If you have worked in the IT industry, chances are you have either been to or seen colleagues jet off to exhibitions in foreign countries. Exhibitions are a part and parcel of any industry. These events, usually hosted at large hotels or dedicated expo centres in both large and small cities all over the world, are essentially meant to connect buyers and sellers.
Manufacturers and sellers get a chance to display their products, show off advances, advertise themselves, and make connections that might serve them in the future. There are far more of these exhibitions and conferences than one might expect. Exhibitions in and of themselves are big business. Organising them, planning them, running logistics and marketing for them is an economy of its own. In the United States alone there are more than a million meetings and events each year, which includes conferences, conventions, and tradeshows. Add hotel stays, marketing, travel, and all kinds of other costs and it comes out to a $330 billion industry.
Pakistan is by no means a global hub for exhibitions, but there are plenty of Pakistani businesses that need international exposure, and attending these conferences and getting access to them involves big money too. Perhaps nothing exemplifies this better than Pakistan’s tech industry. Every year, Pakistani tech companies attend countless conferences and exhibitions all across the world. To get to these exhibitions, you have to apply, buy space, set up a pavilion and have a strategy.
But for tech companies, getting to these exhibitions is simply a matter of paying a fee. Because all of the logistical work involved is done by third parties, companies that specialise in organising exhibitions for participants. In the last three years, a number of companies in the exhibition industry have popped up in Pakistan. These companies have been quietly reshaping how Pakistan shows up on the global tech map with grit, design sense, and a business model that makes international visibility possible for companies that would otherwise never afford it.
The gig is far from easy. While these companies have grown in the past three years, they have been up against government machinery. It is an uphill battle against a system that favors monopoly over merit, and connections over competence. And it begins with an organisation called the Pakistan Software Export Board (PSEB). [restrict level=1]
Say hello to the gatekeeper – the PSEB
Every year when the government presents the budget, one of the most ridiculous parts in a document that is generally taxing on the mental faculties of anyone with half a brain or more is the IT budget. It allocates money to ridiculous things such as IT parks, and other strange schemes the government thinks are what promotes tech. Part of the allocations are subsidies and the money that the government gives to promote Pakistani tech abroad in global branding and advertising. How is Pakistani tech promoted abroad? Through exhibitions of course, and the government is willing to spend money subsidising companies going to these exhibitions and promoting these exhibitions.
Now, this money from subsidies should ideally go to the organisers of these exhibitions or to the IT companies directly. There should not be any involvement of any middle layer or third party agents in this process.
In the current scenario, the government has an arm to do this. This is where a single publicly owned firm called the Pakistan Software Export Board (PSEB) comes in. PSEB is the de facto gatekeeper for all “official” international participation by Pakistani IT companies. The way it works is that the Trade Development Authority of Pakistan (TDAP) works with the PSEB whereby the TDAP gives the PSEB funds from the government to spend on the promotion of Pakistan’s IT industry. The PSEB does that under the Tech Destination Pakistan banner.
TDAP in coordination with P@SHA, the official representative body of Pakistan’s IT industry, chooses the international events where they think representation of Pakistan’s IT industry makes sense. The recommendations are sent to the PSEB which then finalizes the events where Pakistan’s IT industry is going to be represented by securing exclusive spaces called pavilions. The IT companies from Pakistan are called to join and show to the participants the benefits of working with Pakistan’s IT industry. The said pavilions are set up by companies from the private sector. These companies can offer their services and get government approval to be the “official” partner that is responsible for setting up the pavilion where Pakistan’s IT companies showcase themselves at these exhibitions. The list of these exhibitions in a year can vary and past years have seen more than 20 such exhibitions such as Gitex in Dubai and Berlin, London Tech Week and LEAP in Saudi Arabia where the government decided that it will showcase Pakistan’s IT industry.
For each event, the Pakistan Software Export Board has to choose one company from the private sector and give them the permission to set up the Pakistan pavilion. There can be as many companies that the PSEB can choose as there are events in a calendar year. Once chosen, the PSEB would then tap into the network of IT companies in Pakistan, reach out to them, invite them to join the event happening in say Dubai or London or some other global destination. The companies get the cost of joining the exhibition happening in say Dubai from the organizers of the exhibition. The PSEB will then market and subsidise the participation cost. PSEB itself reaches out to IT companies in Pakistan, quoting them a subsidised price of joining these exhibitions.
These pavilions include booths that the company sets up for one IT company. The pavilion would include as many booths as the IT companies that agree and accept the PSEB’s price to join the event.
If a private company is unable to get the government’s approval to become its official partner, also called agent, the said company can bid to secure a space at the event for representation from Pakistan’s IT industry on its own. In this case, the private company reaches out to the event organizer, say organizers of LEAP in Saudi Arabia, and tries to secure a space where IT companies from Pakistan can exhibit.
