- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Total 2022 pay: $6,903,089
Total 2023 pay: $6,260,072 - a $643,017 decrease
Base chair pay: $600,000
2023 chair bonuses and other incentives: $5,622,600
Sources:
For comparison, here are other executive salaries ($0 bonuses for each)
| Executive name | Title | Total Pay (2023) |
|---|---|---|
| MARK SURMAN | PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR | 715,143 |
| J. BOB ALOTTA | SVP, GLOBAL PROGRAMS | 508,138 |
| ANGELA PLOHMAN | COO, SECRETARY & TREASURER | 452,234 |
| ASHLEY BOYD | SVP, GLOBAL ADVOCACY | 427,701 |
| ZHILUN PANG | DIRECTOR OF FINANCE | 273,069 |
| DAVID WALKER | SENIOR COUNSEL | 268,565 |
| LAINIE DECOURSY | DIRECTOR, ORG EFFECTIVENESS | 267,028 |
| JUAN BARANI | SENIOR DIRECTOR, GIFT PLANNING | 262,879 |
| STEPHANIE WRIGHT | SR PROGRAM MANAGER, MOZFEST | 236,785 |
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s just a play on the charity CEO scam.
- Start a charity
- Get a CEO (usually the person who starts the charity)
- Pay the CEO what other CEOs make because if we don’t pay at that rate we won’t get the best CEO
- Fuck who ever the charity is for they’re just PR to afford the CEO salary
Usually I find these kinds of “non profit CEOs shouldn’t make money” things kind of annoying but honestly I don’t see any argument for a CEO to make more than a couple million regardless of context.
Remember people, 12M a year is over 32.000 a day. Every day.
People live on 32k a year.
What a poor soul, started out only making half a million dollars a year?? 😑
til my favorite browser has been losing a lot of ground over the years, i guess i’ve been living in my foxy bubble
The fact you’re on lemmy puts you in good company I believe. I, too, am fighting the chromium curse.
Is it adjusted for an inflation?
I smell some spurious correlation.
sfgsdgdsgdsgdsgdfs
i switched to firefox because it had tabs and ie didn’t. ie7 had tabbed browsing in 2006? i later switched to chrome because firefox stopped working well and i got sick of troubleshooting. i switched to brave a few years ago and started using firefox again this year, but i’m regularly switching browsers still trying to find one i like.
the loss of market share was because of chrome, right? Google had a good reputation back then, and their browser worked easily and you could customize it. I wish there were more options that weren’t modified firefox or chrome, but i get why it’s tough.
If I had to guess, this chart lines up pretty well with the adoption of smartphones, so I’d say the drop is due to people using the default Android and iOS browsers on their phones. I’ve installed Firefox and use it on my phone but I don’t know many people who bother changing from the defaults.
That makes a lot of sense! I have trouble remembering exactly when this or that tech was introduced.
This graph shows a disingenuous relationship between revenue and the market share of a free and open source project within the walls of a not-for-profit organization. Firefox is not a revenue stream in the traditional sense. In fact, most of Mozilla 's money comes from grants and donations for projects and research they do.
I get that CEO=EVIL is a viral topic these days but if all you know about Mozilla is that they make the Not Chrome browser, then you should really educate yourself on what it is that Mozilla actually does for the internet. Then you might feel a little better with this pay scale graph.
That all aside, this graph shows the market share of Mozilla when there were 5 browsers available to the vast majority of users, Internet Explorer, Firefox, chrome, Opera, and safari. It’s also before chrome took over the market share from IE at the same time that it pushed out Firefox as the leading browser because chrome was available on the iPhone and was the default browser on Android devices. Hardly a surprise to see that when the internet exploded in users and literally every human being started to carry around a chrome device in their pockets that Mozilla Firefox’s market share went down.
The Mozilla foundation’s largest source of revenue is Google, who is also their largest source of competition. To simply keep increasing the pay of their chief executive officer, to keep them kissing the ass of Google, seems like a strategy that doesn’t align with what many would consider metrics of a successful project, like active users…
Looks like you missed the point of the graph.
Graph doesn’t even show active users. It shows market share which is totally different. Market share is percentage of total users regardless of how many users are out there. Active users can go up while market share goes down. That’s why this graph is disingenuous.
Graphs like these have been going on for years.
It is possible that the CEO came in and cleaned out the bloat of workers that just come in and hang out basically (common in the tech field and has been done to Twitter (X)). -That would make the salary increase correlate to savings. Showing a correlation between development and available funds would be pertinent. Just off the top of my head, I remember significant improvements since first seeing graphs like this.
Also take into account the competition was dismal until Chrome came along. Much like the game console market when Sony entered it, the browser market was hurting with a hole to fill for a strong leader.
Mozillas politics don’t help. Choosing a side can alienate about half your user base. Flip-flopping sides and you’re killing off your whole user base. Declaring dishonestly that ‘we can’t do this without your donations’ while making bank from Google (long time ago) doesn’t help either. Politics would need to come into play here and how much those are on the CEO.
They mostly appeal to Linux users (people more likely to switch out things), and almost every Linux YouTuber promotes Brave (which is shady af). Brave also has or had an undeniable corporate presence in the browsers sub on Reddit with weekly Brave vs *** for a particular category Brave would win at by low karma accounts. Firefox lacked that marketing, not for being a bad browser. Prior to, they had the FOSS fanbase influencing for them.
Statistics and graphs are tools of propagandists. There might be something there, but there’s often a bigger picture to be seen. Firefox isn’t a bad browser, and I’m hoping they can turn it around to gain marketshare again. (and drop all politics).
