What does it mean when "podría ser que" is used with the indicative?
I've been looking at examples of the phrase here:
http://context.reverso.net/translati...podria+ser+que
Most of the examples use the subjunctive, which makes sense since "podría ser que" seems to be a phrase of doubt. However, the indicative is used in "Podría ser que está preocupado por usted," and "Podría ser que hemos localizado la obstrucción a tiempo." How does this change the meaning from when the subjunctive is used?
Also, I've been looking at examples of the use of "podría ser mejor si" here:
http://context.reverso.net/translati...a+ser+mejor+si
This phrase is followed by either the indicative or the imperfect subjunctive, which makes sense because of the presence of "si".
Would it be correct to say that when using "podría ser mejor si," si + the imperfect subjunctive is not posing a counterfactual?
"De todos modos, podría ser mejor si no montaras aquí hoy," is translated as
"All the same, it might be best if you didn't saddle up here today."
If I wanted to say, "It would have been better had you not saddled up," would the translation be "Podria haber sido mejo si no montaras"?
If that's the case, is it fair to say there's very little difference between using the indicative and subjunctive after "podría ser mejor si"? That is, the indicative would say, "It might be better if you don't saddle up," whereas the subjunctive would say, "It might be better if you didn't saddle up"?
Thanks