But the prospective exhibition participation company in this case is not the official nominee of the government. The official nominee of the government would bid separately from the non-government approved companies and try to secure the space for themselves with an added unique proposition that they carry the support of the government with them. With the support of the government, the equation changes. The exhibition organizers are likely to look more favourably towards the government’s official agent instead of someone from the private sector. Both pay the same price to the exhibition organizer but one comes with more weight whose booths would be attended by ambassadors and ministers. When the government is involved, it becomes about national liaison and not just a for-profit enterprise. Access and optics would be better for the one that has the government support.
There are monetary benefits too. According to the MoU between TDAP and the PSEB, the PSEB receives funds from TDAP to subsidise costs for the official agent selected by the PSEB by up to 60%.
In a fair system, public funding, especially large subsidies for international marketing and export promotion, is distributed through open, competitive processes. The global standard for this is the RFP: Request for Proposals. Government agencies invite proposals from organizers, compare costs, evaluate performance, and select the best plan. It prevents corruption, creates transparency, and ensures public money is used well.
But in Pakistan’s case, no such process exists. The same agent is repeatedly handed most of the exhibition contracts, without any competition. No calls for proposals. No budget comparisons. No performance evaluations.
At the same time, there is also the perception issue. Tech companies are likely to trust the government backed organiser rather than the ones doing it without their approval. As an official of one organising company tells us, in their first year, the industry response was tepid at best. Very few companies were willing to risk joining an unrecognized platform, especially one without the safety net of government endorsement. Exhibitions abroad especially in tech hubs like Dubai and Berlin are expensive and high-stakes. Why take the risk?
But over time, trust was built the hard way: through delivery. Each event was run like a startup launch. Hands-on, detail-driven, and focused on outcomes. Companies weren’t just given a booth and forgotten. They were helped with branding. Connected with investors. Introduced to buyers. Given practical, affordable options. Word spread.
Three years in, participation surged. Events like fintech festivals and startup showcases began drawing over 150 participants, a testament to the model’s success. More than a commercial enterprise, the platform became a gateway for Pakistan’s IT and tech ecosystem to be seen, engaged, and considered internationally.
Meet the agent
On paper, it looks like a success story: Pakistan’s IT industry is increasingly visible on the international stage, with local companies participating in global exhibitions from Singapore to Dubai, Istanbul to Amsterdam. On paper, it also looks that the government is promoting the IT industry at all these events when in reality it is a third party that the government gives a contract to.
Subsidies from the government cover up to 60% of the cost, allowing more businesses to represent the country abroad. It’s meant to be a support system, a way to elevate Pakistani technology into the global spotlight. But dig deeper, and a different story unfolds.
One where a single private agent, without any formal tender process or competitive bidding, controls the lion’s share of these international tech showcases. Where inflated budgets, opaque approvals, and unchecked authority turn public support into private profit. And where those actually building value independent organizers without government handouts are sidelined, blacklisted, or simply erased from the map. The agent is an individual by the name of Dawar Khan, whose companies Eventage, International Exhibition Management and Event Champ etc., have secured most of the exhibitions abroad to represent Pakistan’s IT industry.
This unchecked access to public funds allows the agent to inflate costs with impunity.
The government can bid to secure space at a global exhibition, say Gitex Dubai, where they would set up booths for each tech company from Pakistan that agrees to join the event in Dubai. The government would give the contract to set up these booths to a private company like Eventage. Eventage would give a price to the PSEB for setting up one booth. Say that the company gives a price of Rs 30 lakh to the PSEB. The Rs 30 lakh covers the company’s cost of setting up the booth, branding, lighting, carpets etc with add ons like networking opportunities arranged by PSEB and government bodies like TDAP and the respective embassy of Pakistan. This price would also include profit of the private company which is organizing everything on behalf of the government of Pakistan.
The PSEB would reduce this cost by 60%. In this case, it would come down to Rs12 lakh. In this way, the difference of Rs 18 lakh is paid by the government and that is where the money set aside in the budget for these subsidies goes. This cost after subsidy is quoted to tech companies in Pakistan, encouraging them to join the said exhibition at an affordable cost. It is a simple enough system. However, industry insiders claim that the prices quoted to the PSEB by companies like Eventage are inflated. They claim that PSEB does not allow for competitive bidding which does not allow a fair field of competition. Estimates received by Profit claim that instead of the Rs 30 lakh, a single booth at an event like Gitex in Dubai could be organised by other companies at a cost as low as Rs 6 lakh to Rs 8 lakh per booth including their profit. The difference is massive. Add to this the fact that PSEB would pay for 60% of this and the cost for tech companies to have a booth at such an event comes down to Rs 2.4 – 3.2 lakhs. This actually means that the amount set aside for the subsidy can be distributed to a lot more companies which can then go to a lot more events.
