X-Message-Number: 6494 From: Peter Merel <> Subject: Pricing Prometheus Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 23:13:54 +1000 (EST) Ken Stone wrote, >The answer: that provider should own 100% of Prometheus in order to >do this. Granting royalty-free use to any cryonics companies would >erode the financial interests of all other shareholders. Proceeds >deriving from Prometheus should be split equally amongst all >of its investors. Anything else is a form of fraud, even when it >is legally acceptable. Fraud is definitely too strong a word to use here, but this is an issue worth discussing. I guess the trouble is that any org that can use the technology royalty-free has a pricing leg-up on the other orgs, which may make things less competitive if the cryonics industry ever gets off the ground. On the other hand, such an incentive might be just what's needed to get the suspension orgs to part with their cash, and that cash is, I guess, sorely needed to get prometheus off the ground. But I should think that prometheus should be of vital concern to all the orgs regardless of this incentive - after all, if an org didn't own shares in the thing, they'd certainly be in trouble on two fronts; firstly they'd be giving up what may be a tremendous future source of funds, and secondly they'd be pretty much admitting that they had no real interest in doing their best to make cryonics actually succeed. So, although I disagree with Ken's terminology, I think I agree with his reasoning - no freedom from royalties unless you buy the whole kit and kaboodle. Greg Stock wrote, >One additional point: A few days ago Paul Wafker wrote something to the >effect that pledgors would be allowed to increase their pledges in the >future, and thus purchase more shares if they saw fit AT THE ORIGINAL SHARE >PRICE. I don't know if Paul actually said the capitalised bit - it was my idea that today's minimal pledgers be permitted to increase their holding at a latter time ... but I agree that pricing the thing is quite problematic, so maybe this one isn't such a good idea, at that. Peter Merel. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=6494