I am very grateful for answers to my questions, but I have the feeling you are using my question as an opportunity to make a statement of your opinion in general.
On the contrary, I consciously gave you suitable search terms for the forum search instead of repeating my words from there here in full text again.
And that is not very helpful and honestly also one-sided, because clearly such projects can also go wrong. But they can also go well.
I cannot see one-sidedness here at all, since I – as always – have pointed out that there are opposing views (and their proponents often also provide reasons, so that one can understand the views of both "factions"). And here opinions specifically differ on whether it is problematic in the end result or not.
But maybe I spoke too Chinese, so you overlooked the clarity of my answers? – I wrote, for example:
Surgically precise excavation with a slope angle of 90° only works in rock soil with the cutting disc, so "practically only in theory at all."
That says in German: Building ground – especially when another load is already pressing from above – does not stand firmly upright if you excavate next to it with zero distance "vertically (i.e. not at all) sloped." Rock would be solid (though at the expense of harder material to cut through), but normal earthy building ground is merely highly tenacious (but still too mobile to stand firm just by strict observation).
So, if you are "only" experienced in house construction and not also in mining, I see in that
that the person building a basement adjoining someone without a basement builds first the central success factor.