Bayim Olur musun? fair puts the focus on visitors with investment intent

Özhan Erem, founder of the Bayim Olur musun? franchise fair and chairman of Medyafors, has said the event’s priority is not simply to increase visitor numbers. In an interview with Hibya News Agency, Erem emphasised bringing visitors who intend to invest together with franchisors for productive discussions. His comments offer a concrete starting point for debate within Turkey’s franchise community about what businesses and investors should expect from attending a fair.

Looking beyond visitor numbers

According to a summary of the interview published by Hakkarihaberler.com.tr on 26 September 2026, Erem discussed his nearly 40 years of experience in exhibitions and specialist publishing, the launch of Expo Channel and changes within the franchise community. The standout message in the summary, however, concerned the fair’s approach to visitors.

The central aim Erem described is not simply to attract more people to the venue, but to create a setting for productive discussions between prospective investors and franchisors. The distinction matters: visitor numbers indicate an event’s reach, while the emphasis on investment intent introduces a different measure, concerned with the purpose of those discussions.

This does not mean visitor numbers are unimportant. Rather, Erem stressed that numerical growth should not be treated as the sole objective. The story is therefore not about a new attendance record or an announcement of signed agreements, but about how the organiser approaches meetings between brands and investors.

What do the comments tell us — and what remains unclear?

The available interview summary sets out the kind of engagement the fair aims to encourage, but provides no figures on the results. It does not disclose visitor numbers, a breakdown of investor profiles, the number of meetings held or the number of franchise agreements signed after the event. The comments should therefore not be read as a report of commercial success already achieved.

Nor does the summary explain how visitors with investment intent are identified. It gives no details of application screening, budget verification, advance appointments or dedicated matchmaking arrangements. On the evidence available, Erem’s remarks express the organiser’s priority; they do not establish that a particular screening or verification system is in place.

The summary also omits the fair’s dates, venue, list of exhibiting brands and participation requirements. This article should therefore not be treated as an announcement of new event dates or an invitation to apply. It is based on the founder’s comments about the quality of contact between investors and brands.

These limitations put the comments in context rather than diminish their value. Separating an objective from measured results allows members of the franchise community to assess the organiser’s message more clearly and identify what further information they need before deciding to attend.

Preparing for meetings: a perspective for franchisors

One practical takeaway for brands is that preparation for a fair should go beyond visibility alone. This is not a new service or requirement announced in the interview, but a suggestion about how exhibitors might respond to the stated aim of facilitating meetings with prospective investors.

Clearly setting out the expected investment, the franchisee’s responsibilities and the support available before a meeting can help candidates compare an opportunity with their own circumstances. Explaining what information will be shared afterwards and how the assessment process will proceed can also prevent the initial contact from remaining inconclusive.

The aim should not be to steer every visitor straight towards signing an agreement. Establishing whether the candidate’s expectations align with the brand’s is a more cautious starting point. A meeting at the fair can be treated as an opportunity to exchange information and agree on the next steps in due diligence.

Another useful question for brands is how to assess the value of a meeting. Collecting contact details is not the same as having a two-way discussion about investment requirements. Erem’s emphasis on looking beyond volume provides a framework for considering that distinction, although the available material does not explain which assessment methods brands actually use.

Attending with specific questions: a perspective for investors

For prospective investors, the practical implication may be to clarify expectations before attending. Identifying the available budget, preferred city, intended role in running the business and documents needed to make a decision can make it easier to compare discussions with different brands.

At an initial meeting, it is useful to request written information on what the initial investment covers, ongoing fees, training support, supply arrangements and the main contractual obligations. These are not participation requirements announced by the fair, but questions candidates can use to structure their own assessment.

Erem’s message places the value of a franchise fair beyond the size of the crowd. Turning those meetings into an investment decision still requires further information gathering, financial assessment and a review of the contract. Practical takeaway: Attend not just to discover brands, but with specific questions whose answers you can compare. Treat the first meeting as the start of due diligence, not the point at which to make a final decision.