Originally posted by @Nick B.:
@Charles Seaman, they can charge what they want but I find this fee to be unfair.
In the beginning of my career, I used to think the same way, and on the first couple of syndications, I pegged asset management fees to revenue. However, then reality happened and caused me to rethink this approach.
This asset management fee pays for what? For asset management, which means it basically pays for operations overhead, salaries, software, etc.
Well, when things are running well, no one cares. But, when things turn sideways, you realize in a hurry that you wish you had more budget to hire more people, better people, more software, etc. When the revenue comes down, the last thing you want to be is hamstrung on the money you can throw at the issue. This is very similar to having reserves.
Granted, WhiteHaven may well be one of the more expensive sponsors out there. But, what we do is hard and very dynamic, and I wouldn't do it without being able to make plenty of money for myself and have plenty more for operations. I pay my office staff well, and I pay my construction guys more than most, which is why things run like they should and investors make money, which is the whole point.