X-Message-Number: 1659
From:
Subject: CRYONICS Miscellaneous comments (Carlos Mondragon)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:56:36 PST
>To: Cryonet
>From: Carlos Mondragon
>Re: Misc. Commentary
From: Garret Smyth regarding the Omni Contest:
>Who is paying for the prize of a free suspension? Presumably it's Alcor,
>in which case does the suspendee get a share of the patient care fund
>without having to contribute anything, or is the suspension minimum made
>up out of general operating costs?
Alcor's General Operating Fund is paying for the suspension, hopefully by
buying an insurance policy on the winner. If the winner is uninsurable,
then the Operating Fund will pay the up front cost of the suspension and
reimburse the Patient Care Trust Fund for the marginal maintenance costs.
Alcor will be receiving two full page ads in Omni within the 12 months
after the contest (usually these cost $30K each) and an as yet unknown
augmentation of our growth rate as a result of the publicity. See Ralph
Whelan's piece on this in the December issue of Cryonics.
-----
In his history of the Cryonics Society of New York, Mike Darwin wrote:
> What very soon happened was that some of the patient's relatives quit
>paying, payed only sporadically, or argued, bitched, and moaned beyond any
>possible comprehension. These ravings were unequalled in cryonics until
>recently. For those who wish to appreciate their flavor you have only to
>look at what has been posted on this net in the last few months to
>appreciate the sheer mean-spiritedness and gross stupidity. that went on
>at that time.
The first sentence, I know to be true and it makes me especially
curious as to why Saul Kent is now advocating some form of control of
patients by their relatives. Perhaps he will enlighten us soon. As for
ravings on the net, I agree with Perry Metzger that the nature of this
forum nourishes that sort of vitriol. Certainly I am guilty of having
contributed to it; Mike, how about your stuff?
> In some ways the two situations are very close and the ironies are
>not lost on me: the cast of characters was much like it is now. Perhaps
>cryonics attracts such ilk out of proportion: more likely it is the
>phenomenon of the "crud rising to the top." By this I mean that people
>willing to take responsible positions in cryonics are often the least
>qualified to do so. However, those better qualified to, i.e., stable,
>nonsociopathic individuals with sound judgment have too much to lose and
>are unwilling to work for so little remuneration. There are occasional
>exceptions to this: quality individuals with courage and commitment who
>will make sacrifices in taking positions of responsibility. But damn few.
>The result? The crud rises to the top.
The maxim as I first read it was: "Politics is a brew in which the
dregs rise to the top." That is one reason why I (unsuccessfully) opposed
the politicalization of Alcor, and in light of the results I agree with
Mike wholeheartedly.
In his commentary on the Jones Estate litigation, Mike Darwin wrote:
> I would also note that the estimates of the value of the estate which
>formed the basis upon which many decision were made (including outlays for
>legal bills) was flawed. Saul had no way of knowing this at the time, but
>later Carlos Mondragon did. But in the months that followed the
>settlement Carlos relied on the opposition's estimates and made many
>critical decisions for Alcor on this basis. The cost to Alcor of this
>error has been enormous, and in my opinion every bit as financially
>damaging as the "mishandling" of the litigation by Saul. Perhaps the last
>word on this matter should be Carlos': he has stated to me and others on
>more than one occasion that despite Alcor having to pay the legal bills
>for both sides Alcor still got considerably better than half of the
>estate. This was the amount Alcor was first offered by the relatives,
>minus of course the small detail of control of Dick's suspension. Was it
>worth it for that last little detail alone. Hell yes!
This is sort of a "what did he know and when did he know it?"
question. When Saul had no way of knowing the actual value of the estate,
of course neither did I. Later, when I did find out, the entire board
(and Saul) were immediately informed in writing. At no point did I rely
on "the opposition's estimates". Saul, myself, and Alcor's board had
relied on *Dick's* estimates which had been consistent going back to when
Mike and Andy Potter helped him establish his original estate plan in late
1986. There were two parts to the Jones estate: the "date of death
assets", and future income derived from residuals on intellectual
property. It was the latter that was overestimated by everyone, including
Dick. The only "cost to Alcor" was our having to redo financial
projections, since at that time we had in no way encumbered the
erroneously projected future income stream. The final settlement was not
an even split with the family. Since they had also made the same error,
we succeeded in negotiating a settlement which gave Alcor all of the date
of death assets and split only the future income. This is why I have said
that we "got better than half the estate". In fact, to date we've
collected about 80% to their 20%. Certainly I agree with Mike that the
litigation was worth it to get control of Dick's suspension, and I've
recently put it in the magazine that Saul had my full support at the time.
But had I known then what I know now (i.e. my accumulated experience and
knowledge of the rather arcane world of estate litigation), certainly I
would have done things differently and advised Saul to change course as
well. What worries me is that Saul has consistently written things to the
effect that he learned nothing and would do the same all over again.
-------
In his tirade on the failed attempt to move to Arizona last summer, Mike
Darwin wrote (refering to his Symbex experience):
> The prospectus for purchase of the building was a small book running
>52 pages in length. Every major (and minor) concern was addressed. We
>raised the money in big and small chunks. But still it took time -- a
>couple of months in fact. The building was the envy of the cryonics
>community at that time.
Ahem, Mike several of us know that that prospectus of yours was about
90% copied from a prospectus for a limited partnership in a Taco Bell
franchise. Nothing wrong with that, had we taken the limited partnership
route, no doubt we would have used similar boiler plate.
Mike goes on to deride Dave Pizer's fundraising ability. I must
point out that Dave raised nearly a quarter of a million dollars in less
than two weeks. To the best of my knowledge, no one in the history of
cryonics has done as well for any single project in any length of time.
As for the rest of what Mike said on this subject, I suggest that a
much more accurate history of events is obtainable by looking at the
traffic on this net at the time and judging for oneself.
--------
Michael Riskin's posting on the 18th was amusing, gratifying,
embarrassing, and hopefully inspiring. My reply,
*** Yes Michael, I do indeed "sometimes open mouth before engaging brain
and say something inappropriate."*** Much of my job has been to
communicate and unfortunately, not everything I say can be a gem of
wisdom. Soon I'll have a lot more time and a lot less pressure, so I'll
try to do better. But since I'm not a politician and I don't like
politics, don't expect me to pull *all* my punches ;-).
Thanks,
CM
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1659