The Futuro House

The photo to the left is of a Futuro Corporation Of Colorado Stock Offering Prospectus (pdf). Though undated the contents suggest it is from late 1970.

The Futuro Corporation Of Colorado was incorporated 011269 and at the time the document was published the company principles were Charles Cleworth (President), John Lawrence (Executive Vice President) and Bryant Baker (Vice President & General Manager). The company's architect was David Decker.

The document presents an interesting history of the company. Cleworth and Lawrence were publisher and editor respectively of the magazine Plastics World and in the October 1968 issue of the magazine a photo of a Futuro was published. This resulted in large numbers of people writing to the magazine for information and as a result Charles Cleworth contacted Polykem only to find that US rights were already held by the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia (many other documents relating to discussions between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado can be found in the archive including a 120470 package sent to Cleworth that included an offer to enter into a licensing arrangement with Polykem for the manufacture and marketing of the CF-100 and Cf-45 Venturo in the US since the Futuro rights were held by the Futuro Corporation of Philadelphia).

Charles Cleworth then started a dialogue with Leonard Fruchter, President of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia which led to Cleworth and Lawrence being granted sales and marketing rights for Colorado and Utah with the possibility of future expansion into Montana and Wyoming. The plan involved the Futuros being manufactured in New Jersey by the Futuro Corporation of Philadelphia and then shipped to Colorado.

The Futuro Corporation Of Colorado went to work marketing the Futuro House and they interested May-Daniels & Fisher, at the time Denver's largest department store in the Futuro House. The store wanted to display a Futuro in front of their main downtown store in late summer 1969. Though a Futuro House was expected to be delivered in time for this display to take place it never came.

After several months without a Futuro House (for which a deposit had been paid) being delivered to the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado the company was invited to display a Futuro at the Colorado Garden & Home Show in Denver in February 1970 (there is an original Press Photo relating to this event in our collection of "Things Futuro"). Leonard Fruchter was approached again and the Futuro Corporation of Philadelphia agreed to deliver a Futuro in time for this show. Again the Philadelphia Company failed to deliver and a small model was displayed at the show instead.

The Colorado company believed several potential sales were lost as a result and ultimately the relationship between the companies ended when it became apparent that Leonard Fruchter was really only interested in a franchising model and that was not the business model Charles Cleworth and his team was interested in.

That said the Colorado company believed that the work they had done so far had clearly demonstrated a market for Futuro and so they began to consider how they might "go it alone". The company proposed to go with a design a little different from the Finnish original (which they felt was a little too small) and so, with the help of their architect, David Decker, they came up with a design "substantially larger" that could accommodate six adults and three children in a "loft arrangement". There is no indication in the prospectus of the dimensions of the "new" design. The intention was to construct their own molds and, at the time the prospectus was published, those molds had been completed.

The prospectus does contain a plan showing the Elevation, Section and Floorplan for the Futuro but the plan is without details and there are no dimensions noted. The prospectus also includes a series of photographs depicting the construction of the master molds through the partial assembly of the first unit.

The prospectus indicates that there had been significant interest in the Futuro mentioning inquiries from a developer who wanted 100 units, a motel owner wanting 30 and a second developer wanting 20. There were doubts about the ability to produce in such numbers and no promises or deals had been made.

As well as containing a final copy of the Stock Offering Prospectus it was interesting to find in the archive the original "template" pages from which the document was put together. In this age of digital imaging and everything done on a computer it is fascinating to look back to the beginning of the 70's and see documents put together by typing text on a page and then taping the photographs to be included to that page. The images below show some of the template documents from which the final prospectus was made.


Eppich confirms the bankruptcy filing of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia and provides the filing number along with contact information for the court appointed Receiver and attorneys for both Fruchter's company and the Receiver. Eppich also explains a little of how Chapter 11 bankruptcy works.

As far as the status of Polykem's licensing agreement with the Philadelphia company is concerned Eppich indicates he cannot answer Olander's questions but he goes on to suggest that likely the court appointed Receiver would be obliged to answer the questions and Eppich suggests that Polykem contact the Receiver. Unsurprisingly there is nothing in the archive to indicate whether or not Polykem pursued this recommended course of action.


In this 111770 letter Charles Cleworth indicated to C.J. Olander that he was looking forward to seeing Polykem's "new design" and also to receiving a business proposal.

In this 113070 wire (pdf) Olander indicated "architectural renderings" and a draft contract would be sent by the end of that week.

A short response from Cleworth can be found in this wire sent the next day. The drawings and contract referred to accompanied this 120470 letter from Olander to Cleworth.


In a 120470 letter to Charles Cleworth Polykem proposed a business arrangement that would involve the licensing in the US of Polykem's "new house" along with the CF-100 to the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado. That letter was accompanied by several other letters and documents. This unsigned and undated license agreement (pdf) was one of those documents.

