X-Message-Number: 3138
Subject: CRYONICS:Unbundling (part 2)
From: (Charles Platt)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 02:15:25 EDT
At the risk of becoming tiresome on this topic, I went and
tracked down the original proposal by Mark Voelker for
unbundling a cryonics organization (in this case, Alcor).
Since Mark had given extensive thought to this concept and
had spent weeks, perhaps months, developing it, his text here
is considerably more detailed and comprehensive than most
CryoNet posts, and is worth "reprinting" for that reason
alone. I trust no one will object to my quoting Mark's text,
since it was posted here originally and is still retrievable
in full.
Please note, I have no idea whether Mark is *currently* in
favor of the unbundling concept, and I am using his text
because it is the clearest presentation of the concept
that I have seen.
------------
> Date: 13 Oct 1992 13:12:40 -0700 (MST)
> From:
> Message-Subject: unbundling, splitting, structure of Alcor
> A SUGGESTED STRUCTURE FOR ALCOR
>
> <preamble omitted>
>
> 1) Alcor is operating in an increasingly competitive environment.
> The cryonics industry is growing rapidly and new organizations are
> appearing on the scene that will compete with us.
>
> 2) Alcor is operating in a hostile legal and regulatory
> environment. Although we have won many legal challenges to our
> existence in the past, we are still small and so are not attracting
> much attention. We must be prepared to survive, and above all to
> protect our members in suspension, as we begin to be taken
> seriously by our adversaries.
>
> 3) Alcor needs to conduct expensive, risky research and development
> to advance the technology of cryonic suspension.
>
> 4) Alcor's suspension operations are highly visible both to our
> members and to others not so sympathetic to our cause. Suspension
> operations are also expensive and those expenses tend to be highly
> unpredictable, as demonstrated by the recent Boston suspension.
>
> 5) Alcor's staff is compensated at well below market rates, and
> cannot look forward to a big payoff in the future because Alcor is
> organized as a nonprofit corporation. Much of our business is
> conducted by volunteers, yet we need to attract talented
> professionals from the highly paid medical and scientific
> communities to perform the technically demanding tasks required to
> make Alcor succeed.
>
> 6) Alcor is in a cash crunch now, but if growth rates are
> maintained at past levels, economies of scale will help alleviate
> this problem. But maintaining these growth rates depends on
> Alcor's continued technical and managerial leadership.
>
> 7) If Alcor fails, that failure will be catastrophic: the patients
> will be lost.
>
> The above considerations make the following proposal worthwhile to
> consider: That Alcor be split into two separate organizations, one
> providing patient care, and in the future reanimation, and the
> other providing suspension services and performing the rest of
> Alcor's functions. This structure for Alcor would provide important
> protection for our patients without reducing our ability to compete
> in the risky, fast moving, interactive arena of suspension services
> and marketing. Furthermore, the two organization could have
> different structures and policies that would allow them to optimize
> their operations in both fields simultaneously. For instance, the
> Patient Care organization could remain as a non-profit corporation,
> but the Suspension Services company could be a for-profit
> corporation, allowing it to attract capital to stay ahead of the
> competition.
>
> Advantages of this arrangement
>
> *The Patient Care Organization would remain insulated from the
> risks and liabilities of the Suspension Company.
>
> *The Suspension Company could be more aggressive in pursuing its
> goals and competing in the marketplace, without increasing the risk
> to the patients.
>
> *The Suspension Company, as a for-profit corporation, could seek
> outside capital to maintain its technological leadership and as a
> joint stock company could provide incentives now lacking for its
> hardworking staff.
>
> *The Patient Care Organization could concentrate on serving the
> needs of the patients and their relatives, and on managing its
> assets conservatively for the long term.
>
> *The Suspension Company could emphasize the needs of the members,
> who tend to be demanding and vocal.
<Additional elaboration of these concepts omitted>
#####################################################################
Charles Platt / 1133 Broadway (room 1214) / New York / NY 10010
/ phone 212 929 3983
[ FYI: The excerpt above is from message #1301. - KQB ]
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3138