As things stand, in the past three years, Dawar Khan’s companies have organised a majority of the events that the government has been involved in. The government can give work to any of the companies out there, but Dawar Khan has been the agent for 36 events out of 51 in the last three years. That’s 70% of the exhibitions where the PSEB decided it would showcase Pakistan’s IT industry and chose Dawar to do it subsidized by the government.
Keep in mind that dozens of IT companies attend these exhibitions. If say 100 companies attend Gitex Dubai, under the Dawar Khan model, Rs12 crore are being given to Dawar to set up 100 booths. According to market sources, this Rs12 crore covers the cost and is enough to give him a decent profit. By quoting the price at Rs 20 lakh, the agent is pocketing an extra Rs 18 lakh. Multiply this to 100 companies attending the exhibition, we are looking at Rs18 crore in unearned profits through subsidies.
Correspondence seen by this reporter confirms that events such as LEAP and Gitex that could be organized for $150,000 are routinely quoted at $700,000 by the above-mentioned companies. With the government offering a 60% subsidy, that means the state pays nearly five times more than it should. The agent pockets the difference, often taking home more than $100,000 to $400,000 in commissions per exhibition based on the size of the exhibition, its importance and how many companies from Pakistan attend it.
Multiply that by 36 events in total that Dawar’s companies have been chosen to be the government’s official agent, the numbers become staggering. We are talking about at least $3.6 million that Dawar has possibly earned in profits if all events are small. However, that is not the case. We have created a tier-based categorisation of these events where costs and eventually subsidy amount increases as the events move up in a tier. If all events are Tier C, Dawar has pocketed $3.6 million. If all events are assumed to be Tier A, Dawar pockets $14.4 million. Stay in the middle and Dawar would have pocketed $9 million. The $9 million (Rs2.5 billion in today’s dollar rate) number is the best unbiased estimate of the amount that Dawar possibly pocketed through his companies in three years because of an unfair system.
This isn’t just unfair. It’s expensive. Let’s unpack the scale of this hidden cost and how much it’s draining from the system.
There should also be questions on if such subsidies should exist, especially for IT companies that are already cash rich, earning millions of dollars annually. It can possibly be a good idea when applied fairly. But what’s happening instead is a textbook example of budget inflation and corruption.
While independent organizers manage full-featured international showcases for $100,000 or less based on the importance and cost of organizing the pavilion in different countries, the monopoly agent regularly quotes $500,000 or more for similar events. And since there’s no RFP process and no mechanism to invite competitive bids, these inflated invoices are either accepted without scrutiny or through collusion.
Real money but illusionary advertising?
It gets worse. Even with the inflated prices, there are serious questions about where all of this money is being spent.
In a startling discovery, this reporter has uncovered what appear to be fabricated promotional materials for Pakistan’s IT industry events in locations like Saudi Arabia, Toronto, and Berlin. Using error-level analysis, a forensic image technique, several of the billboards and digital ads masterminded by PSEB’s ad partner, M&C Saatchi show signs of manipulation. Searches on fakeimagedetector also show anomalies in these pictures and raise questions about their authenticity. Industry sources also say that the pictures don’t look real.
The PSEB budgets billions of rupees annually which it can spend on subsidies, grants, and global marketing. According to sources in the advertising industry, the rule of the thumb is that 30% of all spend is on marketing. Sources say that these global marketing campaigns cost millions of dollars when done in cities like Toronto, Berlin, London etc. We are talking about tens of crores to billions being spent on global marketing in a year. This amount is firstly being spent on subsidising and promoting these exhibitions. Secondly, there are now questions on whether the marketing actually happened or not.
The pictures that have turned out to be fake as well as ones that appear to be real also reveal that the campaigns, costing tens of crores, appear to be weak. Sources familiar with and directly working for advertising companies in Pakistan say that the campaigns appear designed for local consumption – people who see billboards and paid social ads aimed at passersbys rather than the global tech community. “It looks more like the campaign is aiming at an audience to sell them a consumer good product like a shampoo or a soap instead of an IT service.”
Profit asked the advertising agency concerned on the inauthenticity of the pictures. A representative from the company answered that the campaign was real without giving any rational explanation for why the pictures appeared fake. Profit also asked the representative to provide a third party audit report of the advertising campaigns for the government. Profit couldn’t reach out to PSEB to share these findings and ask for an audit report from them. The representative said that he was meeting PSEB officials on Friday after which he would be able to reply to our queries. But Hussain said that it was unlikely even after his meeting with the PSEB that he could share anything with Profit because confidentiality clauses with the client restricted them from sharing any details.