The draft agreement covers the licensing in the US of two structures described only as Exhibits A and B and would remain in force for a period of 10 years. Initial license fees of $35,000 would be due upon execution of the agreement ($20,000 in respect of Exhibit A and $15,000 in respect of Exhibit B). Royalties would be payable at a rate of $25 per manufactured section in respect of Exhibit A and $200 per manufactured unit in respect of Exhibit B. Royalties would be subject to a minimum of $3,000 for year 2 and $5,000 annually thereafter. An additional license fee of $5,000 in each of years 2 and 3 could be offset by royalties paid.

Though not specified in the agreement itself other associated documents suggest that Exhibits A and B were in fact the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo respectively; among those documents were these:

• Several plans and architectural drawings for the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo.
• A document that appears to deal with engineering data related to snow and wind load calculations for the CF-100.
• A Gulf Oil branded brochure that appears to be some sort of sales or marketing brochure related to the CF-100.
• Two photographs, one color and one black and white, of a Gulf Oil branded CF-200 service Station under construction. The date and location are unknown.
• A costing document which breaks down the material and labor costs for the manufacture of a CF-200 Service Station.

In addition the information included in this quotation relating to Exhibit B does include dimensions which are listed as 23' by 23'. The CF-45 Venturo had an approximate area of 45 square meters (hence the designation CF-45) and while a 23' square is slightly larger in area than that (a 22' square is almost exactly 45 square meters in area) the dimensions are very close to that of the CF-45 Venturo. Given the similarity in dimensions, the fact that Venturo plans were included in the package and the fact we cannot think of anything else Exhibit B could refer to we believe it did indeed refer to the CF-45 Venturo.

The package of letters and documents that comprised the offer of a "partnership" with the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado was valid until 030171 and indicated that the offer would be "off the table" in the event of a failure to execute this license agreement and make the initial royalty payments by that time. In an 022371 letter Olander followed up on this offer and in a 030571 letter Cleworth wrote to Olander indicating that he would not be proceeding.


In a 120170 letter to C.J. Olander of Polykem Charles Cleworth had suggested that the future for the "Gulf" unit (the CF-100) was not looking too good in the US. On 120470 Olander sent Cleworth a package of documents that included an offer to enter into a licensing agreement (never executed) with the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado in respect of the CF-100 in the US.

This letter (pdf) to Cleworth, sent ahead of any response by Cleworth to the business proposal Polykem had offered, indicates that Olander had a different view and was upbeat about the prospects for the CF-100 in the US. In particular Olander indicated that Polykem was not trying to push Gulf Oil towards an exclusive deal in the US (though they had entered into such a deal in Europe; in error according to Olander). As a consequence the market for the structure was much larger. In addition the expectation was that as orders and production increased costs would go down making the structure more marketable.

Olander ended his letter by indicating that he had attached some new drawings of the "new structure" (though not specified likely the CF-45 Venturo) with the promise of more to follow. These drawings do not appear to be included in the archive.


This final letter (pdf) in the series of letters between C.J. Olander of Polykem and Charles Cleworth , at least in this archive, that began in the fall of 1970 is perhaps the least interesting but for the sake of "completeness" it is included here.

The letter from I. Denisoff (secretary) is in response to a 091071 letter from Cleworth to Olander and is sent to Cleworth at a hotel in Germany where he was attending a plastics event. The letter informed Cleworth that Olander was actually in the US at the time and encouraged him to contact Olander at his hotel once he returned to the US.


This 062471 letter (pdf) from Charles Cleworth (printed on Plastics World letterhead not Futuro Corporation Of Colorado letterhead) to one Frank Rapstine of Amarillo, TX discusses a potential Futuro sale.

In the letter Cleworth offers to sell a 26' diameter "ellipsodal" (quoted spelling) house to Rapstine and deliver it to Amarillo for $25,000. Cleworth indicates that this is less than the $35,000 it cost to produce and that the low price was due to the fact that the company was "moving on to a new design."

There is no indication in the archive as to whether any sale ever resulted and we have never heard any reports of a Futuro in Amarillo.

There are several interesting aspects to this letter:

• Cleworth references a 26' diameter house. In this late 1970 Stock Offering Prospectus the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado indicates its intention to manufacture a Futuro "substantially larger" than the standard 26' Finnish Design and these plans are for a 28' diameter Futuro. The Cleworth letter indicates that the "ellipsodal" house is the only one they have produced but it is unclear whether this indicates the only 26' model or the only model total.
• The letter indicates the unit cost $35,000 to manufacture. Given that all estimates of the cost of a Futuro around the time were substantially less than this and the reference to this being the only unit it is possible the $35,000 number included the initial cost of producing molds.
• The letter indicates the company was moving on to a new design and refers to that design as the new "three-quarter" house. Though not found associated with this letter this series of photographs and negatives illustrate a structure that fits that description and may well be the "new" design Cleworth was referring to. In addition this hand painted artist's impression also appears to be of such a structure.

