X-Message-Number: 31646 Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:44:55 -0400 From: Subject: Membership Growth: Alcor and the Cryonics Institute One of my least favorite things to do is answer people when they ask me about the differences between Alcor and the Cryonics Institute (CI). Contrary to what anyone might expect, the purpose of this message is simply to recount some facts about membership growth in the two organizations rather than to engage in breast-beating or invidious comparisons. Data on the Alcor website prior to 1990 is better than what is available for CI, and data concerning funded CI Members is only available for the last 3 years. Alcor Members are funded by definition. Alcor annual Membership growth prior to 1983 was in the single digits, and the same can be said for CI annual Membership growth prior to 1994. Alcor's Membership growth had a huge spurt in the early 1990s. With 84 new Members, 1991 is by far the best year for growth in Alcor history. The worst year for Alcor was in 1994 when it had a net loss of 15 Members -- mostly to CryoCare. CI had a small growth spurt in 1994 and 1995 (the only years of double-digit growth before 1998), so CI may have also picked-up some disgruntled Alcor Members at that time. Alcor's annual Membership growth since 1989 has been roughly linear, in the 25-50 range. Surprisingly, the advent of the Internet does not seem to have much affected Alcor's growth rate, in sharp contrast to the situation at CI where there was a very sharp increase in growth rate associated with the Internet. Since 2001 CI's annual Membership growth has been somewhat linear in the 60-70 range. Alcor achieved about half the 2008 year-end Membership in 1998, whereas the half-way mark for CI was in 2003. There was a burst of new Members in 2005 for both Alcor (73) and CI (100), probably associated with a New York Times article. Alcor Membership and CI Membership numbers are not directly comparable, however, insofar as Alcor Members by definition have contracts and funding in place for human cryopreservation. CI Membership, by contrast, only confers the privilege of making cryopreservation arrangements -- whether for pet, human or tissue/DNA. Many people join CI simply to store pets or tissue/DNA. CI statistics distinguishing Members with executed contracts for human cryopreservation (CI-CRYO) only date from 2006, the same year CI began having Insurance-funded Standby and Transport from Suspended Animation, Inc. (SA) as an option for CI Members. Below is a table of annual Membership growth for Alcor -- and different classes of CI Members -- since the year 2000. Year__Alcor_____CI 2000____41_______42 2001____39_______62 2002____44_______63 2003____50_______76 2004____52_______63 2005____73_______100__CI-CRYO_CI-SA 2006____28_______76____40______20 2007____24_______69____37______22 2008____37_______58____36______19 CI_CRYO is a subcategory of CI and CI-SA is the subcategory of CI-CRYO who have made arrangements for Standby and Transport from Suspended Animation. As can be seen, at least half of the new CI Members with executed contracts for human cryopreservation (CI_CRYO) have made arrangements with SA (CI_SA). Although linear annual Membership growth for Alcor and CI is not as good as what we would like to see, it would be naive to imagine that the recent past is a guide to the future. Publicity and key events of various kinds will substantially affect growth rate. Scientific breakthroughs could also significantly affect annual Membership growth. -- Ben Best Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31646