X-Message-Number: 9598 From: Ettinger <> Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 18:59:39 EDT Subject: 21CM & Other Questions 21CM & OTHER QUESTIONS 1. Saul Kent (#9590) danced around my main question concerning plans of 21st Century Medicine, but did not answer it, so I'll repeat it. 21CM is for profit, so a major aim must (?) be enhancement of shareholder value--making money for the stockholders. Any failure to pursue this might result in shareholder lawsuits. But the operational focus revolves around suspended animation and related research. Kent and Faloon, and presumably other present and future investors, are motivated mainly by the wish to save their own lives through suspended animation. These people, presumably, will tend to want to plough revenues and potential profits back into the research, especially if that research is not advancing as rapidly as hoped. So we have this potential conflict. The profit-oriented investors will want dividends or/and rising share values; those with a focus on their personal life extension will want the research funding given first consideration. How will these disparate aims be reconciled in the 21CM prospectus? Saul probably doesn't know yet, in any detail, but he should have a general idea. To continue to dance around the question and leave the answer vague is not really an option when you are dealing with the SEC and potential lawsuits. Saul speaks of growing revenues from such projects as organ cryobanking, and from cryonics organizations for procedures that are improved even if not perfected. I'll get back to that in a moment; but he also says, "Do you really think Bill and I are satisfied with $1 million a year funding for 21CM? Do you really think we wouldn't like to see it raised to $2 million, $3 million, or $10 million a year?" Yes, I believe they would like to see the much larger amounts raised. That suggests that, if Saul and Bill have the deciding voice, any potential profits will be ploughed back into the research. Are they going to reveal this clearly to prospective investors? To be sure, there exist public for-profit corporations with an ideological focus--environmental or political or whatever--in addition to a commercial one. They attempt a balancing act, but I am not familiar with any that allow ideology actually to outweigh the profit duty to shareholders. The ideology is marginal, not primary. In the 21CM case, the ideology would be central, and clearly in potential conflict with the normal duty to seek profits for the shareholders. 2. Now back to the notion of growing revenues from cryonics organizations for improved procedures. These revenues would presumably come from royalties or fees from BioTransport (BT) which is planned to provide preparation and transport services, initially for CryoCare (CC) and Alcor and later any others that may participate. Well, to begin with, we have an inconsistency between some of Saul's statements. One of his main contentions is that cryonics has a terrible or non-existent product, which accounts for the allegedly moribund state of the program. This rotten product includes the advances (whatever their degree of merit) in previous years by Alcor and BioPreservation (BP). So mere advances that fall short of suspended animation, according to Saul's essay, will NOT have any significant impact on growth of cryonics. Yet now he says, "improved cryonics methodswill lead to major growth in cryonics. [if accompanied by research published in professional journals and a well funded suspended animation program]" That qualification in brackets above hedges Saul's previous statements a bit. He had said that until the product works, forget it. Now he says, well, it doesn't have to work to be beneficial, it just has to impress the right people by pushing the right buttons. There could be some merit in this revised position, certainly--but how much, no one knows. It isn't money in the bank by a long shot. Will the anticipated revenues (both to BT and to 21CM, remember) from improved procedures come from fees paid in advance by organizations or their members? This means immediate hikes in dues or special assessments. Will they pay? Look for dissension and serious problems. Will revenues come indirectly from suspension fees of newly suspended members? Those were not figured into the cost basis of the suspension fees. It seems clear enough that the BT fees will be higher than anything previous, and possibly much higher, and climbing. Who can believe that a reliable stream of new revenues will be the result? Whether BT itself will be viable is another question that I will not pursue here. 3. The Prometheus Project (PP) was originally conceived (firmly) as a for- profit enterprise. Later Paul Wakfer changed his mind and decided that, since money would come anyway mainly from immortalists, it might as well be nonprofit and gain the benefits of that status. Seems to me there is a pretty close parallel with 21CM. If 21CM were to go nonprofit, the "investors" could still benefit financially, indirectly, from any licensing revenues etc., by having 21CM subsidize their organizations, reducing their suspension fees. The details would require a lot of work, but it strikes me as a possibility. 4. I repeat that Saul and others have struck not only an unreasonable and irresponsible note, but also a counterproductive one, in effectively labeling cryonics as a fraud. This stance can only hurt everyone involved, in my opinion, including 21CM. If Saul and associates expect most of us to accept his characterization and also give money to 21CM, he has given new meaning to the term "chutzpah." Robert Ettinger Cryonics Institute Immortalist Society http://www.cryonics.org Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9598