This 082670 letter (pdf) from Charles Cleworth, President of the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado to Gocke Olander of Polykem is the first in a series of letters and other communications between the two spanning the year or so from August 1970 to September 1971.

The letter follows up on a phone call and in it Cleworth indicates that the Colorado company will complete the prototype of their Futuro House within two weeks at which time they would be ready for production.

Cleworth adds that his company had tried to work with Leonard Fruchter and the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia but that that relationship had ended when Fruchter was unable to supply promised Futuro Houses. This late 1970 Stock Offering Prospectus indicates that on at least two occasons the Philadelphia Company failed to deliver a Futuro; one for display at May-Daniels & Fisher, a Denver department store, in late summer 1969 and one for display at the Colorado Garden And Home Show at the Currigan Convention Center in Denver, Colorado in February 1970. On the latter occasion the Colorado company was forced to display a small model rather than a full size Futuro (as reported in the Denver Post on 020870 and as seen in these photographs).

Cleworth goes on to propose that his company become the exclusive US and Canadian licensee for the Futuro House and that they would pay Polykem a royalty of $100 on each Futuro his company produced. This draft License Agreement which is undated and unsigned was attached to the letter. Though there is no indication whether this document was drafted by the Colorado company or Polykem later correspondence suggests it was a draft by the Colorado company of a potential agreement to re-assign Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia rights to the Colorado company (though Olander indicated in that later letter than Canada would be excluded as they had another licensee in Montreal).

In a short 090270 follow up letter Cleworth can be seen seeking a response to this letter.


This is an unsigned and undated draft (pdf) of an agreement between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado assigning the 112668 Licensing Agreement between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia to the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado.

Though there is no actual indication as to whether this was drafted by Polykem or the Colorado company it was found attached to this 082670 letter from Charles Cleworth to Gocke Olander of Polykem and that letter along with other later correspondence between Cleworth and Olander suggests it was drafted by the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado.

The document would have assigned Futuro rights to the Colorado company in the same territories as the original agreement with the Philadelphia company which essentially covered the whole US. Polykem was to get 80% of any royalties generated under the agreement subject to a quarterly $1,000 minimum.


Most of the letters in this archive are in files without the original envelopes but this 090770 letter from C.J. Olander to Charles Cleworth was still in this envelope (pdf) which provides a nice example of stationary bearing the Polykem name and logo.




This draft of a wire (pdf) to Polykem by Charles Cleworth asks Polykem to acknowledge receipt of his letter of 082670.

A handwritten note indicates the wire was sent 090870 which means it actually crossed with C.J. Olanders response to the 082670 letter which was sent the day before on 090770.


Along with a 100570 letter to Charles Cleworth C.J. Olander included a copy of this 092470 letter (pdf) from Polykem to Leonard Fruchter.

The letter references previous correspondence (not included in the archive) suggesting the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia would discharge an overdue promissory note by means of weekly payments of $1000 and in it Olander indicates that Polykem was assuming, given the bankruptcy filing of the Philadelphia company, that Fruchter would personally be assuming the debt to Polykem and the responsibility for discharging it.

Olander goes on to indicate that in the event of a failure to discharge the debt by 111570 Polykem would consider that they were no longer bound by the terms of their agreement with Fruchter as of that date.


It seems that even attorney's get it wrong sometimes. In this 100170 letter (pdf) from Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young to Edward Eppich (an attorney retained by Charles Cleworth) one Albert Der Movsesian informs Eppich that his company had made an error in stating that the bankruptcy documents for the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia did not list Polykem as a creditor.

In fact Polykem was listed as a creditor in the amount of $12325; a fact that had apparently been missed by a messenger who examined the documents at the District Court. This error had caused Cleworth to misinform Polykem in a 091870 letter; an error which was corrected in a later 100770 letter. A copy of the creditors listing was included with the second letter.


In a 091870 letter Charles Cleworth had informed Polykem that they were not listed as a creditor in documents filed in association with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia.

Letters from attorney's (here and here) retained by Cleworth to gather information for Polykem about the financial status and bankruptcy of Fruchter's company later indicated that information was incorrect and in a 100770 letter to C.J Olander Charles Cleworth corrected the error. Attached to that letter was this 19 page document (pdf); a listing of unsecured creditors of the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado. Polykem is included in the amount of $12325.

This document is interesting in that it gives some indication of the amount of money invested in (or borrowed by) the Futuro Corporation of Philadelphia prior to its filing Chapter 11 earlier in 1970.

The total unsecured credit listed in the document is a touch over $500,000 and as such it provides some indication of the initial confidence level of the Philadelphia company in the future of the Futuro House. An inflation calculator at DollarTimes.com indicates that in 2014 such an amount would equate to a little over $3M and clearly one would require a good degree of confidence in a business plan to invest (or take on debt) to that extent.


