with the bank, but with a youth population that sometimes confuses impulsive emotion for effective strategy—while the likes of Mark Zuckerberg and other tech moguls quietly profit from the very platforms fueling the chaos.