Re: PAM

[krandall@world.std.com]

At 09:11 AM 10/21/99 -0400, Robert P. Cashin wrote:
>       At last, we have a decision, we are unanimously in favor of PAM.  Now,
>the next decision is "Do we want to invest in PAM, and if so, how much?"
>
>       To review, a zero investment would give us zero influence on policy and
>content.  

I don't believe that a zero investment equals zero influence.  PAM needs
_us_ too.  We will turn over our members to PAM as subscribers, and will be
paying part of our dues toward the magazine.  This is a pretty hefty slice
of influence.  

>An investment around $3000 would make us a majority share
>holder and give us the maximum influence, but still not control, we have
>to allow the editor some leeway and he probably wants a lot.  An
>investment in between would give in between influence.

I have come to feel that it would be best for AGA and PAM to have a
consumer/service provider relationship, at least at this point in time.
The more I think about it, the less I think that AGA would be able to
continue it's majority shareholder position until the magazine actually is
running in the black.  

I think that AGA has a lot to offer PAM and vice versa.  An arms length
distance might make it easier for us to make decisions.  If we are _really_
unhappy with how things are going, (and I don't think we will be) we can
always, with notice, just withdraw from the project.  Then we could go back
to publishing a hobby journal that we felt was a better fit for our
members.  If we have a large amount of money invested, this is a much
harder decision to make.  

While it would be nice if PAM takes off like a rocket, and runs in the
black very quickly, I don't know that that is a realistic expectation.
Will we be happy if we've invested as much as we can and we _still_ can't
maintain our majority stock holder position?

Karen