6 ms·
Meanwhile Mozilla's CEO salary went from $2.9m to $5.6m from 2020 to 2021.
by vasco 4y ago
Meanwhile Mozilla's CEO salary went from $2.9m to $5.6m from 2020 to 2021.
- touwer 4y agooutrageaus
- lbriner 4y agoSame with Wikimedia. The association seems to become some kind of cult where it is seen as OK to spend enormous amounts of money on overheads and salaries without really making anything better because "big salaries = good performance", I wish we had put that fallacy to rest already.
- tiffanyh 4y agoAs a for-profit business, that CEO salary is typical for a company of their size. People seem to always confuse Mozilla Foundation (non-profit) and Mozilla (for-profit) entities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
- goodpoint 4y agoThat doesn't make it any more legitimate.
- alxlaz 4y agoThe salary is definitely typical. What's less typical is an under-performing employee getting a 93% raise.
- tiffanyh 4y agoWhat makes you say this individual is underperforming? What metric are you measuring this individual against? Because Revenues went from $441M (2020), to $527M (2021), that's a 20% YoY increase in topline revenue growth. That's huge for a company of this size. https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2021/mozilla-fdn-2021-fs-final-1010.pdf https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2021/mozilla-fdn-202...
- coldtea 4y agoThe only metric that matters given the mission of Mozilla is user share...
- alxlaz 4y ago> What metric are you measuring this individual against? Because Revenues went from $441M (2020), to $527M (2021), that's a 20% YoY increase in topline revenue growth. That's huge for a company of this size. That annual report can be tl;dr-ed as "we're like years away from closing shop but we sampled data at juuust the right moment to make you wonder why". That's a huge for a company of this size, but it's also largely accidental. The mechanisms behind the revenue growth are fragile and tied to the browser (if not directly, like Pocket, at least in the initial stages of the funnel and through branding, like Mozilla VPN). And the browser is bleeding users. There are plenty of alternatives for all these services which will be there if users decide to switch browsers. The only way it'll still look like growth next year is if adoption of paid services will be slow enough that it'll take more than an year to reach the declining user cap. Mozilla can secure secure its position through attractive software and services, not bean counting bullshit -- paying customers pay for software and services, not numerology. Failing to deliver attractive software and services is a core failure, and the capital underperformance: unless it's rectified, annual reports won't look as pretty. So yeah, my metric here is increasing paid service adoption base. $441M -> $527M is an attractive looking feature, but that's because it only contains the initial adoption uptick in a shrinking potential customer base.
- throwuxiytayq 4y agoMozilla needs a cheaper CEO who knows the fuck they’re doing. The current leadership has verifiably demonstrated that they don’t. I’m using Firefox and not switching anytime soon, but the Mozilla situation is making me angry and sad at the same time.
- sshine 4y agoI'm in this boat. Interacting with the UI on Firefox for iOS incurs several seconds of waiting: Clicking the tab icon, opening a new tab, clicking back. ANYTHING, really. Often it just dies. If I close all tabs, it gets better. So I basically have to choose between tabs or any acceptable UI speed. They literally went from "browser is slow with many tabs" to "now tabs are super lightweight" to "this is a shitshow". I'm not sure how they can be so deliberate and so accidental at the same time. I wish the board would fire those incompetent leaders and regain market value, but I'm afraid it's a collusion where everyone in power is just ripping Mozilla for what it's got before the ship sinks. Sure feels that way.
- D13Fd 4y agoWhat device are you using? On my iPhone 14 and last-gen iPad, I don't notice any of that with Firefox.
- sshine 4y agoiPhone 13
- m4rtink 4y agoOn iOS Mozilla might not be actually 100% at fault if their app does not work correctly. This is because an inside apple policy dictates that all apps on iOS must use the Safari web engine and can't ship their own. As a result all browsers on iOS are just glorified Safari skins & Web application support continues to lag as a result among other things & Apple has complete control over what that one true web engine of iOS supports and what not.
- rvz 4y agoAll paid for by Google. Despite 14 years ago suggesting they wouldn't solely rely on Google's money [0] and laughing all the way to the bank after letting go 'Mozillians' in 2020. Mozilla's so-called mission statement in a privacy focused browser is a complete failure. This cult around Mozilla needs to stop. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20120105090543/https://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9044160/Mozilla_can_live_without_Google_s_money_Baker_says_ https://web.archive.org/web/20120105090543/https://www.compu...
- PurpleRamen 4y agoIIRC Yahoo also paid a fair share of it for a while. Didn't they even get a whopping 500 Million at the end?
- KingOfCoders 4y agoBy FF users who go to google if they type or misstype something in the address bar.
- grandpoobah 4y agoIt shouldn't even be 1 million. What value could one person even hypothetically add, that would justify a multi-million dollar salary? Not even mentioning the fact that Firefox is losing market share.
- sph 4y agoIt's more than justified if the Mozilla CEO's mission is to lose users and market share. They are doing an incredible job, and deserve every last cent.
- ghusto 4y agoNothing, but their value isn't directly linked to their salary. It's more due to how unrestrained capitalism works, where you need to offer that kind of money to stop them going to someone who can offer more. For places like Mozilla, there _is_ a solution to this though: Altruistic organisations like Mozilla (which they at the very least are on the surface) would do their best work with altruistic individuals. Those kinds of people would sacrifice an unreasonably high salary, just so they can work for an organisation they believe does good. So it's a win-win. You get the types of people you need, and you pay less. Why this isn't happening, I don't know. My guess is that one dumb fuck infiltrated the organisation, and he's hiring more dumb fucks.
- edwnj 4y ago[dead]
- lamontcg 4y agoApple and Google's CEO salary is what?
- coldtea 4y agoThat is relevant how? They shouldn't bring one a regular market CEO, and what their CEO has to do to win users and promote the FOSS engine has nothing or little to do with what Apple and Google's CEO has to do to pad stocks. In fact, it's precisely of the BS focus they have, doing what any corporate spiky-haired boss CEO would do, that they lose users...
- lamontcg 4y agoTANSTAAFL and a modern web rendering engine is one of the nuclear power plant projects of software engineering. There is going to have to be a large engineering effort behind building any of them. And expecting software to be completely free and for everyone to work for peanuts is just exploitative. There are also only three alternatives and you don't get to choose some naively idealistic FOSS implementation that doesn't exist. Tearing down Firefox only makes Google and Apple stronger.
- beej71 4y agoMaybe the CEO's salary needs to be the number of daily active users gained over the past year. :)