@Steven Stokes I definitely want to move forward with an honest and transparent business plan and keep communication open.

If you are a principal in a transaction, like a lessor, lessee, optionor, optionee, and you are transparent to the owner on your intention, that is the important thing.

That's why we are as transparent as possible when working with another investor.

If you can't keep the deal transparent then you don't have a deal.

The rationale being that trust is built quicker through transparency and freedom than tight lipped negotiations and restrictive contracts.

If that occurs, I'd suggest a borrower to look elsewhere.For most of the upfront fee collectors there is very little transparency.

That for sharing with the group.To extend the conversation a bit.The terms of specific trusts are not transparent to folks here.

The second (postings) was not threatening to my way of thinking, but another strong call for transparency and board/mc help with crime.

Ok Brian, if I was a potential investor I would be happy if I felt everything was transparent and well thought out.I would be scared if I thought things weren't as they seemed and I would be scared if I felt the decision makers didn't have any experience.If I made more than I was promised I'd be happy, if less than not as much.If timelines were kept as promised it would be good.

As leaders in your industry, I would think you'd want to set the standard, be transparent, and use some reasonable assumptions that firms would voluntarily adhere to, perhaps 5-7% for vacancies/leasing costs, 5% for maint/repairs, and 5% for capital reserves (this is actually less than the 20% that Curt states he personally uses).