I would attribute it to different goals, different definitions of diversification, different perceptions of acceptable risk, and different utility functions for success.In other words, there's no absolute right or wrong...just what's right or wrong based on an individual's goals, skills and risk ideals.At least that's my take...

So, it does require that the GC trusts you to some degree.While I don't use lien waivers, I do talk to the subs every chance I get, and I will flat out ask if they're getting paid, if there are any issues with payment (late, checks bouncing, etc), and if they express any concern or indicate that there might be a problem, I'll pull the GC aside and have a chat with him,But, I've only had one problem, and had I been a little more perceptive, I could have avoided it (it was on my second project and I wasn't proactive enough).Also, it's always good to ask the GC (and the subs) if they've worked together before.

My perception has changed greatly in my time living here.

Knowing now that it is possible to post a thousand articles from other sources and perhaps gain several influence points from them effects my perception of influence points accumulated by some members.

As such, I've changed my perception of retirement funds, 401k, etc..

The emphasis is my perception, not Greg's intention.

This seems to be based on differing perceptions of the ability of a person to sustain a loss.

If the buyer perceives they have a deal but will be taken to the cleaners in reality they will buy.If on the other hand they perceive they are being taken when they are not then they will fight you all the way and most likely will not purchase.I always argue it's not about reality it is the perception.

However, if one has not planned ahead for business expenses the overall perception that investors are speculators becomes legitimately cemented.

Hi, Jon is perceptive, know who you are dealing with and watch out for red flags, like a "property churner".