Dehlin's In The News? What?

[toon]

Putting aside subjective definitions of "rich," the actual quote does not suggest that Dehlin is making 4 to 5 times $90,000 (or $360,000-$450,000), but rather 4 to 5 times whatever amount donors have canceled since news of his disciplinary council surfaced. So we can't do a real calculation because we don't know how much has been canceled. If the amount canceled is $10,000, then Dehlin is currently making $120,000-$130,000. If it's $20,000 canceled, then he's making $150,000-$170,000. And so forth.

 

It appears in 2013, he grossed $90,000 from his podcasts, most likely through donations .  That comes to $7,500 per month.  Has it been a month yet since he's been notified of the disciplinary council?  And during that time, he probably hasn't lost the entier amount from people that cancelled -- most likely a fraction of that.  So his increased income, assume he's being truthful, is likely at most in the range of $10,000 to $20,000 during this period.

 

ANd I suspect there's good reason to believe that this alleged spike will not be lasting.

[Brian 2.0]

It appears in 2013, he grossed $90,000 from his podcasts, most likely through donations .  That comes to $7,500 per month.  Has it been a month yet since he's been notified of the disciplinary council?  And during that time, he probably hasn't lost the entier amount from people that cancelled -- most likely a fraction of that.  So his increased income, assume he's being truthful, is likely at most in the range of $10,000 to $20,000 during this period.

 

ANd I suspect there's good reason to believe that this alleged spike will not be lasting.

 

See above post.  We need to stop throwing the 90K number around.  It's probably 55-60K.  And further, increases in donations to a company does not necessarily equate to an increase to his earnings any more than increases in tithing donations equate to an increase in the brethren's stipends.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Brian 2.0

[Brian 2.0]

And with people having an issue with Dehlin making money, even if it is a lot of it, why do you have a problem with it?

 

Would the incomes from John Bytheway or Lex De Azevedo in their heydey ruffle your feathers as well?

 

There's lots of things to point at if you want to diss on Dehlin, but making money for his time and work doesn't seem like one of them.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Brian 2.0

[rockpond]

But that is only a portion of the $90K.  Does he have independent ventures?

 

 

He will be losing the nonstop media coverage that generates the awareness (and anger) that generates the donations. Have you seen a big spread on Kelly since she was exed? What this boils down to is that the vast majority of Mormons have never heard of him even now. He needs media to maintain momentum. 

 

If you are looking at the 2013 income statement you'll notice that Dehlin's pay is divided into two lines (one refers to "prior year's earnings" that were apparently paid in 2013).  The two lines total just under $90,000.

 

I'm not sure that Dehlin will lose the media coverage that he's got.  I don't think you can make a "straight across" comparison with Kelly.

 

Dehlin built OSF/MS without much media attention.  He could likewise continue without much media attention.  But he might manage to stay on speed-dial with many media outlets when they are covering LDS stories.  Only time will tell.

[juliann]

It seems the 90K isn't completely accurate as a yearly salary.  That includes an amount left over from previous years:

 

 

http://openstoriesfoundation.org/finances/

 

56K a year for the amount of man-hours he's putting into his company does not seem excessive to me.

 

I'm not an accountant, but I think trying to make this look like they are really giving him back wages is baloney. I think the word they are looking for might be "bonus?"  Try telling the IRS he didn't really earn $90K.  

 

It looks like to me that this coming out right now is hugely embarrassing just from the scrambling to point out he pays insurance and taxes like every other person...plus the attempt to downplay this as back salary that was just sitting around for some reason.

 

And it should be embarrassing for someone who has loudly proclaimed this is all about "conscience."

[rockpond]

I'm not an accountant, but I think trying to make this look like they are really giving him back wages is baloney. I think the word they are looking for might be "bonus?"  Try telling the IRS he didn't really earn $90K.  

 

It looks like to me that this coming out right now is hugely embarrassing just from the scrambling to point out he pays insurance and taxes like every other person...plus the attempt to downplay this as back salary that was just sitting around for some reason.

 

And it should be embarrassing for someone who has loudly proclaimed this is all about "conscience."

 

Actually, holding over prior years' wages is not uncommon and can be done for a number of reasons.  It's published on their income statement from LAST YEAR, nothing sneaky about it.

 

I'm not sure what you think is "hugely embarrassing" about this.  You'll note from the website that OSF has published their financials including Dehlin's pay for years!  It has never been a secret.  In fact, he very publicly made an offer to listeners some years back saying that he'd like to continue to produce the podcasts but could not do it without financial support.  Listeners chose to provide the support, so he continued with the podcasts.  He's been very open all along and appreciative of the contributions.

 

There's nothing embarrassing or nefarious about this.  OSF has been financially transparent unlike another organization I know of.

[juliann]

If you are looking at the 2013 income statement you'll notice that Dehlin's pay is divided into two lines (one refers to "prior year's earnings" that were apparently paid in 2013).  The two lines total just under $90,000.

 

I'm not sure that Dehlin will lose the media coverage that he's got.  I don't think you can make a "straight across" comparison with Kelly.

