@Jeff GreenbergI understand and agree with you to a point, I don't fret over deal sponsor compensations so much. If I saw a deal like your example come across, I'd consider that a home run, but something that sounds more risky, and I'd want to know more about that deal sponsor, and what percent voting rights each person had, in case something went wrong. I'm assuming you have a great relationship with this sponsor. But I wouldn't assume that all of the passive investor out there that are getting into the business have that same kind of relationship established yet.
These syndications I'm involved with, have 5-40 investors per deal. Each investor does need to determine what and who they are comfortable with investing in. Part of my reason for personally not wanting anybody in a deal to have more than 20%, has to do with SEC Rule 506, "Bad Actor Disqualification" instances. If we have a sponsor, and he doesn't perform, we want to be able to vote him out as the asset manager. I've seen a case where the lead sponsor, mis-managed the asset, and put the asset in danger of foreclosure, when the bank called the other KP's and let them know. Luckily they were able to vote him out as the asset manager, and save the property, ultimately selling the assets and making the investors returns. I'd have to be super comfortable with a sponsor taking 50% if they had more voting rights than the other investors. I'm no lawyer, but this is some things they bring up to me.
I've not seen any apartment deals come across yet, where they are projecting such high returns in 18 months. Not to say they aren't out there, but I have only been investing in MF for one year. Each market is different.
I'm working on getting my own deal, putting out offers currently and will be leading a deal someday soon hopefully. I'm still fairly new to apartment investing, just over a year into it and have been a passive or Key Partner in 5 deals, in three states, and 633 doors. I'm still a newbie I guess though. Still have lots to learn. Cheers!