5 January 2026
For a long time, strata management in New South Wales has operated behind complexity.
Not always maliciously.
Not always deliberately.
But consistently.
Layers of jargon, dense contracts, “industry standard” practices, and financial arrangements that many owners corporations struggle to fully understand have become normalised. Complexity has often been mistaken for professionalism. Opacity has too easily been confused with expertise.
That era is coming to an end.
The strata industry is now under genuine scrutiny, and the shift underway is not superficial. It is structural. Expectations are changing, enforcement is tightening, and tolerance for poor disclosure is shrinking. Transparency is no longer aspirational. It is fast becoming a baseline requirement.
This piece is not written to inflame or sensationalise. It is written to clarify. And to explain why a simple poker analogy captures the current moment in strata better than volumes of commentary ever could.
The Comfort of Complexity
At its core, strata management is not meant to be complicated.
A strata manager is appointed to act in the best interests of an owners corporation. That includes administering the scheme, complying with legislation, managing finances responsibly, and exercising honesty, care, and diligence.
Yet over time, parts of the industry have leaned heavily on complexity as a shield.
-
Management agreements that few committee members feel confident interrogating
-
Disclosure statements that technically comply but practically obscure
-
Commission and referral arrangements treated as normal rather than exceptional
-
Supplier relationships that raise legitimate questions about alignment of interests
Owners corporations – made up of people with jobs, families, and limited time – have often assumed that what they were being told was complete and sufficient. In many cases, that assumption was later tested.
This is not a fringe issue. It has been the lived experience of many schemes that only gained clarity after changing managers, challenging invoices, or scrutinising finances during disputes or audits.
Opacity became comfortable.
And comfort bred complacency.
The Shift: Scrutiny Is No Longer Theoretical
What has changed is not public sentiment. It is oversight.
NSW Fair Trading has made it clear that failures around disclosure, conflicts of interest, and duties owed to owners corporations will no longer be dismissed as “industry practice.” Increased regulatory attention is now being applied through the existing legislative framework, most notably the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 and the Strata Schemes Management Regulation 2016.
These laws are not new.
What is new is the seriousness with which they are being examined and enforced.
The underlying message is straightforward:
If a financial arrangement cannot withstand scrutiny, it does not belong in a strata scheme.
For strata businesses built on transparent, fee-for-service models, this environment is overdue but welcome. For others, it represents a fundamental challenge to long-standing commercial structures.
And that is where the poker table comes in.
“If You Can’t Spot the Fish…”
There is an old poker saying:
“If you can’t spot the fish at the table, you’re the fish.”
In poker, the “fish” is the weakest player. Not because they lack intelligence, but because they lack information. They don’t fully understand the game, the odds, or the behaviour of the players around them. Losses occur not through bad luck, but through asymmetry of knowledge.
For years, many owners corporations have unknowingly occupied that position.
They trusted without visibility.
They signed without full understanding.
They accepted complexity as a proxy for competence.
At the same time, some operators understood exactly where the margins sat, how disclosure could remain technically compliant yet practically opaque, and how complexity could discourage deeper questioning.
But the critical part of the analogy is this:
The game has changed.
The lighting is brighter.
The rules are being enforced.
And the players who relied on others not understanding the game are being exposed.
In some cases, those who believed themselves untouchable are discovering they are far more vulnerable than they assumed.
Quiet Conversations and Real Consequences
There are strata business owners who are completely comfortable with this environment. Their disclosures are clear. Their revenue is understood. Their clients know exactly how they are paid.
There are others who are not.
Across the industry, conversations are occurring about audits, compliance reviews, and whether historic practices will withstand regulatory attention. This is not panic. It is recalibration.
History is instructive. Industries that normalise opacity eventually face correction. Financial services did. Construction did. Real estate did. Strata will be no different.
Accountability does not negotiate with ego.
What This Means for Owners Corporations
For owners corporations and committee members, this moment represents something rare: leverage.
Transparency shifts power. It replaces blind trust with informed oversight and enables better governance decisions.
Three practical steps matter now more than ever:
1. Demand Clear Financial Disclosure
Ask, in plain language, how your strata manager is remunerated beyond base management fees. This includes commissions, referral fees, rebates, and incentives connected to suppliers.
Clarity should not require persistence.
2. Read the Agreement as a Governance Document
Because it is one. Understand what services are included, what attracts additional fees, and how financial relationships are disclosed. Independent advice is not an accusation. It is prudent governance.
3. Remember the Relationship
The strata manager is engaged by the owners corporation. Transparency is not a courtesy. It is a duty.
These steps are not adversarial.
They are mature.
What This Means for Strata Managers
For ethical, well-run strata businesses, this environment is an opportunity.
Transparency rewards clarity. It differentiates operators who have always acted openly from those who relied on silence. It levels a playing field that was never truly level.
For others, the message is simple:
Adapt, or accept that the industry is moving on without you.
Reform does not destroy good businesses.
It exposes weak business models.
If profitability depends on clients not understanding how revenue is generated, regulation is not the problem.
Why This Is Bigger Than Strata
This conversation is ultimately about trust.
Communities entrust professionals with their homes, finances, and governance. That trust cannot exist in darkness. It requires transparency, accountability, and a willingness to explain, not obscure.
The poker analogy resonates because it is uncomfortable. Nobody wants to believe they were the fish. But recognising that reality is often the first step to changing outcomes.
Ignorance is not failure.
Remaining ignorant when information is available is a choice.
Final Thoughts
For too long, opacity has been mistaken for sophistication in strata. That confusion is now being corrected.
Transparency is not radical.
It is foundational.
The question for everyone involved – owners, committee members, and strata professionals alike – is no longer whether the game is changing.
It is this:
Are you prepared to play it openly?
Or are you still hoping nobody notices how you’ve been winning?
Call to Action
What has your experience been with transparency in strata management?
Do the current reforms go far enough, or are they just the beginning?
The conversation is open.
And it should have started years ago.
JM
Founder + Managing Director
Bettr Strata