4 ms·

the context is "for-profit" ... if a company is for-profit and somebody is contributing for free then that is a very personal choice - but there are more obviou

by rv-de 6y ago

the context is "for-profit" ... if a company is for-profit and somebody is contributing for free then that is a very personal choice - but there are more obvious reasons for not doing so.

tomp 6y ago
It's not for-profit. The whole organisation is non-profit. It's being funded by contributions, as well as profits from a subsidiary. The fact that one of the subsidiaries is structured as a for-profit is a red herring. Just a legal structure. The whole organisation is non-profit.
- rv-de 6y ago
  If a CEO can justify such a salary then it is very much for-profit ... your argument is just a play with words.
  - tomp 6y ago
    No, the problem is that people don't understand what non-profit means. It has nothing to do with the internal structure of the company, employee salary (CEO is also an employee) etc. It has to do with external structure, i.e. ownership and distribution of profits (which there cannot be any). Mozilla CEO's salary isn't even that big, in the large scheme of things. https://www.erieri.com/blog/post/top-10-highest-paid-ceos-at-nonprofits-2020 https://www.erieri.com/blog/post/top-10-highest-paid-ceos-at... I agree, though, that non-profit shouldn't automatically be conflated with beneficial or working for the common good, as is common.
  - untog 6y ago
    What is the acceptable salary for the CEO of a non-profit?
- fierarul 6y ago
  The IRS would disagree with this. Mozilla Foundation has a staff of 80 and "manages" about 1000 volunteers. It's unclear how much donations it gets as they published a consolidated report that includes the corporation. I expect that very little. Mozilla Corporation has a staff of 750 and $400M revenue (I expect most from the Google search deal). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation

by rv-de 6y ago

the context is "for-profit" ... if a company is for-profit and somebody is contributing for free then that is a very personal choice - but there are more obvious reasons for not doing so.

tomp 6y ago

It's not for-profit. The whole organisation is non-profit. It's being funded by contributions, as well as profits from a subsidiary. The fact that one of the subsidiaries is structured as a for-profit is a red herring. Just a legal structure. The whole organisation is non-profit.

rv-de 6y ago
If a CEO can justify such a salary then it is very much for-profit ... your argument is just a play with words.
- tomp 6y ago
  No, the problem is that people don't understand what non-profit means. It has nothing to do with the internal structure of the company, employee salary (CEO is also an employee) etc. It has to do with external structure, i.e. ownership and distribution of profits (which there cannot be any). Mozilla CEO's salary isn't even that big, in the large scheme of things. https://www.erieri.com/blog/post/top-10-highest-paid-ceos-at-nonprofits-2020 https://www.erieri.com/blog/post/top-10-highest-paid-ceos-at... I agree, though, that non-profit shouldn't automatically be conflated with beneficial or working for the common good, as is common.
- untog 6y ago
  What is the acceptable salary for the CEO of a non-profit?
fierarul 6y ago
The IRS would disagree with this. Mozilla Foundation has a staff of 80 and "manages" about 1000 volunteers. It's unclear how much donations it gets as they published a consolidated report that includes the corporation. I expect that very little. Mozilla Corporation has a staff of 750 and $400M revenue (I expect most from the Google search deal). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation