Yes, I agree.
And it's pretty weird that WT publications still push "bethel service" for young people when there seems to be little prospect of a "bethel career" at this point. They've toned it down a bit, but not enough to meet the new reality.
The term "publisher" does seem anachronistic now, as does "tract society" as another poster pointed out.
They may have enough money to keep them going for a while. But on the other hand they may find that expenses are not as easy to cut as they hoped for a few reasons:
1. The move to Warwick may have proved more expensive than they budgeted. (On the assumption that most big projects overspend and Watchtower is not immune.) So while they made lots of money from the sale of Brooklyn property, the move might not be the stupendous financial boost they hoped for, or others imagined.
2. Beyond regular costs of moving to Warwick, there were stories about unexpected problems with waste and cleanup. How much might that cost?
3. The same can be said about the expense of moving from Mill Hill in London out to Chelmsford. In principle these downsizing moves should bring in a lot of money. But JWs don't have a great track record in managing such projects efficiently and they may not realise the kinds of windfalls they may have expected.
4. If I understand the Circuit Overseer guidebook correctly, they promise to retire COs at a certain age and provide an allowance for them as special pioneers for the rest of their lives. With increasing lifespans and probably thousands of former Circuit Overseers to support, that's got to be a tremendous financial burden. At some point they may need to choose been going bust from making such payments, or cutting the allowances and thereby alienating and infuriating a huge group of key supporters.
5. Plus the mounting costs from meeting abuse claims. I don't think they were budgeting for this ten years ago or more. It's a cost that could easily escalate and which had not figured in whatever their long term plans have been for the organisation.
6. The new arrangement of removing financial autonomy from the congregations may backfire spectacularly on the organisation. It's quite easy to see a scenario in which contributions fall because JWs don't see them being spent locally and see no point in contributing when the funds are never allowed to accumulate. Resentment is also bound to build up just as soon as local KHs request funds for repairs and Watchtower refuses.
7. Disaffection among ordinary JWs seems to be at its highest ever. And people who are doubtful about the GB and all the scandals in the news and not going to contribute much money, if at all.
8. Numbers of JWs are falling in rich countries and still growing in the poorest countries. This presents a huge financial burden and dilemma for Watchtower. They claim that theirs is the most important message in the world and they spread the message without regard for financial gain. But at the same time they don't want to go bust. So what do they do? The closure of Gilead was an indication of where they are going.
9. They just produced a new Bible and songbook which must have cost a fortune to produce for the worldwide membership. There are rumours that the new edition was due to be released in German this summer, but was delayed. Was it delayed because the work isn't finished, or are they having difficulty financing the publication? You're probably talking about producing something like half a million new Bibles to start with, expensive quality items, which may cost millions of dollars. Then there's Spanish and all the rest to follow. Maybe they've bitten off more than they can chew with the revised NWT. It's a huge expense that has arrived when they can apparently least afford it.
10. They are furiously cutting bethel staff at the moment, down from 26,000 to 19,000 in just one year. But any downsizing of personnel is fraught with difficulty. On top of alienating thousands of people, they may make mistakes in choosing which people to let go. They may lose key skills and efficiencies they had not appreciated. In reality the cutbacks may not result in the kinds of savings that they look like producing on paper.