Davido Responds To Dammy Krane’s Debt Allegations

Nigerian singer, David Adeleke, popularly known as Davido, has responded to the debt allegation of his colleague, Oyindamola Emmanuel, better known as Dammy Krane.

makeitupnews reports that Dammy Krane has consistently accused Davido of being reluctant to settle the debt for his songwriting contribution to an earlier released track, even after contacting the DMW boss privately. On Friday morning, he took to his X handle to troll Davido and list out the things Davido owes him, stressing he filed a petition against the singer at a police station about a year ago. Responding, Davido stated that he never got paid for the three verses he sang on Dammy Krane’s song nine years ago, including the royalties. He wrote: “I never got paid for that also my 3 verses I’ve gifted you all your dead careeer … .. oh yea plus my royalties, we charge now so that’s about $150 k x3 a verse.. also house rent and food when u stayed in my house in Atlanta when you were homeless ..”

Businessman, Abu Salami Accuses Davido Of Running With His N218 Million Meanwhile, Davido, has been accused of breaching a financial agreement between him and a businessman, known as Abusalami, on Instagram. makeitupnews understands that Abusalami took to his Instagram page to allege that the renowned musician breached the agreement in relation to a children’s project. The complainant claimed he paid Davido the sum of 218 million naira, out of a total project cost of 326 million naira, but that the singer did not fulfil his obligations. In a detailed statement shared on his Instagram page, Abusalami explains that the project, which involved young talents from 20 different states, was scheduled but ultimately cancelled by Davido, resulting in a financial loss of 42 million naira for Abusalami. Abusalami also claimed that he requested Davido to do a commercial about the project, which the singer refused to do. He stressed that the singer went away with his money without delivering the project, labelling Davido as a “thief.” He also highlighted his own financial difficulties and the potential negative impact on the young players who were supposed to benefit from the project.