$15M
Target fund size Proposed
Thesis & Fund I
A proposed $15M first fund for Pakistani software.
Pakistan has exported engineering for twenty years and captured the margin of an hourly rate. The next decade belongs to teams that keep the equity instead.
The argument
Sell the product, not the hour.
Every part of the thesis follows from one observation: the country's engineering capacity is proven and its ownership of the output is not.
Pakistan's IT export line is measured in billions of dollars a year, and almost all of it is services. Services revenue is linear, capped by headcount and priced against the cheapest comparable bench in the world. It builds skill without building assets.
Product revenue behaves differently. It compounds, it carries a multiple, and it accrues to the people who own the company rather than the people who bill for it. The bench that can build it already exists. What has been missing is the first institutional cheque and the operating detail around it.
| Dimension | Services | Product |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue shape | Linear with headcount | Compounds |
| Gross margin | 25–40% | 70–85% |
| Priced against | The cheapest bench available | The value delivered |
| Who owns the upside | The client | The founders |
| Exit multiple | Low single digit | Revenue multiple |
Hours
Product
Margin
Equity
Underwriting
Five questions we have to answer yes to.
The test exists to stop us funding a good team with no path to a second cheque. A no on any one of these is usually a no overall.
| Proof | The question |
|---|---|
| Hard currency | Is there a credible buyer paying in dollars, pounds or dirhams within twelve months? |
| Unfair build | Does building from Pakistan make this materially cheaper or faster, rather than merely possible? |
| Reachable buyer | Can this team reach the buyer without a sales office in the buyer's city? |
| Narrow wedge | Is the first version small enough to ship in weeks and specific enough to be chosen? |
| Structural clarity | Can the company be held, funded and eventually acquired through a structure a foreign investor recognises? |
Proposed Fund I
Small, concentrated, and early.
Figures below are the fund we are building toward. Nothing here is committed capital.
$50–250K
First cheque Proposed
20–25
Companies over the fund life Proposed
40%
Reserved for follow-on Proposed
We expect to lead or co-lead the first institutional round, take an information right rather than a board seat at pre-seed, and reserve materially more per company than we invest initially. Ownership targets are a consequence of that construction, not a rule we apply to a founder.
Risks
What would make this thesis wrong.
We would rather state these plainly than be asked about them in a first meeting with a limited partner.
Currency and transfer risk
Rupee volatility and repatriation friction affect valuations and exits. We mitigate through offshore holding structures, not by ignoring it.
A thin follow-on market
If Series A investors do not engage with the region, our companies stall at a stage we cannot fund alone. Reserves and early co-investor relationships are the answer.
Talent leaving
The same engineers we back are recruited abroad at multiples of local pay. Equity has to be real, and vesting has to be honest.
Perception discount
Some buyers and investors discount the country regardless of the company. Product quality and reference customers are the only durable rebuttal.
Policy and connectivity
Internet disruption and regulatory change are real operating risks for a software company here.
Too few fundable teams
The thesis needs enough product-minded founders each year to build a portfolio. If that number is smaller than we believe, the fund is the wrong size.
Does your company pass the five?
If you can answer all five, we want the conversation. If you can answer four, we still want it — tell us which one is missing.