Manny Ita
Renowned event architect and founder of Zapphaire Events, Funke Bucknor-Obruthe, has officially debunked widely circulated reports alleging that Afrobeats superstar David Adeleke, popularly known as Davido, owes her firm a debt of $50,000. The controversy, which gained significant traction on social media over the weekend, was fueled by purported leaked screenshots of a demand notice sent to the singer’s management regarding services rendered for a recent high-profile engagement. In a formal rebuttal issued today, Monday, January 26, 2026, Bucknor-Obruthe clarified that the documentation being shared across digital platforms is entirely fabricated and intended to cause reputational damage.
Addressing the situation via a verified statement, the event planner characterized the viral evidence as “doctored” and urged the public to disregard the narrative of financial friction between her brand and the artist. “Our relationship with David and his team has always been professional and based on mutual respect,” Bucknor-Obruthe stated, adding that her firm maintains strict confidentiality and professional protocols that do not involve public debt recovery through social media leaks. She emphasized that the figures and the layout of the “leaked” invoices were inconsistent with Zapphaire Events’ official billing systems and were likely the work of “malicious actors” seeking to exploit the singer’s high-profile status for engagement.
The singer’s management team has yet to issue an official counter-statement, though insiders close to the DMW (Davido Music Worldwide) camp have dismissed the rumors as a recurring attempt to distract from his ongoing international tour preparations. The debunking by Bucknor-Obruthe has brought a swift end to the viral speculation, which had initially prompted a debate among fans regarding the financial transparency of celebrity-vendor partnerships in Nigeria. Legal representatives for the event planner have indicated that they are monitoring the origin of the “doctored” screenshots to determine if further legal action is necessary to protect the firm’s brand integrity.