In a 120170 letter (pdf) to C.J. Olander Cleworth followed up on earlier correspondence regarding whether or not Leonard Fruchter and the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia had discharged their financial obligations to Polykem (among others this 111770 letter and this 113070 wire refer).

Cleworth went on to then discuss developments around Gulf Oil (and, though not named, presumably the CF-100). Cleworth indicated that Gulf Oil did not believe the CF-100 matched their vision of the style of architecture appropriate to their gas stations. Cleworth also added the advice that Polykem would be best served by not pursuing an exclusive (implied) deal with Gulf Oil in the USA and that they should instead be prepared to negotiate with any interested parties. Discussions around Gulf Oil continued with an Olander letter of 120470.

Cleworth ended by indicating that he was looking forward to seeing the "new design" first mentioned in Cleworth's letter of 111770 and later in a wire sent by Olander 113070.


In a 120470 letter to Charles Cleworth Polykem proposed a business arrangement that would involve the licensing in the US of Polykem's "new house" along with the CF-100 to the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado. That letter was accompanied by several other letters and documents. This estimate of labor and materials costs for the manufacture of a CF-200 (pdf) was one of those documents.

The document is very faded and in poor condition (the photos are actually a little easier to read than the pdf file) and is titled "Kemi Station C F 200: breakdown, raw materials and labor hours."

Though this document is not specifically referenced by any of the letters and documents that accompanied Olander 120470 business proposal it was found in the same folder and given that the offer appeared to include licensing of the CF-100 it is reasonable to assume it was one of the documents in the package.

The package of letters and documents that comprised the offer of a "partnership" with the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado was valid until 030171 and indicated that the offer would be "off the table" in the event of a failure to execute the license agreement and make the initial royalty payments by that time. In an 022371 letter Olander followed up on this offer and in a 030571 letter Cleworth wrote to Olander indicating that he would not be proceeding.


Many documents in this archive indicate that Cleworth's initial interest in pursuing a business relationship with Polykem was related to the Futuro House. Indeed he even called his company the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado.

In a 120470 letter C.J. Olander of Polykem offered to enter into a business relationship with the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado. That offer however was for licensing of the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo and did not include the Futuro House.

Included in the document package associated with that business proposal was this 120470 letter to Cleworth which advised that Leonard Fruchter had finally discharged his financial obligations to Polykem. This effectively took the Futuro House "off the table" for Cleworth and in this letter Olander suggested that the Futuro being developed by Cleworth was likely in breach of US Patent D216542 and that he should contact the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia before proceeding with that development.


In this letter C.J. Olander follows up with Charles Cleworth on a couple of previous communications. Olander offers to provide more information if it is needed but the letter was clearly aimed mainly at eliciting a response from Cleworth.

Olander references two of his letters; one sent 120470 and the second sent 010871. The 120470 letter "covered" a package of documents in which Olander proposed that Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado enter into a licensing agreement covering the manufacture and sale of two structures in the US (not specified but almost certainly the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo).

That offer was valid only until 030171 so it is reasonable to assume, given the date of this letter, that this was a "last ditch" attempt to seal a deal. The 010871 letter is not included in this archive. Cleworth responded to Olander in a 030571 letter.


In a letter dated 030571 Charles Cleworth had apparently "put to bed" the notion of a business arrangement between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado to manufacture and market Polykem's "new design" in the US.

In this letter (pdf) Cleworth appears to open up the possibility of further discussions indicating that the design is "a real beauty" and adding that he would be interested if he could be of any help in marketing in the US (though there is no mention of licensing or manufacturing).

The "new design" is not specifically named though all of the earlier correspondence and documentation suggests it was the CF-45 Venturo. There is no response to this letter in the archive other than this "generic" response from a Polykem secretary by the name of I. Denisoff.

Along with this brief 090270 letter (pdf) to Gocke Olander of Polykem Charles Cleworth sent a copy of a US Department Of Commerce letter indicating that "the patent" had been lost. Though not specifically stated the assumption must be the reference was to US Patent D216542 for the Futuro House. The US Department Of Commerce letter was not found in the folder containing this letter.

Cleworth also took the opportunity to follow up on his 082670 letter in which he proposed that Polykem re-assign their license agreement with the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia to Cleworth's Colorado company.


In this 090770 letter (pdf) C.J. Olander responds to a 082670 letter from Charles Cleworth. Olander indicates that Polykem might be open to re-assigning their licensing agreement with the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia to the Colorado company in the event that the Philadelphia company defaulted on the terms of their agreement.

The letter suggests that Polykem was finding it difficult to get information on the status of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia as Olander asks Cleworth for assistance in obtaining confirmation of the bankruptcy status of the Philadelphia company and information on whether or not a promissory note had been paid. Cleworth responds to these questions in this 091870 letter.