Our understanding is that PSEB officials would have received our queries on the questionable authenticity of their advertising campaign through Saatchi. We will include their version if they choose to give any response.
Visa support as leverage
Beyond inflated costs, there’s another, subtler form of control: visas. International exhibitions require participants to travel and that means securing business visas. For exhibitions officially endorsed by the government, visa facilitation is often coordinated directly through embassies. Participants receive priority processing, letters of support, and diplomatic endorsement. But for independently run exhibitions, no matter how credible, this support is denied.
This gives the official agent an unspoken but powerful tool: exclusivity by restriction for others. Companies may want to join better, cheaper, more impactful exhibitions, but hesitate because visa success isn’t guaranteed. For startups and SMEs, that uncertainty is often enough to walk away.
This isn’t hypothetical. It’s happening. In one case, a Pakistani exhibition organizer had to refund over one crore rupees, nearly $35,000, out of pocket after visa refusals derailed participation. Meanwhile, the official agent continues to run government-backed events that deliver poorer results, face no scrutiny, and still retain monopoly control.
In some cases, independent success has led to outright theft. One organizer, after successfully running an exhibition for two years, was abruptly shut out. The name, target audience, even the format all copied and relaunched by the government’s preferred organizer. Pressure was exerted on the exhibition organizers to cut ties with the original host. A WhatsApp conversation seen by this reporter showed the director of business development at PSEB actively discouraging an exhibition organizer in Singapore to not work with a private company and instead provided an alternative.
Suddenly, the exhibition that had been built from the ground up with relationships, planning, and investment was removed from official support lists and replaced with a government-backed duplicate. This is not a competition. This is erasure.
A system designed to exclude
The problem isn’t limited to one firm or one set of events. It’s a systemic issue. The same agent is repeatedly awarded contracts. They submit “internal lists” to ministries, which become the basis for subsidies, recognition, and visa facilitation. Events that aren’t on these lists don’t exist, at least as far as the government is concerned.
There is no transparency in how events are selected, how much public money is spent, or what value is actually delivered. Audits are either ignored or never conducted. And even when credible organizers present evidence of success photos, feedback, metrics, real industry traction they are quietly removed from official records the following year. Replaced by the same agent.
The possible illegality in London Tech Week 2024-25
For two consecutive years, London Tech Week was listed in PSEB’s annual reports as a key international engagement. But in the most recent cycle (2024–25), the event was conspicuously missing from the official calendar issued by the Trade Development Authority of Pakistan, the very authority responsible for approving such expenditures. Despite this, PSEB went ahead and poured hundreds of thousands of pounds into subsidizing and marketing the event. This was done without the required clearance from TDAP, making the spending not just irregular but legally questionable. The government’s official agent for this exhibition was Dawar Khan.
Despite all of this, the independent organizers persist. With a database of over 9,000 contacts, active marketing, and 10-12 committed IT companies per event, they continue to prove that good work doesn’t need subsidies to survive just fairness.
They charge minimal fees around Rs2-3 lakh per exhibitor, and focus on value, not volume. Their margins are slim but sustainable. They don’t need handouts. They need a level playing field.
If they were offered the same 60% subsidy and visa facilitation that the official agent receives, their events would be nearly free for participants, opening the door for hundreds more Pakistani companies to compete internationally.
But the system isn’t built for equity. It’s built for control.
Senior officials at the PSEB, including Chief Executive Officer Abu Bakar, Chief Marketing Officer Amir Anzur and Director of Business Development Shahbaz Hameed did not respond to Profit’s request for comments on the matter. Instead, Profit has received credible reports that the said team at the PSEB has initiated a cover up to avoid accountability. Profit also reached out to Dawar Khan but received no response.
What needs to happen
The government must issue open RFPs for all subsidized international exhibitions. Let organizers compete on cost, quality, and performance. Publish budgets. Evaluate outcomes. Make it public.
If the goal is to promote Pakistan’s tech sector, visa support should be available for all credible events, not just the ones rubber-stamped by a single gatekeeper. Every rupee spent on subsidizing exhibitions must be accounted for. Let the industry choose where to go. If one organizer consistently delivers better outcomes, they should rise and not be removed from the list.
At stake is not just money, it’s Pakistan’s global image. Every time an inflated, poorly-run exhibition is passed off as “official,” it damages the credibility of our IT sector. It makes us look unserious, unreliable, and politicized.
But there’s another way. One where value is rewarded, not connections. One where public money uplifts the industry, not a monopoly. One where the people building platforms quietly, consistently, with real results are allowed to do what they do best: help Pakistan be seen, not silenced. [/restrict]
