X-Message-Number: 9758
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 21:44:58 -0800
From: American Cryonics Society <>
Subject: self insurance

Jim Yount said:

>>Presently, self insurance would divert so much time and energy away from
>>other activities, that it is not a good idea.  When societies have
>>membership bases of thousands of people, not hundreds, we can consider
>>this strategy.

To which Borys Wrobel (in Message #9752) wrote:

>Thats what I suspected, frankly, but my question is then, would not a
>self-insurance scheme bring up the number of members and make the effort
>worthwhile?

Reply:

The insurance companies do a pretty good job of pricing their produce to
produce a small per-policy profit, and to properly account for mortality
and the cost of money.

I don't think we could save enough through self insurance to make much
difference in recruitment.  However, many people may not be aware that they
can pay a relatively small amount to an insurance company (up-front) and be
covered for a lifetime.  Your post helped call attention to that fact.
Perhaps we should publicize (on our web pages and elsewhere) various
cryonic suspension payment plans.  One of the myths that negatively impacts
enrollment is that cryonics is so expensive it is just affordable to the
rich.

Long life,

Jim Yount


=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+American Cryonics Society
(650)254-2001
                      FAX (650)967-4444
P.O. Box 1509
Cupertino, CA 95015
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9758