Trial Balloon: Starting a Church

To kick this off, I figured I'd start a little tongue-in-cheek. I'm only half kidding, but I think churches are the most brilliant business model ever invented.

Think about it, would you want to run a business in which:

1. Had huge market saturation and acceptance, well above 90% of the global population
2. Not only are your profits completely not taxed, and your tangible assets (real estate) not assessed property taxes, but customers purchasing your product don't even have to pay taxes on the money they send to you [1]
   
3. Most of your customers agree your product makes them better off, and there are network effects (community bonding) driven by scale, but the intrinsic value of those products is completely un-testable and un-refutable
4. Has a brand which is so unshakable that no public figure in the world can express a negative view on your product without ruining their career [2]
   
5. You are able to mix up your price point, and charge more to customers with a greater ability (or willingness) to pay - in fact, they'll voluntarily contribute more if they start earning more
6. Your employees never strike, love their jobs, require almost no pay beyond what's required to live very simply, almost never jump to a competitor, and have no huge ambitions that require stroking

That's pretty much a dream come true, no? The Catholic Church is the largest property owner in Manhattan (and probably the world) and funds expansion efforts (missionaries) as well as all sorts of random non-core businesses (e.g., they have their own Astronomy research group). They've sustained their operations (and profits) for the better part of 1700 years. General Electric, eat your heart out.

Market Function, Entry & Threats

OK, so how would anyone take advantage of these facts? Well, suppose L. Ron Hoopard likes the way this sounds and wants to start a religion. What obstacles are there?

The good:

• Religions rarely badmouth each other; no negative ads, or really ads at all
• Regardless of what you may presently believe is the Word of God, you have to admit it wouldn't be that hard to invent (A) a creation myth, (B) an organizational structure, (C) prescriptions on how to pray, how to live, how to recruit, and (D) any other supporting stories to reinforce the above. i.e., mimicking a religion isn't a surpassingly-brilliant act of creativity
• No substitute products, really. Atheism / agnosticism don't offer the same benefits
• Countries with near-homogeneity of religion (think France, Italy, Indonesia, Japan) have less civil strife and unrest - though people of course find other things to kill each other over
  

The bad:

• People are usually jealously protective of their religion and tie family history up with it significantly.
• Sales efforts (missionary work, revivals, televangelism) are long-cycle, although if successful in developed countries they have a very high ROI.
• Religions won't usually badmouth other established religions, but prominent religious leaders will usually happily badmouth an apostate or upstart. Joseph Smith had a rough time of it with LDS/Mormonism, Martin Luther did Germany no favors, and so on.
• Opportunity cost. Paul of Tarsus gave up a decent life as a merchant, but of course he was a success story. How many heretics (and supposed heretics) have been executed by major religions? It's probably easier today, at least in the western world, but in more appealing markets with higher religious flux, you might find yourself verifying your choice of God in an entirely unplanned manner.

So, it's a high-risk, high-reward proposition. You'd better have a really effective message, both in content and salespeople, to be worth the risk of (A) being laughed at, (B) being mocked/denounced, or of course (C) being executed.

But if you can pull it off, like Smith/Brigham Young, L. Ron Hubbard, or (let's give him credit) Henry VIII, you'll be rolling in it, and probably be laughing all the way to... um, oblivion.

A final note

Please don't interpret this as disrespect towards religion. I may cheekily talk about their "product" or "brand" as if it were Campbell's Soup, but I do believe that on balance it's a force for good in the world. However, one thing that's probably indisputable is that they have the most advantaged, most sustainable model for getting money in the door of any organization Man has ever conceived. It's the best business in the world, with the most advantages, the deck stacked in its favor. One might, though, fairly question whether religion deserves that status, i.e. that it's not merely a good force for improving the lives of humanity, but the best force in the world for improving the lives of humanity. I think that's a tougher debate, and well beyond my scope here.

-Steve

[1] You know the old phrase, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's; render unto God that which is God's", meaning, give the government their share of your income (taxes) and give your chuch their share (tithe)? Well, it seems amazing to me that somehow, in the structure of things, God gets paid before Caesar. He's ahead in the pecking order - contributions to churches are tax-deductible, but a tithing church will expect you to pay your 10% regardless of how much you're going to pay in taxes. Pretty secure revenue model, there, God.

[2] Except, I guess, religions which don't have a significant "market share" in your country. Conservative politicians here have little restraint sometimes in criticizing Islam; Muslim public figures in Muslim countries will often criticize Christianity or Christian-majority countries. Whatever.