Again, other might feel differently here.b) Skin in the game: as a conservative investor, I understand that the dirty secret of industries that the waterfall compensation is in the line with me and incentivizes sponsors to take more risk.

There’s numbers on a piece of paper that put seller financing in a great light.And then there’s the reality of seller financing being a bet on the buyer managing and maintaining a property well for years or decades while you still have skin in the game.And a bet that the value doesn’t decline by more than the balance of the debt.And a bet that the higher “price” received because of seller financing doesn’t come with opportunity cost in the form of being able to spend or invest the liquidity day 1.And the fact that buyers with seller financing always want better terms than a bank would give them, which is real economics that sellers are far less equipped than banks to estimate risk/reward on.Seller financing is relatively rare.

The seller has an opinion and so do appraisers, but no other skin in the game.

The tenant is a deadbeat lying useless waste of skin.

If a contractor has skin in the game, obviously he will go above and beyond to ensure the project is profitable for himself and the investor. 

The person you spoke with may be referencing earnest money deposit (buyer showing the seller they have skin in the game; this can be refundable or non refundable).Some lenders require an application fee (junk fee) and those lenders typically are more expensive to begin with.

Like a snake shedding its skin, I severed ties with those who drained my spirit and clouded my judgment with their deceit and greed.

That's just how it works when you can't put skin in the game so to speak.

@Andrew Steffens @Jason Wray @Sarah KensingerI appreciate your POV's but you have skin in that game.

Allowed a tenant to pay deposit and first month's rent via nonprofit which meant he had little skin in the game and he became a nightmare.