A lot is personnel costs, I think. They had at least 70 people in May [1]. Estimating $200,000 per employee per year, that's 14 million. I'm not really sure

A lot is personnel costs, I think. They had at least 70 people in May [1]. Estimating $200,000 per employee per year, that's 14 million. I'm not really sure how accurate $200,000 is, but between benefits, events, office space (in SF), and other associated expenses, employees cost a lot more than just their salary. Is there any reason digg should have that many employees? Probably not. [1] http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/06/digg-cuts-10-of-staff/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/06/digg-cuts-10-of-staff/ edit: Oops, kind of slow on the trigger--other people said the same thing.