While agreeing in principle to the possibility of the transfer of the Philadelphia company's agreement with Polykem to Cleworth Olander indicates that Canada would be excluded from such an agreement as Polykem had another licensee in Montreal, Canada.

There is also a reference by Olander to "other recent developments in this field" and "gas-stations" and an invitation from Olander for Cleworth to visit Polykem in Finland. Later correspondence takes the discussion of "gas-stations" further.


In this 092270 letter (pdf) Olander responds to Cleworth's wire of 090870 and letter of 082670.

In the letter Olander seeks further information on the financial status of Fruchter's Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia.

It seems likely this letter was sent before Olander received Cleworth's letter of 091870 since Cleworth had indicated in that letter that he was still awaiting the information Olander was seeking.

The letter also appears to suggest that there may have been progress made in getting the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia to make good on their financial commitment to Polykem by means of weekly $1000 payments.


In this 100570 response (pdf) to a 091870 letter from Charles Cleworth C.J. Olander sends Cleworth a copy of a letter that had been sent to Leonard Fruchter that indicated Polykem would consider Fruchter in breach of their agreement unless a promissory note due 083170 was paid no later than 111570.

Olander indicates that in actual fact the 111570 date should have been 101570 but that the error in the date may have been fortuitous and could lead to a visit to the US about which Olander undertook to keep Cleworth informed.

Olander goes on to suggest that Cleworth's 091870 request for an agreement between Polykem and his Colorado company was a little premature given uncertainty about the status of Leonard Fruchter's Philadelphia company and in light of that Olander returned, uncashed, a $100 royalty check that Cleworth had sent along with that request.


Along with a 091870 letter Charles Cleworth sent Polykem this $100 check (pdf) as the royalty payment for the first Futuro House produced by his company. Given that no license agreement was in force between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado and uncertainly about the financial status of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia the check was returned uncashed by Polykem on 100570.




In this response (pdf) to a 092270 letter Charles Cleworth provides information regarding the financial status of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia that had been requested by Polykem.

Cleworth informs Olander that the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy some months previously and goes on to indicate that previous information suggesting Polykem was not listed as a creditor in documents filed in association with the company's bankruptcy was incorrect. In fact in a listing of unsecured creditors (attached to this letter) Polykem was listed in the amount of $12325.


In this 100670 letter (pdf) Edward Eppich of the law firm Neef, Swanson & Myer informs Charles Cleworth that earlier information that suggested Polykem was not listed as a creditor in documents filed in association with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia was incorrect. That error had actually been made by a Philadelphia law firm Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young (this 100170 letter refers) and Eppich was just the "messenger".

This error had actually caused Cleworth to misinform Polykem in a 091870 letter; an error which was corrected in a later 100770 letter. A copy of the creditors listing was included with the second letter.


This document (pdf) records the details of two wires sent to C.J Olander of Polykem. The first, dated 113070, asks simply "has Fruchter paid you?" In a follow up letter to Olander dated 120170 Cleworth indicates he had still not heard about whether or not Fruchter had made payment so it appears Olander did not respond to this wire (or he did and the response is not included in the archive).

The second wire, sent 120170, was clearly a response to a wire on another topic from Olander which, coincidentally, had been sent the same day as Cleworth sent the first of these two wires. In this wire Cleworth thanks Olander for his wire and, presumably as a late addition since it is added as a hand written notation, indicates he "will await material".


This 120470 letter (pdf) from C.J Olander of Polykem to Charles Cleworth is essentially a "cover" which, along with several other attached letters and documents makes a proposal for a business arrangement between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado in respect of Polykem's "new design" (unspecified) and "the other structure (they had) available (Gulf)"

Olander summarized the results of discussions he had with Gulf Oil during a visit to Houston and also with a company by the name of Venture Out Inc of Knoxville. Gulf Oil did not appear to require an exclusive deal though they did require assurance that "the structure" would not be used by any other oil company. Interestingly Olander also states that "Fruchter still has the impression that the Gulf structure (could) only be used as (a) "gas station" and asks Cleworth not to correct this opinion.

In the letter Olander also indicated that Polykem had an arrangement with a New York department store to deliver one of the new "summer house" units for a Scandinavian design show in September 1971. The structure is not named but other documents associated with the letter suggest this was the CF-45 Venturo (we are unfamiliar with the timing of the development of the CF-45 so this is not certain but we are not sure what else it could be).

Olander then moved on to the substance of the Polykem proposal to the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado and first informed Cleworth that Leonard Fruchter had finally discharged his financial obligations to Polykem. This effectively took the Futuro House "off the table" for Cleworth and in this letter (also dated 120470 and one of the documents to which this letter was "cover") Olander indicated that the Futuro being developed by Cleworth was likely in breach of US Patent D216542 and that he should contact the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia before proceeding with that development.

