Warwick Project Update Email

by wifibandit 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • pixel

    In order to make the best use of dedicated funds and assist with other theocratic directives, the Governing Body recently adjusted the project completion date from December 31, 2016 to September 1, 2016.

    Aha! so, the completion by 4 months earlier is NOT because they worked fast and everything went so good, they are actually cutting it short because of funds.

    PS: I have heard comments already from some brothers saying that they will finish earlier because of some kind of divine approval.

  • brandnew

    Bit©hes build us our retirement mansions !!!!!!!!

    Then get lost !!!!!

  • Warwickslave

    You beat me to the punch, wifi I was going to post it up. Like I have mention the WT used many contractors. They did the heavy lifting, dubs were working inside the buildings. They also were trying to be green certified so they could get some money from the government.

    finishing early on project this big is not a big deal. You going have your average jW say how jah blessed the project and that's why it finish early. No, the reason is that they hired many contractors they are expensive now they are running low on money. I hope jah don't destroy all the construction workers in Armageddon, is going to take dubs 6,000 years to clean up NYC

  • Tenacious

    My goodness!

    I need to contact my Construction Group to make sure I'm still a go!

    Packing my bags as I type this.......

  • Stealth

    We have a saying in project management. Better, Faster, Cheaper. Pick 2. If you want faster, then you must either pay more or cut corner on quality to get it done faster.

    Could they be wanting to move up the completion date before their next annual meeting?

  • respectful_observer

    It could be due to any number of reasons. As others have cited, it could be costs associated with permitting issues, etc.

    My best guess is that they may have been offered some new incentive by the buyers of the Brooklyn properties to move out 4 months earlier than planned. Those new Brooklyn developers may be looking at some benefit to them to get started earlier than planned (permitting, project financing, any myriad of NYC building restrictions, regulations, etc.)

  • OneEyedJoe
    can you explain that management triangle you mentioned?

    It's what Stealth was alluding too as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_management_triangle

    Often summarized as Stealth said. You have 3 components to how a project turns out that are in conflict with each other. You have the scope (how much work you're going to do, and how good the quality will be), the timeline, and the cost. You can't optimize all 3 and if you make changes to one it will affect one of the other two, or both. If you want to make a project cheaper, generally speaking you let it take longer or you reduce scope/quality. Since they're doing the opposite (or at least they're not admitting to changing the scope or quality) then it makes me very suspicious of their statement.

    Sometimes large constructions like these have additional costs than just materials and labor. Sometimes permits and concessions expire. There are conditions to development that must be met with work or money. If you don't finish, you pay. There was a case I remember where the watchtower bought land for development. The city approved the development and gave incentives. One was having to make some donation or purchase for the local fire department (if memory serves me well). The real state agency that managed the sale had a clause that said that the org had a number of years to develop the property. If the development was canceled by the org and they wanted to sort of "return" the property, they had to pay a huge sum of money on fines.

    So sometimes accelerating the job may cost more in personnel but a lot less in red tape.

    I thought about this, but dismissed it because I figured that the original plan would've already been laid out such that inspections, permits, etc were all arranged and timed correctly to avoid any fees and unnecessary costs. Assuming someone didn't botch the planning, would a shorter timeline actually save money normally? While I've had a little exposure to construction, I'm not super familiar and certainly nothing on this scale.

    I guess you are saving some money by moving up the completion date by 3 months. They feed all the workers right? Saving 3 months food costs, that's saving something. Other than that, off the top of my head I can't think how it saves them money.

    Any savings on food cost would be minuscule unless they've actually reduced the amount of work that will need to be done (i.e. don't build one of the dorms or something). Assuming they're keeping the project scope the same, the only way they save money on food is if there's less waste because they're feeding more people. To get the job done faster, they'll have to bring in more people, so they're feeding people for 4 months less time but they're feeding more people and it balances out.

    In most cases, bringing the schedule in (especially in cases like this where there was already a fully developed plan) by throwing more people at it usually results in an increase in total person-hours required to finish the job. The more people you add the more overhead there is in coordinating them, and the more they're stepping on each other's toes and the more you have problems with the right people getting the right information at the right time. That's a big reason that, generally speaking, reducing a project's schedule increases it's cost.

  • Londo111

    It almost seems like they want to move in BEFORE the 2016 AGM. IF SO, what could they be announcing that is making them so nervous to move up the timeline?

    Edited: Just saw Stealth said the same thing.

  • Magnum

    you have personally seen Jehovah’s spirit in operation both at the project and with your personal circumstances

    How can they make these dogmatic, definite statements? How would one know for sure he had seen "Jehovah's spirit in operation"? Is there some way he could he prove it? Is there some objective way to measure it?

    What about all the countless times that things work out well for non-JWs? Are those times evidence of Jehovah's spirit in operation? It irks me how JWs say such things. Is the current JW financial situation evidence of Jehovah's spirit in operation? What about the situation in India? (http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6023413583839232/no-more-printing-wt-awake-my-country-shit-just-got-real)

  • StarTrekAngel


    I am not an expert at this matters either but I recall that particular incident. I believe the WT settled the dispute by re-assigning the land to another project.

    Here at work, we had a project in 2014 (nowhere as large as Warwick) where we had to build 9 telecommunications towers. Because they were built partly with incentives from the USDA, we had to bring the EPA in for environmental analysis. The person in charge of the project was not careful enough to notice one of the requirements. Certain migratory birds come thru the area twice a year and apparently towers can not be build during those times. When we went to erect the tower, part of the documents required to begin the construction were rejected by the FCC. Upon investigation, we realized the EPA has withdrawn their documents from the FCC in our behalf. We had to re-apply, but we were only granted the project after the birds were gone. Almost a whole year later. The project manager was fired as his carelessness costed the company a whole year worth of revenue.

Share this