Selebogo Molefe — The 'SMME champion' taking YOUFM Business Hour to new heights
Though radio was never part of Molefe's original plans, he sees his unexpected journey into broadcasting as a blessing. 'I was doing my own thing when the call to come host the business show came along. I can't wait to leave a lasting legacy in the minds of the listeners,' Molefe said.
Known for his commitment to uplifting entrepreneurs, Molefe is determined to use YOUFM Business Hour as a platform for more than just market discussions. His goal is to offer mentorship, profile up-and-coming businesses, and create a space where entrepreneurs can learn and grow together. This focus aligns with Molefe's broader passion: starting entrepreneurship-driven projects that place community development at the heart of economic progress.
With years of experience in organising high-profile corporate events, Molefe has developed a diverse skill set, from project management to event co-ordination, all of which contribute to his success as an entrepreneur. His leadership journey has also been shaped by mentorship under influential figures like Prof Bonang Mohale, a relationship that has helped him understand the importance of opening doors and creating opportunities for others.
When he's not behind the mic, Molefe is busy building his business, The Biz Plug, an SMME development agency that provides accredited training, mentorship and coaching for small business owners. The Biz Plug partners with various corporate and government agencies to drive enterprise & supplier development (ESD) and support the growth of emerging businesses.
In addition, Molefe has recently launched Share The Codes (www.sharethecodes.co), an initiative that connects entrepreneurs, investors and buyers to foster collaboration and growth. The initiative's Joburg chapter engagement takes place monthly at Johannesburg Business School's Centre for Entrepreneurship, with plans to expand nationally, starting with Rustenburg in August.
'I'm not a business show guy. I'm not a finance guy. What I am is an SMME champion,' Molefe says, reflecting on his years of helping companies grow. 'I've been doing this for many years, and I believe we can achieve great things for ourselves, each other, and ultimately YOUFM.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
4 days ago
- IOL News
Brian Molefe's legal troubles deepen as AIG sues for R4. 4m over defence costs
Insurance company AIG South Africa is gunning for former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe in a multimillion-rand lawsuit. Image: Simphiwe Mbokazi / Independent Newspapers uMkhonto weSizwe Party MP and former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe is facing more legal woes after an insurance company slapped the erstwhile Transnet boss with a R4.4 million lawsuit. AIG South Africa signed a written management liability insurance policy with Eskom in April 2017. In terms of the policy, AIG agreed to provide liability cover to the power utility's directors, officers, and employees, including those in its subsidiaries. Each insured person was insured independently and separately for their respective interests, according to the policy. Molefe, in his capacity as chief executive of Eskom, qualified as an insured person under the policy and was eligible, subject to its terms and conditions, to indemnification during his time at the state-owned entity. The policy made provision that AIG will advance cover for liability insurance, being the obligation to pay to or on behalf of an insured person any loss incurred by the insured person. In Molefe's case, AIG agreed to pay for his defence costs on condition that if it was found by a court that he had gained a profit or an advantage to which he was not legally entitled or that there was a commission of a dishonesty or deliberate fraudulent act, then he would have to repay the costs that had been disbursed or that would be disbursed to him or on his behalf. The insurance company disbursed the sum of approximately R4,398,849 (about R4.4m) for his defence costs. However, various judgments were delivered against Molefe by the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) and the Constitutional Court, which determined that his conduct was unlawful. The matter relates to Molefe unsuccessfully applying for leave to appeal to both the SCA and the apex court, an earlier Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, judgment finding that his reinstatement as Eskom chief executive was at variance with the principle of legality and reviewing and setting aside the board's decision to accept his early retirement proposal in November 2016. The high court also reviewed and set aside the decision by then Public Enterprises minister Lynne Brown to appoint and reinstate Molefe to the position of Eskom chief executive and declared that any payment or sum of money received by Molefe under any purported pension agreement between him and Eskom is invalid and ordered him to repay such amounts within 10 days. AIG informed Molefe of its intention to institute legal proceedings and claim the provision of his defence costs, and that he accepted the benefits conferred on him by the policy and agreed to be bound by its terms. The company told Molefe in October 2017 that it would advance defence costs to him on a without prejudice basis, and, on the basis that should it eventuate in due course that he was not entitled to an indemnity under the policy, he would refund such costs in full and on demand. Molefe maintained that he did not agree to the provisions of the policy and is not bound by it, as well as that he did not agree to repay the defence costs He also insisted that an arbitration clause in the policy compelled AIG to refer disputes on the recovery of the defence costs to arbitration and raised a special plea in the pending action by the company that its case be dismissed or stayed pending resolution of the arbitration. On August 1, Judge Allyson Crutchfield ordered that the disputes in respect of the claim instituted by AIG shall not be referred to arbitration. The judge found that Molefe's stance that he is not bound by the policy while simultaneously relying upon and claiming the enforcement of the arbitration clause in respect of AIG's claims was untenable and not sustainable in law.
