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