Having eliminated the Futuro as an option for Cleworth, at least for some time, Olander then summarized the proposal to Cleworth regarding the "new design" which would be subject to a $15,000 license fee and Gulf (CF-100) which would be subject to a $20,000 license fee. Royalties would then be payable at a rate of $200 per unit. Interestingly Olander pointed out that this was the royalty rate on Futuro in countries other than the USA and that Polykem had agreed to a $100 royalty per unit with the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia only because of Olander's "stupidity to believe his (Fruchter's) flashy reception on (Olander's) first trip to the USA.

Olander ended by asking for some information from Cleworth on the financial status of the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado along with some information regarding plans for production of units.

This letter started out by indicating that several other letters accompanied it. Though those letters are not listed the following letters and documents were found in the same folder as this letter and can reasonably be assumed to be associated with this letter.

• A letter dated 120470 indicating that the Futuro House being developed in Denver was likely in breach of US Patent D216542 and that Cleworth should contact the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia before proceeding further with that development.
• A letter, also dated 120470, which outlined a timeline for a licensing agreement, provision of molds, trial production and eventual full production of the "new design" in 1972. The proposal was subject to Leonard Fruchter having first refusal on the "new design" and declining to pursue it.
• A letter, also dated 120470, which contained quotations for the supply of molds for the manufacture of two structures described only as Exhibit A ($12,800) and Exhibit B ($7,500). The quotation was good until March 1st 1971 and would be executed only after the license agreement was signed and the license fees had been paid. Though not specified it seems likely that Exhibit A referred to the CF-100 and Exhibit B to the CF-45 Venturo
• An unsigned and undated draft Licensing Agreement covering the licensing of two structures again described only as Exhibits A and B. Exhibit A was associated with Gulf Oil and Exhibit B with British Petroleum and/or the Sinclair Oil Company.
• Several plans and architectural drawings for the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo.
• A document that appears to deal with engineering data related to snow and wind load calculations for the CF-100.
• A Gulf Oil branded brochure that appears to be some sort of sales or marketing brochure related to the CF-100.
• Two photographs, one color and one black and white, of a Gulf Oil branded CF-200 service Station under construction. The date and location are unknown.
• A costing document which breaks down the material and labor costs for the manufacture of a CF-200 Service Station.

The letters and documents in this package suggest the offer of a "partnership" with the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado was valid until 030171 and that the offer would be "off the table" in the event of a failure to execute the license agreement and make the initial royalty payments by that time. In an 022371 letter Olander followed up on this offer and in a 030571 letter Cleworth wrote to Olander and indicated that he would not be proceeding.


A 120470 letter from C.J. Olander to Charles Cleworth was accompanied by a package of documents in which Olander proposed that Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado enter into a licensing agreement covering the manufacture and sale of two structures in the US.

The structures were referred to in some cases as Exhibits A and B and in others as the "new design" and the "Gulf" unit but there is sufficient evidence in the documents to determine definitively that the agreement covered the manufacture and sale in the US of the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo. The Futuro House which had been Cleworth's first and major interest was not a part of the offer since Leonard Fruchter of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia had, after some time, discharged his debts to Polykem.

In this letter (pdf) Cleworth indicated that he and his colleagues were "not enthused enough about the design" to want to license it in the US. Though only referencing the "new design" it is reasonable to assume that since the business proposition made by Polykem included both that design and the CF-100 in a "package" that this letter indicated Cleworth did not intend to pursue the CF-100 either. In essence this letter appears to put an end to discussions about business arrangements between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado.


This three page series of notes (pdf) on interior fixtures and fittings for the Futuro House dated 110370 carries no company identification and no authors name.

The document was found in an envelope which also contained this series of Futuro Corporation Of Colorado Interior design plans by David Decker dated 110170 and though not actually attached to the plans given the date and the fact they were stored in the same envelope it is a reasonable assumption that they were related.

The document includes notes on Heating & A/C, Kitchen Appliances & Cabinets, Bathroom Appliances & Fixtures, Electrical and Plumbing.


In a 040274 hand written note on Plastics, Machinery & Equipment Magazine letterhead (pdf) Charles Cleworth indicates that as of that date he had sold his 28' ellipsoid fiberglass house for "$1 plus other considerations". It is difficult to make out the name of the individual to whom the sale was made; as best we can tell it was Arthur W. Loerke.

A second letter (pdf) on the same date, again hand written on Plastics, Machinery & Equipment Magazine letterhead relates to the same sale but states different numbers. In this letter, which has no addressee but starts out "This will certify that on the above date", Cleworth again indicates that A. W. Loerke purchased his ellipsoid fiberglass house (which in this case is additionally described as "Futuro 28'"). However here we have a price of $5,000 with Cleworth acknowledging receipt of a check for $2,000 and noting that the remaining $3,000 was due to be paid no later than 071574.