IOL News
06-08-2025
- IOL News
Political interference nearly crippled South Africa's energy landscape
Former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe. Image: Jacques Naude / Independent Newspapers As South Africa marks a decade of wind energy generation under the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (REIPPPP), it must also reckon with a period when political interference nearly brought that progress to a halt. At the centre of that disruption stands former Eskom CEO Brian Molefe. Molefe's refusal to sign key renewable energy agreements delayed investment, deepened load shedding, and destabilised the sector. The resulting uncertainty cost the country billions and led to significant job losses, consequences that are still felt in the energy landscape today. Molefe was appointed CEO of Eskom in 2015, after a tenure at Transnet that would later come under scrutiny for enabling large-scale procurement irregularities. In August of that year, he and then-President Jacob Zuma celebrated the first unit of the Medupi coal-fired power station reaching commercial operation. The event was presented as a turning point. Zuma announced that load shedding was over, and the energy crisis resolved. That statement was not only premature, it was deliberately misleading. Medupi had already been delayed by four years and had exceeded its original budget by tens of billions of rand. The final unit would only come online in 2021. These delays placed immense pressure on older coal-fired power stations that needed scheduled maintenance. Without this planned downtime, system stability declined. Load shedding remained a necessary and increasingly frequent tool to prevent system collapse. Rather than use this milestone to support a balanced and diversified electricity mix, Molefe used it to justify delaying the signing of REIPPPP Bid Window 4 power purchase agreements. His reasons ranged from the claim that Medupi's output would suffice, to arguments about the tariffs being too high. Behind these justifications was a clear agenda: stall the growth of private-sector-led renewable energy. The impact of that decision was immediate. Local and international investors paused or withdrew. Project developers halted work. Manufacturing facilities scaled down. One of the most visible casualties was DCD Wind, which closed its newly launched wind tower manufacturing plant in the Coega Industrial Development Zone. Construction companies, including established South African firms like CONCO, were forced to shut down. Thousands of jobs were lost, and the momentum that had been building in the renewable sector was lost. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Molefe's actions were part of a broader campaign to disrupt institutional reform in the energy space. He did not act alone. His efforts were supported by Zuma, the Gupta network, former Minister of Public Enterprises Lynne Brown, and two successive energy ministers, Mmamoloko Kubayi and David Mahlobo. It was only after Zuma's recall in February 2018 that political space opened for intervention. Within weeks, incoming Energy Minister Jeff Radebe approved the signing of the long-delayed Bid Window 4 agreements. On 4 April 2018, 27 projects were given the green light, unlocking R56 billion in investment. Why did this level of resistance to renewables exist at a time when the country was in the midst of a worsening electricity crisis? The answer lies in a political battle that continues to define South Africa's energy decisions. It is a struggle between competing factions within the ANC, between those who support transparency and decentralisation, and those who rely on state-owned institutions to control procurement, influence contracts, and preserve patronage. These centralist actors have long promoted mega-projects, including large coal and nuclear builds, as the default strategy for energy security. Such projects are consistently framed as job creators. The implication is that decentralised, private-sector-led electricity generation threatens employment, especially in the coal value chain. This narrative has been reinforced by unions and political allies, even as evidence shows that renewable energy procurement has supported broad-based investment, skills development, and regional economic growth. The Medupi and Kusile projects have made the risk of state-led mega projects clear. Both have suffered cost overruns, delays, and ongoing technical failures. These outcomes have weakened Eskom, undermined supply stability, and exposed public finances to inflated risk. Yet the same centralist arguments persist. Although