[ExI] May Cryonics issue

[Keith Henson]

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 2:04 PM,  Rafal Smigrodzki
<rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You are right, David, that the key to success in the cryonics business
> is to drum up more business and reduce waste .... but the devil is in
> the details.

So true.

> Massively (percentage-wise) cutting prices for neuro and
> slightly (again, percentage-wise) increasing prices for whole body
> should definitely achieve both, even if the total average
> per-suspension intake is only slightly increased. Neuro patients are
> more likely to be price-sensitive, so cutting their price will
> increase their numbers.

I would take this with a grain of salt.  Nobody really knows the price
elasticity curve for cryonic suspension contracts, though we could
possibly derive a point or two from the depth of financial catastrophe
it takes for for members to cancel their membership.  I suspect that
the number of people who would sign up if it were free is a small
fraction of the population.

I have no good idea of what a survey would find because I get my
impressions from a rather small sample of people who are far out on
the distribution curve.  That said, I see widespread belief in the
generation of my youngest daughter (who is almost 30) that medical
advances over the next few decades will allow them to live a very long
time.

Just how widespread this belief is would take some survey work.
Figuring out how to convert these people into Alcor members is another
problem, if it can be done at all.

A really interesting project would be to get some of our rich members
to fund a monthly or bimonthly cryonics raffle.  Win the raffle and
you are covered, due and insurance for 2-5 years.  It might give us
some idea of how large or small the population of potential members
are.

Of course for young people stating out with hundreds of thousands of
school debts, the prospect of taking on the expense of cryonic
suspension is not a good one.

Keith