It is unclear why these two letters seem to be saying something different. The additional funds referenced in one letter could of course be the "other considerations" referenced in the other though that does seem to be an odd way of putting it.

It appears that the deal was almost complete by the due date; 071574. A note on that date (pdf) to Cleworth from Loerke (and "approved" by Cleworth) indicates that there was only $500 outstanding. A. W. Loerke appeared to be trying to negotiate some kind of a deal on Cleworth's behalf relating to a company called Total Mold to cover the last $500, If that fell through Loerke agreed to pay Cleworth $500 as the final payment on his account.

This sale was actually years in the making. In this 062471 letter Cleworth offers for sale his 26' "ellipsodal" (quoted spelling) house for $25,000 including delivery to Amarillo, Texas. In that same letter Cleworth indicates that this was the only unit of this type his company had produced prior to moving on the a new design.

The 062471 letter also indicates that the unit being offered for sale was the same one seen advertised in Cervi's Rocky Mountain Journal. The Cervi's advertisement included a photograph and was clearly for a Futuro; the unit was located in Englewood, Colorado; The same advertisement appeared in issues of Cervi's Rocky Mountain Journal as far apart as April 1971 and October 1972 (see here for details and photos).

Even prior to that letter Cleworth had signed this 042471 contract with a realtor to sell this Futuro. The contract listed the address as 4390 South Santa Fe Lane, Littleton, Colorado, the Cervi's advertisements placed the unit in Englewood and the actual sale to A.W Loerke was of a Futuro located at 4390 South Windermere, Englewood, Colorado. A quick trip to Google Maps shows that in fact there was a single Futuro and a single location which lay about half way between Littleton and Englewood. Entering either of the listed addresses into Google Maps pulls up basically the same location.

Other than the price paid there is one other inconsistency in the various documents relating to this Futuro. The earliest document referencing the sale of the Futuro, the 042471 real estate contract, refers to a 26' unit while the eventual sale, according to these letters, was of a 28' Futuro. That said the evidence does strongly suggest that these were in fact one and the same unit and, if that is the case, one or other quoted dimension must be in error.

Also interesting to note is that despite an initial listing price of $25,000 in 1971 the Futuro actually only fetched $5,000 (or was that $1?) when it eventually sold in 1974.

Finally in the same envelope that these letters were found was this type-written note (pdf) which refers to the movement of the "Plastics Futuro" from Perry Park to Sageport

Though the year is not noted the note is dated 7/24 and, given its presence in the same envelope as the other letters we might reasonably assume it dates from 1974.

That said its relationship to the other letters is unclear. None of the letters (or anything else in the archive) refer to either Perry Park or Sageport as a location for a Futuro. Perry Park is some 40 miles or so south of Englewood and Sageport is a little further east in Larkspur. In addition neither location matches any other reports of Futuros in Colorado of which we are aware (Bailey, Boulder). Bottom line is this; we really have no idea what this note is referring to.


In this 091870 letter (pdf) Charles Cleworth responds to C.J. Olander's letter of 090770.

Cleworth indicates, in answer to Olander's inquiry about the financial status of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia, that he was still awaiting complete information and that he expected copies of the Philadelphia company's bankruptcy documents within a week. He goes on to add that he had been told that his "legal people" had informed him that Polykem was not listed as a creditor in those documents.

Cleworth then indicates that while he understood that Polykem may not wish to provide him with copies of the agreement between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia it would be difficult for him to assist in determining if the Philadelphia company was in breach of that agreement without additional information about that agreement.

In respect of his own company's activities Cleworth informs Olander that they are only a week away from putting their first "house" on display. He also references "enclosed photographs" but there were none attached to the letter. Given the timing and that the reference is to the "first" house it seems likely that the photographs were some of this set of photographs which chronicled progress from initial construction of moulds through completion of the Colorado company's prototype Futuro House (some of which were also included in the Colorado company's late 1970 Stock Offering Prospectus).

Though no license agreement was in force between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado at the time Cleworth also included a check for $100 (which was later returned uncashed) as the royalty payment for the first Futuro his company produced. This amount was in accord with that suggested in Cleworth's 082670 letter suggesting possible re-assignment of the agreement between Polykem and the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia to Cleworth and the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado. That letter was accompanied by an unsigned and undated draft agreement which, as far as we can tell, was never executed.

Finally Cleworth suggests, in response to Olander's invitation for him to visit Finland, that a visit by Olander to Denver might be more productive. He does however go on to add that he would be able to visit Finland, just not at the suggested time, if a visit by Olander to the US was not possible.


In this 111770 letter (pdf) to C.J. Olander Charles Cleworth is clearly unhappy with the way things had gone. Cleworth alludes to some wires sent by "Helsinki" which are not included in the archive which apparently suggested that the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado was effectively "shut out of the picture".

