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