the Zuma-Molefe axis is no longer in power, resistance to reform continues. In recent months, pressure against independent power generation and market liberalisation has increased again. This reflects a deeper reluctance to relinquish control of an energy sector that has long served as a channel for influence and enrichment. South Africa remains in a fragile position. There is no shortage of technical expertise, investor appetite, or policy guidance. What has been missing, repeatedly, is political alignment and the will to put the country's energy needs above personal or factional interests. If this dynamic does not shift, the country risks repeating the very failures that stalled progress a decade ago. Only a stable, rules-based environment that protects procurement integrity and regulatory independence will allow South Africa to rebuild a credible, reliable electricity future. Thomas Garner holds a Mechanical Engineering degree from the University of Pretoria and an MBA from the University of Stellenbosch Business School. Image: Supplied
IOL News
22-07-2025
- IOL News
Brian Molefe's ongoing legal battle over R32m Eskom pension fund payout
MK Party MP and former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe. Image: Jacques Naude / Independent Newspapers Former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe will continue his fight against the power utility's pension and provident fund over the millions of rand he received in a payout in 2017. In 2018, the DA, trade union Solidarity, and the EFF obtained a Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, order reviewing and setting aside Molefe's reappointment as Eskom boss as well as the proposal granting him early retirement. At the time, the full bench of the high court – Judges Keoagile Matojane, Hans Fabricius, and Segopotje Mphahlele – also declared any payment or sum of money received by Molefe under any purported agreement between him and Eskom invalid and ordered him to repay the amounts within 10 days. Molefe unsuccessfully applied for leave to appeal to both the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading In their scathing ruling, the judges found Eskom's decision to waive penalties and buy Molefe an extra 13 years of service totalling R30.1 million after only 15 months' service at the age of 50 stretched incredulity and was unlawful for want of compliance with the Eskom Pension and Provident Fund's (EPPF's) rules. 'What is most disturbing is the total lack of dignity and shame by people in leadership positions who abuse public funds with naked greed for their benefit without a moment's consideration of the circumstances of fellow citizens who live in absolute squalor throughout the country with no basic services,' the high court reasoned. In July 2022, the EPPF was later directed by Judge Norman Davis to repay Eskom the R32.3m payout, including employer contributions, Molefe's monthly pension contributions, and his performance bonus pension contributions. Molefe was ordered to repay the fund about R10m together with mora interest, which is charged when payment is not made. The former Transnet chief executive has maintained that based on his calculations, the net amount that he has to repay is just less than R1.5m. The EPPF then became entitled to set-off against the amount due by Molefe against the net balance of the Transnet Retirement Fund lump sum he received upon receipt of a tax directive from the SA Revenue Service (Sars) on the tax payable on the amount. Molefe appealed the July 2022 judgment, and on July 11, 2025, another full bench of the high court – Judges Ronel Tolmay, Mmonoa Teffo and Rochelle Francis-Subbiah – upheld his challenge. Parts of Judge Davis' order were set aside and substituted. 'The matter is referred to oral evidence to determine the amount payable by the appellant (Molefe) to the first respondent (EPPF), before a different judge. 'The first respondent must discover all documents relating to the calculation and flow of money as well as all documents it intends to use during the leading of evidence within 15 days of this order,' the court ruled. Additionally, according to the judgment, Molefe must discover all documents relating to the calculation and flow of money and all documents he intends to use during the leading of evidence within 15 days of the filing of his documents. The judges continued: 'The judges stated that actuaries may file supplementary reports after receiving the aforementioned documents, and must do so at least 45 days before the matter is heard.' Molefe did not respond to requests for comment on Tuesday.
