Skip to content

16 Comments

  1. William Noel
    10 April 2014 @ 12:35 pm

    I'm curious about how they plan to increase sales because R&H has a long track record of not doing that very well.

  2. Elaine Nelson
    10 April 2014 @ 3:24 pm

    Another "Signs of the Times."  People are reading fewer print materials.  Too bad this wasn't recognized before the loss of nearly $1 million.

    • v. dan miller
      12 April 2014 @ 11:36 pm

      SAD. VERY SAD.

  3. v. dan miller
    12 April 2014 @ 11:30 pm

     

  4. Truth Seeker
    13 April 2014 @ 12:00 am

    In my view placing the R & H under NAD would be the kiss of death. I'll readily say that I have no facts to support my view but that is my personal reaction.
    Maranatha

    • billman
      16 April 2014 @ 8:22 pm

      It looks like the R&H was going through a near death experience anyway.  And while the cost side of the equation has been addressed, has it been addressed in a way that will not impact negatively on revenue.  And what are the steps that will be taken to boost revenue.  Apart from leasing space, I see nothing that inspires.

  5. Edward Reifsnyder
    13 April 2014 @ 4:24 pm

    I'm confident our church leaders don't know how inadequate their series of actions regarding the publishing mission seems.  Resistance to change is part of the human condition, but churches seem to be afflicted more than usual.  We ferociously cling to 150 year old business models while reality has moved on.  We could accomplish the same mission objectives from two moderately sized office suites, one for the Pacific Press and one for the Review, that would house editorial, marketing and finance staff.  Everything else could be outsourced without significant capital investment.  But, no.  It seems we can't accept that the fundamentals of publishing and information distribution have changed beyond recognition and that we are not immune from the forces that drive the change.  It seems we believe we must cling to what we apparently view as divinely ordained business models.  Frankly, this resistance reduces our mission effectiveness.  

    • Steve Ferguson
      15 April 2014 @ 7:57 am

      'We ferociously cling to 150 year old business models while reality has moved on.' 

      Indeed, just look at the names we give things in our Church:  'President'; 'Departments'; 'Divisions' and 'Unions'.

      These are not biblical terms – these are corporate terms founded on an American business model at the dawn of the 20th Century.  No doubt they seemed 'modern' and innovative at the time.  However, given they are not biblical, the important point is we not be wedded to them as holy writ, when they are not.

      Just look at the resistence to remove either Divisions or Unions from the corporate structure.  They are indeed treated as holy writ!

      There is a great article recently in the SPD Adventist Record on one of the New Zealand Conferences.  They have abolished many of the trappings of that old corporate-beaucracy model.  The President now calls himself 'Senior Pastor', they have abolished 'Departments' (with its silo thinking), and Pastors are called to a more biblical and apostolic model of caring for a number of Churches – in being a resource to the laity.  And the outcome – Church growth and much reduced administrative costs.

    • billman
      16 April 2014 @ 8:28 pm

      It is difficult to change when the prophet has prophesied.

      Many years ago one of the manufacturing plants of Sanitarium Health Foods was being closed.  I remember some dear not so old souls digging up EGW quotes that said when the sanatoriums were being closed, that this was a sign that the church was collapsing.

      We closed it anyway.  And more have closed since, enhancing the overall business.

  6. Steve Ferguson
    15 April 2014 @ 8:01 am

    'The Review and Herald Publishing Association (R&H) board voted significant cuts in staff and operations at a special meeting on Sunday (April 6) after year-end reports revealed a loss of nearly $943,000 for operations in 2013 and continued weakness in the first quarter of this year.'

    May not be directly relevant, but look at this $1m loss at the same time the GC spends a $1m on the Record Keeper series – and decides afterwards not to release it for publication!

  7. Elaine Nelson
    15 April 2014 @ 3:05 pm

    Was it Sen. Dirksen who once said:  A million here, a million there, and soon you're talking money"?  To the church, like Congress, it seems to be "easy come, easy go, there's always more where this came from."

  8. v. dan miller
    15 April 2014 @ 3:32 pm

      Dirksen said "A billion here and a billion there…."

  9. earl calahan
    15 April 2014 @ 5:39 pm

    The inbreeding of in house fact finding and analysis continues. Why not hire a bright youngster alum of Wharton, and stop repeating these gross losses to 19th century accounting.

    • billman
      16 April 2014 @ 8:32 pm

      It may well be that the inhouse people know what needs to be done.  But the final decision makers are hostage to their constituencies.

      It would be well to reflect that a number of vice presidents were restructured out in the past 18 months or so.  They may have been the resistors to change.

  10. Elaine Nelson
    15 April 2014 @ 8:46 pm

    We do remember when an auditor was fired because he dared to tell the truth?  Read "Fatal Accounts."

  11. Elaine Nelson
    15 April 2014 @ 8:46 pm

    We do remember when an auditor was fired because he dared to tell the truth?  Read "Fatal Accounts."