X-Message-Number: 9749
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 02:58:06 -0400
From: Saul Kent <>
Subject: Forprofit Vs Not Forprofit

        I believe the recent discussion on
Cryonet of the relative virtues of forprofit and
not forprofit companies in cryonics has not
been especially relevant to the issues
at hand.

        I agree with Thomas Donaldson
(9740) that a forprofit company works best
in a rapidly growing market, but I do not
neccesarily agree that a forprofit is "unlikely 
to work well" in today's very low growth 
cryonics market.

        In such a market, the only 
people likely to buy stock in a forprofit
cryonics company are hard-core
cryonicists.  Such shareholders are
unlikely to compromise patient care
in the quest for profits.

        However, when the cryonics
market begins to grow, the advantages
of a forprofit company (the possibility of
profit for investors) will then be able to
take effect.

        On the other hand, one of the
likely consequences of rapid growth in
cryonics is likely to be concern on the part
of the public, the media and the legislature
over the inability of many people to afford
cryonics.  In such an environment, a not
forprofit company might be advantageous
over a forprofit.

        When the cryonics movement
begins to grow rapidly, I believe a mix of
forprofits and not forprofits will develop
that will be appropriate to the growth of
the market.  I, therefore, believe it is
appropriate to have *both* forprofit and
not forprofit companies today.

        The key issue today, I believe,
is not whether a company is forprofit or
not forprofit, but whether the company
has good management.

---Saul Kent, CEO
21st Century Medicine

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9749