These wires were likely a follow up to Olander sending Cleworth a copy of a letter to the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia indicating Fruchter had made a proposal to satisfy his debt to Polykem.

Cleworth went on to add that as a result he did not feel obliged to pay for the services of the Philadelphia attorney's he had retained to assist in gathering information about the financial status of the Futuro Corporation Of Philadelphia. That information had been provided by Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young via "middle man" Edward Eppich of Neef, Swanson & Myer (letters here and here refer).

Though the letter reads as being almost despondent in nature there are a couple of positive notes that indicate Cleworth was still keen to foster a business relationship with Polykem. He indicated a willingness to move ahead on the "new house" which Polykem had just patented and looked forward to seeing the design along with a business proposition. The "new house" is not actually described or named.

We are not familiar with the timing of the development of the CF-45 Venturo though it is possible this is what was being referred to. Later correspondence from Olander to Cleworth dated 120470 outlined a proposition on "the new design as well as the other structure we have available (Gulf)" and among various documents that appear to be associated with that letter were these CF-45 Venturo plans/drawings.

Cleworth ends by indicating that he and his company "stands ready to take over" should Leonard Fruchter default on his payment to Polykem.


In a 120470 letter to Charles Cleworth Polykem proposed a business arrangement that would involve the licensing in the US of Polykem's "new house" along with the CF-100 to the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado. That letter was accompanied by several other letters and documents. This quotation (pdf) was one of those documents.

The quotation is for molds for two structures (described only as Exhibits A and B) at a cost of $12,800 and $7,500 respectively along with one complete structure (Exhibit B) at a cost of $6,700 and associated shipping. The quotation specified that it was valid until 030171 and contingent upon a license agreement being signed and initial licensing fees having been paid.

The quotation does not specify exactly what structures the descriptions Exhibit A and B referred to but other documents in the package indicate that they were the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo. Among those documents were the following:

• Several plans and architectural drawings for the CF-100 and the CF-45 Venturo.
• A document that appears to deal with engineering data related to snow and wind load calculations for the CF-100.
• A Gulf Oil branded brochure that appears to be some sort of sales or marketing brochure related to the CF-100.
• Two photographs, one color and one black and white, of a Gulf Oil branded CF-200 service Station under construction. The date and location are unknown.
• A costing document which breaks down the material and labor costs for the manufacture of a CF-200 Service Station.

In addition the information included in the quotation relating to Exhibit B does include dimensions which are listed as 23' by 23'. The CF-45 Venturo had an approximate area of 45 square meters (hence the designation CF-45) and while a 23' square is slightly larger in area than that (a 22' square is almost exactly 45 square meters in area) the dimensions are very close to that of the CF-45 Venturo. Given the similarity in dimensions, the fact that Venturo plans were included in the package and the fact we cannot think of anything else Exhibit B could refer to we believe it did indeed refer to the CF-45 Venturo.

The package of letters and documents that comprised the offer of a "partnership" with the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado was valid until 030171 and indicated that the offer would be "off the table" in the event of a failure to execute the license agreement and make the initial royalty payments by that time. In an 022371 letter Olander followed up on this offer and in a 030571 letter Cleworth wrote to Olander indicating that he would not be proceeding.


In a 120470 letter to Charles Cleworth Polykem proposed a business arrangement that would involve the licensing in the US of Polykem's "new house" along with the CF-100 to the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado. That letter was accompanied by several other letters and documents. This letter (pdf) was one of those documents.

This letter outlines a timeline for a licensing agreement, provision of molds, trial production and eventual full production of the "new design" in 1972. The proposal was subject to Leonard Fruchter having first refusal on the "new design" and declining to pursue it.

The "new design" is not defined but other documents in the package that accompanied the 120470 business proposition suggest that it was actually the CF-45 Venturo. In particular that package included several CF-45 venturo plans and it is hard to imagine why such plans would be included if the structure depicted was not a part of the arrangement.

In addition information included in this quotation included dimensions which were listed as 23' by 23'. The CF-45 Venturo had an approximate area of 45 square meters (hence the designation CF-45) and while a 23' square is slightly larger in area than that (a 22' square is almost exactly 45 square meters in area) the dimensions are very close to that of the CF-45 Venturo.

Given the similarity in dimensions, the fact that Venturo plans were included in the package of documents accompanying the 120470 business proposal and the fact we cannot think of anything else the "new design" could refer to we believe it did indeed refer to the CF-45 Venturo.

The package of letters and documents that comprised the offer of a "partnership" with the Futuro Corporation Of Colorado was valid until 030171 and indicated that the offer would be "off the table" in the event of a failure to execute the license agreement and make the initial royalty payments by that time. In an 022371 letter Olander followed up on this offer and in a 030571 letter Cleworth wrote to Olander indicating that he would not be proceeding.