X-Message-Number: 30280
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 12:08:38 -0700
From: "Finance Department" <>
Subject: Dr. Riskin on Alcor Salaries

------=_Part_20393_936360.1199905718201
Content-Disposition: inline

I private emailed Dr. Riskin a copy of my CryoNet Message #30258, in case he
missed seeing it.  He replied with the following material:

On Jan 7, 2008 6:02 PM, <> wrote:

    Here is the information I received from accounting regarding company
salaries:

    2005   9.0 employees $509k total compensation avg $56.6k
    2006 10.5 employees  444k   "               "            "    42.3k
    2007 11.0 employees  478k   "               "            "    43.5k

    As far as the four specific people you named,

    Steve's salary remained unchanged
    Tanya had about a 10% increase
    Joe W was no longer employed
    Michael Riskin had no compensation

In response to the above, I sent him the following:

"I would suspect that the total compensation going down about $14K from 2005
to 2006 would be due to not paying two people as President in the latter
months of 2005 (both you and Waynick). On Steve and Tanya, exact figures for
2006 and 2007 would have been clearer, but I interpret the below to mean
Steve had no increase either year, and that Tanya had 10% over the 2-year
period.  Correct me if I'm wrong."

He made no reply; therefore, we can conclude that he is telling us that Van
Sickle still makes $46,908 as in 2005, and that Jones makes $58997 (10% over
the 2005 figure).  Alcor's forms 990 for the last two years, when they are
available, will be compared against these numbers.

I seriously doubt that the figure for Van Sickle is accurate.  The history
is a little vague in my head, but I think he only worked part of the year
2005, so that figure is probably way lower than his real salary.  Although
it is not unheard of, it is not often that a company president makes less
than its COO.  I sent a followup email to Riskin, which he ignored, asking
the following:

"Since you have not replied to my "opportunity for corrections" email from
yesterday, yet, I wanted to mention that one major confusing issue is with
Van Sickle's salary. Are you saying he is still making $46,908 each year,
2006 and 2007? Way less than Jones? Somehow I doubt this, and wonder if that
2005 figure is for only part of the year. It would be very helpful if you
could clarify that, with exact numbers.

"And is there some reason you did not give me exact numbers for the years
2006 and 2007, for both Van Sickle and Jones, as I requested?"

FD

Footnote:  Dr. Riskin was made aware that I was referencing my public
CryoNet post and that I intended the public to be apprised of his response.

------=_Part_20393_936360.1199905718201

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30280