X-Message-Number: 2382 Date: 08 Aug 93 15:54:33 EDT From: "A.J. Clifford" <> Subject: CRYONET : Acoma Building I would like to thank Ralph and Brenda for sending their letters detailing the options regarding the proposed Alcor move to Arizona. Since the opinions of Alcor members on this side of the Atlantic have been invited we would like to comment and perhaps contribute to the overall debate. There is a lot of merit in both proposals and the subject was discussed at the recent (Aug 1st) Alcor U.K. meeting. It must be said that no one point was unanimously agreed upon (except the fact that moving from Riverside is a very good idea). Moving from the L.A. area does have two downsides. It means leaving (one of?) the greatest concentration of suspension members behind; and for overseas members the convenience of an international airport behind. Nevertheless almost everyone liked the Acoma building and are keen to see more information about it. We also thought that the Comos proposal has enormous potential and should be investigated but not to the exclusion of the Acoma building purchase. Both proposals are not mutually exclusive. It was suggested that Alcor should purchase the Acoma building and promptly move in while maintaining a developing partnership with the Comos. *If* the Comos building is built two or three years later Alcor could move into that - which should be the last move required of it - and sell the Acoma building or rent out the 3 units that it would have been occupying. Relocating elsewhere in the same suburb at leisure is no problem at all. Alcor would be renting 8 units of the Acoma building and it has been pointed out on Cryonet that the board has no experience of commercial letting. This is not an issue as a management agency can be engaged who would be entirely responsible for the tenants in exchange for commission off the rent earned. It may be a good idea, if Alcor relocates out of California to publically commit itself to eventually opening a small office with an emergency response vehicle somewhere in the middle of California. This could not be done for a few years but should be feasible when Alcor is large enough. Speaking for myself I do not see why the P.C.T.F. cannot invest *some* of its money in real estate. This is a universal, conservative and sensible investment which every house-owner can attest to. Best Regards, Andrew Clifford. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=2382