 

Dehlin built OSF/MS without much media attention.  He could likewise continue without much media attention.  But he might manage to stay on speed-dial with many media outlets when they are covering LDS stories.  Only time will tell.

 

Yeah, he will lose the media coverage. Instead of the headline he will now be a sentence or two in the article about something else. I'll prove my point...I've been quoted in papers.    But seriously, FM gets media calls regularly. It does not translate into fame and fortune. Social media is something else...but again, how often do you see Kelly mentioned anywhere at all? And she overshadowed Dehlin in her brief tenure, and actually has a more compelling topic than mere disgruntled religionists, I think.

[Brian 2.0]

I'm not an accountant, but I think trying to make this look like they are really giving him back wages is baloney. I think the word they are looking for might be "bonus?" Try telling the IRS he didn't really earn $90K.

It looks like to me that this coming out right now is hugely embarrassing just from the scrambling to point out he pays insurance and taxes like every other person...plus the attempt to downplay this as back salary that was just sitting around for some reason.

And it should be embarrassing for someone who has loudly proclaimed this is all about "conscience."

Take the full 90K amount. Do you believe it's "wrong" for him to be making that money? That he doesn't deserve a good compensation for building a following that gives him donations for his service?

This isn't a CEO getting millions while his workers are getting laid off.

This isn't a charity where donors believe their funds are going to feed children in Africa only to find out the execs take 90 cents on the dollar.

Where is a shame?

[juliann]

Actually, holding over prior years' wages is not uncommon and can be done for a number of reasons.  It's published on their income statement from LAST YEAR, nothing sneaky about it.

 

I'm not sure what you think is "hugely embarrassing" about this.  You'll note from the website that OSF has published their financials including Dehlin's pay for years!  It has never been a secret.  In fact, he very publicly made an offer to listeners some years back saying that he'd like to continue to produce the podcasts but could not do it without financial support.  Listeners chose to provide the support, so he continued with the podcasts.  He's been very open all along and appreciative of the contributions.

 

There's nothing embarrassing or nefarious about this.  OSF has been financially transparent unlike another organization I know of.

 

All NFP's are transparent. It is law. And you really need to be looking at their tax returns not a statement.  If it wasn't embarrassing, as I said above, there wouldn't be all this 'splainin' going on.

 

Take the full 90K amount. Do you believe it's "wrong" for him to be making that money?

 

I think it is embarrassing to him because of what he has said.  If mixing money with "principle" is not a problem, why are the salaries of the GA's made an issue by him? Or Kelly's knee jerk attack that "so called" feminists are selling their souls because they get salaries from the church? It appears to be a problem, yes?

Edited February 6, 2015 by juliann

[rockpond]

Yeah, he will lose the media coverage. Instead of the headline he will now be a sentence or two in the article about something else. I'll prove my point...I've been quoted in papers.    But seriously, FM gets media calls regularly. It does not translate into fame and fortune. Social media is something else...but again, how often do you see Kelly mentioned anywhere at all? And she overshadowed Dehlin in her brief tenure, and actually has a more compelling topic than mere disgruntled religionists, I think.

 

Kelly's brief tenure is the key difference.  And Dehlin still runs a podcast with hundreds of thousands of downloads.

 

We'll just have to see what happens.

[rockpond]

All NFP's are transparent. It is law. And you really need to be looking at their tax returns not a statement.  If it wasn't embarrassing, as I said above, there wouldn't be all this 'splainin' going on.

 

The LDS Church isn't transparent.  

 

I'm not sure what explaining you think is happening.  What do you think is embarrassing?  I honestly am not sure what you're talking about.

[Brian 2.0]

I think it is embarrassing to him because of what he has said.  

 

What did he say? 

 

because I remember hearing him say during his call for donations once that he needed to make money in order for it to be worth his while to continue providing the service.

 

Is it embarrassing when a baseball player say he plays because he loves the game and then you find out he made 8 million that year?  The fact the player made 8 million doesn't mean he was untruthful about playing for the love of the game.

 

If he is backtracking on the number and "scrambling", he shouldn't.  There's nothing shameful about it.  Though I can see why he may want to only because in the internet age a lot of people want digital content for free and turn up their noses when they find out someone actually is getting paid for their work off the content the person is enjoying... which is childish to me.

[Analytics]

The law says NFPs need to keep good records, file paperwork with the IRS, and otherwise comply with the law, but there is no law that says they need to be financially transparent with their donors or the public at large.  Of course financial transparency is considered a good practice, which is why I will on occasion criticize organizations such as the LDS Church for not being financially transparent. 

 

To the extent Dillan's income is a "huge embarrassment," it is driven by Open Story Foundations' self-imposed commitment to transparency, not some legal requirement to operate that way.

[Scott Lloyd]

And with people having an issue with Dehlin making money, even if it is a lot of it, why do you have a problem with it?

 

Would the incomes from John Bytheway or Lex De Azevedo in their heydey ruffle your feathers as well?

 

There's lots of things to point at if you want to diss on Dehlin, but making money for his time and work doesn't seem like one of them.

Depending on your perspective, the question of ill-gotten gain comes into play.

