b'pay the asset manager along the way, or at least within a couple of years (and more than just asset management fees), is a recipe for a languishing investment. Investors shouldnt want this, and you shouldnt offer it. Its your job to educate them as to why its in their best interests for you to earn distributions during ownershipand not just on sale.3.A third model that often fails is trying to tailor your returns to individual investorsthis is a rookie mistake; just dont do it. These are take-it-or-leave-it offerings. Youve done the due diligence and the analysis; you know what will work for the long-term and for all investors, dont let a few bullish investors try to influence you or make you carve out special deals for themunless they are bringing in a significant amount of money that you cant raise any other way; or if they want to provide an additional service, such as co-guaranteeing a loan, or introducing you to all of their wealthy friends.4.A fourth model I have seen gives asset managers carte blanche abilities to unilaterally change the terms of an offering, and power of attorney over every investor to force them to go along. This is a dangerous position for investors, because there is nothing to stop a bad asset manager from completely changing the terms of the deal to which investors originally agreed. Investors should beware of offerings that have such provisions, and you shouldnt give yourself that much power. This too is a recipe for disaster as you may eventually succumb to the temptation to write yourself a bigger part of the deal, to the detriment of your investors, and your reputation.219'