Does a property joint-venture need one dominant partner?

[nmb]

Some investors are leaders and some are followers which can make it difficult to make a property joint-venture work. However, as long as each partner brings in specific skills, whether this is finance or experience, there is no reason why it should not work. Even though all partners should have a say in the final investment decisions each partner should perhaps have more say in areas of their expertise.

Does a joint-venture partner need some kind of leader?

 

[FWL]

Personally, I think the word "dominant" should be replaced by "a lead party" whereby all parties still have a say in strategy but maybe the instigator of the project leads the way? As a sidenote, it is important that all details are covered in the initial legally binding joint-venture agreement so there are no misunderstandings.

 

[Longterminvestor]

Generally there seems to be one lead party in a joint venture and one which is more predominantly focused on finance. While this is not always the way, whatever the setup there is a need for each individual party to bring something different to the arrangement. If both parties have the same strengths then it will be costly to bring in others to fill areas where there is limited experience/weakness. So, no dominant party but I agree there may well be a leading party.