A heated debate has erupted on X after Moore (@Accoid) issued a blunt warning: “If you like go and sell your property to japa… Canada PR is greater than ₦100 million, she said. #Japa but don’t sell your property I beg you.”

Her argument? Selling hard-earned Nigerian property to relocate abroad could leave migrants asset-light, especially if plans fail. He warned that returning for holidays (“oblee”) might reveal that those “left behind” have advanced in wealth and influence.

The comment touched a nerve.

At the heart of the debate lies a critical question:
- Is selling property to migrate a strategic investment — or reckless asset depletion?

The Seyi Vodi Comparison
Moore challenged the logic of a Canadian-based tailor claiming permanent residency (PR) is worth more than ₦100 million, asking rhetorically: “Can you compare that guy to Seyi Vodi?”

Seyi Vodi was referenced as an example of someone who built wealth and brand power within Nigeria.

But critics immediately pushed back.

Enyinnaya (@Okey_Bernie) argued that comparing a new migrant tailor to an established fashion entrepreneur ignores context:
- Time in system
- Network depth
- Political and commercial alliances
- Brand maturity

“Same talent. Different systems,” he wrote, emphasising that institutional infrastructure can amplify or suppress outcomes.

Others noted that Seyi Vodi and designers like Veekee James are statistical outliers — not representative of the average Nigerian tailor.

“How Many Seyi Vodis Exist?”

Several respondents challenged what they called “extreme example bias.”

Wil Oko observed: “How many Seyi Vodis are in Nigeria? But there are millions of struggling tailors.”

Ugochi Ukeje made a similar point: “For every Seyi Vodi in Nigeria, there are millions who couldn’t achieve elite status.”

The argument here is probabilistic:
If upward mobility odds are structurally higher in a stable economy, even modest migration success may outperform stagnant domestic assets.

The Asset Liquidation Question

Moore’s core warning was not anti-migration — it was anti-total liquidation.

“Sha don’t sell it all off… use sense.”

This perspective rests on a continuity principle: assets compound over time. Depleting property for relocation introduces concentrated risk.

Tsh echoed this view: “Multiplying assets is better than depleting.”

MOT Career Hub added another caution: “No visa is 100%.”

For this camp, selling property without secured status (especially for temporary visas) is financially reckless.

“Sometimes Property Is the Only Capital You Have”

Opponents countered with lived economic realities.

#ENDSARSNOW argued that many properties being sold are worth ₦20–30 million — modest family homes built over decades. For someone with little cash flow and low salary growth, that asset may represent their only pathway to mobility.

He asked a practical question:

Is it better to stay in Nigeria with ₦250,000 in your account waiting for tenants to pay annual rent — or liquidate and relocate?

Ibrahim Alidu shared a controversial example:

He reportedly sold a ₦50 million house for ₦21 million to move to Canada, and claims he recovered the amount within a year alongside a house down payment.

Others described kidnapping incidents, burglary risk, and property maintenance stress while living abroad — arguing that dormant assets in Nigeria often underperform relative to global income growth.

Environment vs Ownership

The debate widened beyond money.

Arya Stark (@cute_pecky) reframed the issue around safety and institutional reliability — referencing road accidents, stray bullets, and emergency response gaps in Nigeria.

Enyinnaya highlighted COVID-era government grants accessed by low-income Canadian permanent residents — contrasting it with Nigeria’s palliative distribution controversies.

In this framing, PR represents:
- Policy stability
- Legal protection
- Social infrastructure
- Long-term security

Not merely income.

The Emotional Undercurrent: Pride and “Oblee”

Moore’s “oblee” comment — suggesting migrants might return and feel eclipsed by peers — triggered strong responses.

Kola replied: “Do you think everything is about money? A lot of people relocate because of their kids’ future.”

Emmanuel Clark, who said he eventually sold his Nigerian duplex after relocating, wrote: “You can’t be PR in a country and still mentally anchored elsewhere.”

This reveals a psychological layer:
Migration is not only financial repositioning. It is identity repositioning.

PR vs Temporary Visa: A Crucial Distinction

A more nuanced position emerged from Deey: “Sell your property for PR. Not for temporary study or work visas.”

This aligns with financial risk modelling:
- Permanent Residency (PR) offers long-term earnings predictability.
- Temporary visas carry policy uncertainty and income instability.

In Canada’s context, PR status unlocks access to healthcare systems, credit markets, and mortgage eligibility — structural advantages that can justify capital deployment.

What Is Canada PR “Worth”?

Is PR truly worth ₦100 million?

Financially, the valuation depends on:
- Lifetime earning differential
- Currency strength
- Asset accumulation potential
- Pension contributions
- Intergenerational opportunity

If a migrant’s lifetime income increases significantly due to structural environment, the net present value of that shift may exceed ₦100 million.

However, such projections depend on skill portability, industry access, and disciplined savings — not geography alone.

The Real Divide

This debate is not about Canada vs Nigeria.

It is about:
- Asset preservation vs capital deployment
- Risk concentration vs diversification
- Institutional trust vs entrepreneurial optimism

Pride vs pragmatism

For some, selling property to migrate is leverage.
For others, it is liquidation without guarantee.

As one commenter summarised: “Do what floats your boat.”