[juliann]

The law says NFPs need to keep good records, file paperwork with the IRS, and otherwise comply with the law, but there is no law that says they need to be financially transparent with their donors or the public at large.  Of course financial transparency is considered a good practice, which is why I will on occasion criticize organizations such as the LDS Church for not being financially transparent. 

 

To the extent Dillan's income is a "huge embarrassment," it is driven by Open Story Foundations' self-imposed commitment to transparency, not some legal requirement to operate that way.

No, but they have to file tax returns, Analytics!  There is nothing wondrous on this statement. It is tax stuff...don't you disclose this same stuff on yours?

 

Perhaps more accounting types can correct me, but it appears they are also paying him expenses along with his salary. It also appears to be no secret he receives gifts from benefactors.

 

And seriously, how many people don't think someone who proclaims that they are only doing something out of sincere belief and conscience while being persecuted....and then turns out to be making more than most people off of it...wouldn't think this an embarrassing revelation? Isn't he the one claiming that people lose everything they have if they quit the church?

[juliann]

It appears Kelly can still get a headline if Dehlin is involved...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/06/gay-mormons-not-the-problem-small-minded-religious-paradigms
 

 

Sadly, the Mormon faith has become a place that incentivizes the survival of the least fit. Since strict obedience is demanded and harshly enforced, only the least talented, least articulate, least nuanced thinkers, least likely to take a stand against abuse, and the least courageous people thrive in the Church today.

 

 

Begs the question as to the definition of survival, I guess.

 

Read the article, then insert a $90K and expenses and see if it reads quite the same.
 

[Hamba Tuhan]

It's a pretty good set-up if he can pull it off. The whole purpose of marketing, of course, is to create discontent in a target audience in order to stimulate them to pay for a good or service that claims it will satisfy that discontent. Most sellers, however, have to pay for the marketing themselves, with the intention of recouping the investment from the sale of the product. In John's case it would appear that he figured out a way to get people to actually pay him to market to them the very discontent he now hopes to fill with his paid 'counselling' services. Clever!

Edited February 7, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

Only the least talented, least articulate, least nuanced thinkers, least likely to take a stand against abuse, and the least courageous people thrive in the Church today.

 

Nice. Tell us what you really think of yourself, Kate.

Edited February 7, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan

[Brian 2.0]

And seriously, how many people don't think someone who proclaims that they are only doing something out of sincere belief and conscience while being persecuted....and then turns out to be making more than most people off of it...wouldn't think this an embarrassing revelation? Isn't he the one claiming that people lose everything they have if they quit the church?

 

CFR on this statement you are referring to. 

 

and what does this mean....

 

....and then turns out to be making more than most people off of it...

 

what are you getting at?  Do you think that there's someone in the Open Stories Foundation that should be making MORE that John Dehlin?  It's his baby, built form the ground up... he should be making more than most people off it.

[Brian 2.0]

Is the for-profit Deseret Management Corporation (DMC) tax filings made public?  Any way to see what Keith McMullin or Sheri Dew made?  I would think they perform their work "out of sincere belief and conscience" as well.  It'd be pretty "embarrassing" if we found out they made 56K, or heaven-forbid 90K, of that work!

Edited February 7, 2015 by Brian 2.0

[VideoGameJunkie]

I'd rather be poor and still a temple recommend carrying member in good standing. If he is receiving money then I hope his soul is worth it because he's literally selling his soul.

[Brian 2.0]

I'd rather be poor and still a temple recommend carrying member in good standing. If he is receiving money then I hope his soul is worth it because he's literally selling his soul.

 

Are you talking about Keith McMullin or John Dehlin?

[ERayR]

So in 2013 the total income was 134,000. The total expense was 156,000? Why not just pay him 22,000 less so they don't run into the negative?

Yeah...I don't evaluate this stuff. Don't ask me to be your auditor, or accountant.

 

The generate a carryover loss to be used against future income.

[ERayR]

It appears in 2013, he grossed $90,000 from his podcasts, most likely through donations .  That comes to $7,500 per month.  Has it been a month yet since he's been notified of the disciplinary council?  And during that time, he probably hasn't lost the entier amount from people that cancelled -- most likely a fraction of that.  So his increased income, assume he's being truthful, is likely at most in the range of $10,000 to $20,000 during this period.

 

ANd I suspect there's good reason to believe that this alleged spike will not be lasting.

 

Nope he grossed $134,000 plus.  The $90,000 was his W-2 wages. 

Edited February 7, 2015 by ERayR

[omni]

Yeah, he will lose the media coverage. Instead of the headline he will now be a sentence or two in the article about something else. I'll prove my point...I've been quoted in papers. But seriously, FM gets media calls regularly. It does not translate into fame and fortune. Social media is something else...but again, how often do you see Kelly mentioned anywhere at all? And she overshadowed Dehlin in her brief tenure, and actually has a more compelling topic than mere disgruntled religionists, I think.

I don't think Kelly is a good comparison. She and OW had planned to stop their Priesthood Session protests well before she was excommunicated. If she moves back to the U.S. and starts leading more protests I can guarantee you you'll see her name in the headlines again.