I.e people are willing to accept a negative real return in return for safety (or more correctly, perceived safety).

I used to sit on their safety council as a subcontractor.

Federal Pacific and Zinsco are no longer made, but I think Zinsco might have been bought by Sylvania, then maybe GE.I've never had either of the above fail.Even though neither are not made the US Government could still recall the product if the Consumer Product Safety deemed them hazardous.

Hi Josh,ARM loans can be very dangerous, particularly when investing.

And no conventional 30 yrs, just 5 yr ARM.

If you are not an attorney, don't go there.Assuming you make a loan and you want some equity position, you will need to make the loan to/through a business entity through the capital structure and join the entity for the equity shared, that doesn't mean you must be in title, see your attorney to structure such an arrangement.Another way is for you to earn your equity under seperate agreement to provide some other function at arm's length.

Construction management should not be an issue within FAB between cells.And, Lamar is at arm's length, he is not a lender but owner and is entitled to interest (or equities) in Cell One as well as an equity split as a mamber in Cell A.

Also they need to provide you with proof of funds from their bank account or an HML lender.If they are a real buyer they will oblige for safety reasons and just tell them it's your companies policy.

Ce Mill,Do the "upgrades" have anything to do with health or safety, or are they simply cosmetic or function?

I would be selling services on an arm's length basis.For D, I wouldn't be transferring plan income.For E, I wouldn't deal with the income or assets of the plan.For F, there is an exception for "the prohibitions ... shall not apply to (2) any contract, or reasonable arrangement, made with a disqualified person for office space, or legal, accounting, or other services necessary for the establishment or operation of the plan, if no more than reasonable compensation is paid therefor"--which would seem to apply.Am I missing something or just reading it wrong?