Its interesting how many raise a question of ethical behaviour in relation to these types of transactions. It prompts me to ask two questions:

1. Why the (unspoken) assumption that the ‘advantaged’ party has somehow a greater knowledge and awareness of the risks and is therefore unfairly treating the other? One would hope that (in a well constructed deal) ALL parties are aware of the possible pitfalls and have accepted their share of risk. In this case, ethical behaviour is not a factor.

2. What is the difference, in terms of risk and obligation, between this and other forms of ‘middle man’ transactions? I think the only difference is that it’s relatively new and so people may be tempted to be suspicious of it.

Steve