4 ms·
That's an opinion, not a fact. In fact staff cost have more than doubled over the last year, while page views are stable. You can easily see this from the KMPG
by sparkzilla 12y ago
That's an opinion, not a fact. In fact staff cost have more than doubled over the last year, while page views are stable. You can easily see this from the KMPG report: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/e/e3/FINAL_13_14From_KPMG.pdf http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/e/e3/FINAL_...
- mikeyouse 12y ago> In fact staff cost have more than doubled over the last year, while page views are stable. From the SCFs on Page 3 of your link, staff costs in FY2013 were $15.98M and staff costs in FY2014 were $19.98M. This is only an increase of 25%. I'll take your word on the traffic stats but your assertion that staff cost has more than doubled is easily disproven.
- sparkzilla 12y agoSorry, for my error. They have doubled over the past few years, while page views are static.
- efbbbf 12y ago> while page views are static. They're static? http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyAllProjects.htm http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyAllProje... Sept 2014 - 23.1B views Sept 2013 - 17.9B Sept 2012 - 19.1B Sept 2011 - 15.8B Sept 2010 - 14.5B Sept 2009 - 11.8B Sept 2008 - 10.6B