X-Message-Number: 720 Date: 10 Apr 92 03:04:19 EDT From: STEVE BRIDGE <> Subject: Symbex and Scottsdale TO: KEVIN This is in response to questions and comments posed by Michael B. O'Neal in #713 and Steve Harris in #714. Alcor did not put ANY money down on the building in Phoenix (Scottsdale). It is my understanding that Dave Pizer will be putting down an initial $10,000 (his personal funds) to hold the building as soon as the bank can accept it (someone else currently has a hold on the building but is not expected to follow through). I took great pains to point out the following at the meeting Sunday, and I will take the same care here: Alcor does NOT OWN the current building in Riverside and WILL NOT OWN a possible future one in Scottsdale. The current building is owned by a limited partnership named Symbex, Lmtd. The partners are all Alcor members, plus a couple of other organizations with cryonics leanings. Alcor itself, via the Patient Care Fund, is one of the limited partners (not a majority partner but one of the three largest) and Alcor and Cryovita share a LEASE on the building (or perhaps two separate leases). Alcor can decide to sublet the old building to an acceptable lessee; but only Symbex can SELL the building. [By the way of information, I am one of the limited partners in Symbex.] For various reasons, it is highly unlikely that Symbex can be involved in the purchase of a new building, especially one in Arizona, although certainly the individual investors are free to invest in any new partnerships that are formed. The Symbex agreement is very specific for the purchase of the building in Riverside and might not be adaptable for one in another location, especially out-of-state. Nothing prevents Alcor from being one of the limited partners in the new building, as well, if funds can be found or are donated for that specific purpose. It is also high unlikely that the Symbex partnership will be able to roll over any of its money into a new partnership. The only way to do that would be to sell the old building -- but Symbex cannot sell the old building until Alcor moves OUT and into a NEW building. And some partnership already must OWN the new building BEFORE Alcor moves in. Both buildings have to be available to Alcor at the same time, possible for several months. Any move of patients to ANY other building will be expensive, complex, and slow to plan. For safety, and possibly for good management, Symbex may not even wish to sell the old building for a long time after Alcor leaves (all this assuming they really DO leave), in case 1) Alcor has to return, 2) Alcor needs the old building as a Southern California base, 3) some other organization (from a potential new research company to the potential Alcor-Southern California group) wishes to rent it. It seems almost certain that a separate limited partnership must be formed to purchase any new building for Alcor to rent. ***** Overall, after a rough start, the discussion on the proposed move has become more focused on facts and less on personalities. There are many reasons to be cautious about a big, expensive move. But I have confidence that the Board is being careful about gathering the full information needed to make a decision. I was NOT confident of that before the Board Meeting Sunday. It seemed to me that this decision was being rushed through in unseemly and irrational haste. I now attribute this primarily to a failure by the Board of Directors and by President Carlos Mondragon to adequately REPORT the work they were doing to the members at large. I recognize that communications are a burden and that too-early reporting starts rumors and expectations which are hard to live up to. But too-late reporting causes the same problem, since the information can only be sketchy. Most members knew nothing of the possible move until receiving Dave Pizer's mailing a few days (four, in my case) before the meeting. In America, with its less-than-open government, everyone assumes a "plot" or "cover-up" to be a standard operation. I am still neutral on the move, since too many questions remain unresolved. If a poll of the membership at large is indeed being planned, nothing will be served for anyone if the poll is sent out before many of the factual questions (especially the financial, political, and logistic ones) are answered. Steve Bridge Alcor Indiana Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=720