That seems to be a popular question for magazines and newspapers looking at "the Mormons" these days. The latest entry: A modern prophet goes global, in the Economist (and thanks to a reader who sent me the link). The accompanying pic shows a blond missionary in white shirt and tie walking past a third-world hovel. Understandably, the piece highlights events in England: "Also dear to Mormon hearts are parts of northern and central England where, soon after Smith had his visions, the faith won many converts." After touching on 19th-century emigration to Utah, it notes that now "the Mormons want their converts to stay put and use their spanking new meeting-house and temple; and their keen young missionaries are as likely to be British or Danish (even, in one case, from Greenland) as American."
In the "who are these guys?" vein (and five bonus points to anyone who can ID that quote without using Google), the article notes: "For now, at least, the Mormons present as paradoxical a mix of American and global culture as any multinational with headquarters in the United States and customers across the world." Hmmm, I don't think we're that paradoxical. But the article makes reference to Mitt Romney, Brandon Flowers, and President Hinckley, certainly an interesting mix of LDS luminaries. It also quotes scholars Douglas Davies ("the Latter-day Saints are too centralised to be a 'world religion' in the full sense") and Margaret Barker ("part of the faith's power lies in its insistence that prophecy and divine revelation did not just happen once") before closing with a paragraph comparing Mormons with Muslims ("like the Muslims, the Mormons will be preachers in the world pulpit in the third Christian millennium").
On the whole, a very nice article, the kind the LDS PR department prays for at night.