How a Contractor Spotted “Ghost Manufacturers” Before ConExpo

A large international infrastructure contractor preparing lists of potential vendors for three upcoming projects found a relatively silent risk. Many exhibitors at ConExpo Las Vegas referred to themselves as “manufacturers,” but were actually distributors, traders, or white-label sellers. There was no clear indication of their true business model based on the public directory.

The difference between a manufacturer and a non-manufacturer had significant implications for large EPC projects. Contracts required suppliers to provide direct control over manufacture, engineering support, and direct warranties. If the client misidentified these requirements, they would need to restart their procurement process after the event.

Client Profile

The client was a multinational infrastructure contractor responsible for qualifying vendors for multiple projects. Their goal at ConExpo Las Vegas 2026 was to find exhibitors who:

• Controlled their own production processes.
• Were capable of modifying products to meet specific requirements.
• Were responsible for providing product warranties directly.
• Had their own engineering staff to respond to site changes.
  

Problem

Public listings treated “manufacturer,” “supplier,” and “solutions provider” as equivalent terms. This created three challenges:

• Trading companies appeared on the same technical shortlist with true manufacturers.
• Distributors without engineering expertise were assessed for custom production.
• At final negotiations, there was a lack of clarity as to which company held the warranty obligation.

These issues resulted in two prior project contract failures and the need to re-tender, causing construction delays. The client needed to differentiate between those who produced their own products and purely commercial intermediaries.

Solution

Exhibitors Data used the “Description of the Company” field to determine capabilities. For each exhibitor, the dataset was reviewed for:

• Explicit mention of production facilities.
• Reference to in-house engineering or fabrication.
• Indicators of private-label or distribution-only operations.
• Authority to deliver products versus acting as a representative.

Exhibitors were categorized as: Direct Manufacturers, Contract Manufacturers, Regional Distributors, or Trading/Brokerage Firms. The client then updated their meeting list to include only those with verified production control.

Results

• 40% of intermediate-type companies were removed from the initial shortlist.
• Companies that were not truly manufacturers did not enter the technical evaluation phase.
• Time required to verify vendor qualifications was reduced by weeks.
• Two ongoing projects experienced reduced delays related to requalifying suppliers.
• Procurement shortlists were immediately accepted by engineering and legal departments.

The client eliminated shortcomings prior to engaging in any discussions at ConExpo Las Vegas.

Key Takeaways

• Supply chain roles are not clearly identified in exhibitor categories.
• “Manufacturer” does not always mean the same thing as manufacturer.
• Production authority is more clearly identified in company descriptions than in directories.
• Exhibitor data becomes strategic when it validates capability, not just identity

Request Your Verified ConExpo Las Vegas 2026 Exhibitor List