The example from the article shows yahoo forking over much more money than Google, but it still being a disaster: "Indeed, the article notes that Yahoo agreed

The example from the article shows yahoo forking over much more money than Google, but it still being a disaster: "Indeed, the article notes that Yahoo agreed to pay nearly $100 million more than Google, which was important revenue for Mozilla.... 'I felt strongly that Yahoo was not delivering the search experience we needed and had contracted for.'" Yahoo paid nine-figures more than Google to be mozilla's default search engine, but the quality just wasn't good enough. This is a strong hint that quality in this space matters more than just money. How much more would yahoo have had to pay for Mozilla to put up with the decreased quality?