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