- cross-posted to:
- firefox@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- firefox@lemmy.world
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.
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.
You are misinformed too.
This is only about the Mozilla Corporation. Hence, “the ones that make Firefox”.
The ones fighting for an open Internet are the Mozilla Foundation.
The Mozilla corporation are whole owned by the Mozilla Foundation… They are the same company. And both are not-for-profit.
No that’s the trick: Mozilla corp is for-profit.
iphone/android etc
reasonable point but firefox is hardly better off if you look at only desktop share
https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worldwide/#monthly-200901-202411
Even if he made the air suck everyone’s dick and chocolate pudding rain from the sky, he shouldn’t have seven million US dollars every year
700k is high for us but low for CEO pay… I don’t see why CEOs should get as much money when they never have any liability but that’s another question. (Or… what are they really good for, and couldn’t they simply be replaced by the decision matrix their team builds for them anyways)
CEO of a major company? Sounds like reasonable pay to me… The problem is that most workers are not getting paid what they deserve (assume this is correct pay for a top level CEO and adjust your thinking on what fair pay actually is accordingly) It’s not the CEOs (or doctors, lawyers, actors, etc) who are the root problem… It’s the kids born with a billion shares of fortune 500 stock who either grow up to be Trump/Elon or just do fuck all their whole life, but still get to rake in 90% of all “profits”. The people who inherited owning the whole world, they are the problem. The CEOs are just assholes willing to work for the people born into wealth… They still suck, and they uphold the shit system for their own benefit, but I don’t think they are hoarding the wealth, and I think the wealth being hoarded is the ultimate problem.
The average salary in the US is about 66k, meaning that for this to be justified it makes sense that one man gets the same compensation as about 105 average salaries. Does it still sound like reasonable pay?
Sounds like those 105 employees aren’t being paid what they should be. Pay them more. Leave this guy’s pay alone.
Personally I’d say, if top level CEO pay is $6.5m, and we set that as reasonable pay for that level job, and maybe we say the top should earn 20x the bottom, then the average pay in the US should be $325k. Which sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Stop thinking in terms of dragging the top down… Think in terms of lifting everyone else up. If the owners need to own less for this to happen, then so be it
“Just pay everyone more” is nice idea - but obviously that would require a lot of additional money. Whereas “lower CEO pay and raise employee pay” does not require additional money.
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.
How much money do they actually spend on the development of Firefox? That’s a figure I haven’t been able to find. However, in 2023, they had $1.5 billion in assets.
The only justification for a high-paying CEO is if they need to coordinate some large scale fundraising effort - schmoozing with other rich fucks to gain further donations, and plotting elaborate strategies to get more donations.
They have $1.5 billion in assets. How much more do they really need? Need someone to manage Mozilla’s assets? Make me the CEO. I’ll do it for you. In fact, I’ll do it for free. That will be my contribution to the Firefox project. I’ll stick that $1.5 billion in simple bond and index funds and withdraw at a very conservative 2% rate. And that will provide $30 million a year to spend on developers to improve Firefox and other projects. And we can just keep doing that forever. I’ll purposefully withdraw funds at a rate lower than the market averages, so the real value of the endowment grows over time. And that will allow us to slowly expand the scope of operations and start new projects. And while I won’t spend any time or effort to schmooze and jet set across the country to kiss the ass of some billionaire, if one wants to throw some money in the pot, we’ll have a donation button on the website.
What a self serving wank fest
The thing I resent the most with mozilla is them dropping servo development. It was bringing great changes to firefox.
What a poor soul, started out only making half a million dollars a year?? 😑
Firefox isn’t their only product, but it’s clearly their most popular one so this is very questionable.
Would be even better with info about their other product market share as well, and adjustment for inflation. Wouldn’t change the overall message, but would give less stuff for jerks like me to nitpick.
1.) Market share is a different number from daily active users. You can have increasing daily active users while losing market share if the market balloons like it did in 2012.
2.) Mozilla is a nonprofit to begin with. The goal is not to make money on Firefox or any other projects for that matter. The goal is to make the internet better for everyone. Firefox’s profitability will never have any real impact on Chairman pay.
- Firefox has recorded a drop in active users too.
- Ex-CPO Steve Teixeira stood up to Mozilla laying off people in his department, even though it was turning a profit. Ex-CPO.
I agree that Mozilla should act like a non-profit, which is in contrast to people in this thread who say Mozilla should be ranked alongside for profit corporations. But I don’t see Mozilla practicing what they preach
What is a senior director of gift planning and how does that justify a salary of $260k?
They’re probably responsible for spending the nonprofit’s funds in meaningful ways by donating it to smaller projects. There needs to be someone who oversees it and ensures it’s not being wasted.
The irony
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.
You can gain users while losing market share. This graph includes the rise of smartphones (+chrome preinstalled)
It almost perfectly correlates with chrome coming to android circa 2012.
One can keep using good software even if others don’t.
Fox hole
owo
You know what else coincides with 2009? Google Chrome’s release- a browser by a company with far more resources. I’m absolutely not a supporter of CEO pay going up in general- this post is just incredibly lazy
I dont feel the post is saying the two are correlated, more so simply that despite Firefox doing worse year over year, the CEOs compensation continues to rise.
As much as I’m opposed to Mozilla CEOs paying out absurd amounts, we still have to acknowledge that Mozilla has way more revenue streams nowadays than they had a few years ago.
So a sinking market share of one of their (free and open source) products doesn’t mean that the company is making less money overall.
Users on just desktop has been shrinking too, despite more people using computers in general https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity
This is precisely how I read it.
In other words, the marketshare isn’t tied to the ceo? I don’t see the point in putting that out there without any context, like is lowering the ceo’s compensation supposed to magically give Mozilla more market? Do they want a new ceo? How much is Mozilla making? What’s the end goal? Right now they’re competing with Microsoft and Google- it’s not exactly fair competition.
It’s just indicative of where their priorities lie. Dude’s compensation is like 3.5% of their total development budget. Meanwhile they’re being absolutely dominated by their competitors. Maybe instead of working on their golden parachutes, they should focus more on not being obliterated in the next 24-48 months.
Totally! How dare OP post some visual data without having detailed plans about how to solution a company’s various business issues. Super lazy.
Does it make sense for a CEO to be paid more while the business they manage dwindles?
In a vacuum, no- but we all know life is more complicated than this chart. For example, how do they compare to the market rate of other CEOs? Are they increasing profitability (something marketshare alone doesn’t say)? I’m not just gonna say “lower ceo pay = problem solved”- we have to do better. CEO pay is a systemic problem and needs a systemic solution- imo it should be capped across the spectrum or based on lowest employee pay but I’m sure I’m in the minority
The situation is always more complicated than a single graph can represent. Which is why I’m taking this in consideration with other context, and it’s solidifying my impression that Mozilla is failing and I need to find a firefox alternative before they shit it up further chasing money to pay their CEO a ridiculously inflated “market rate”. What good is some theoretical increased profitability (they’re a non-profit!) if all it does is serve to further inflate already inflated compensation packages?
Tbh there really isn’t any replacement, which tells you a lot about how profitable browsers that care even a little about privacy vs browsers that are just supported by bigger companies and have better marketing. And yes, there’s a bunch of smaller browsers around but they’re mostly reskins and die overnight without Google and Mozilla to carry the major load. It’s sad but privacy is not as popular as compatibility with every website and when you’re the default, you’re compatible everywhere. I’ve been around since Netscape and I don’t see a way to change this at all. Mozilla literally relies on Google ad money to stay afloat.
There is no Firefox alternative. There is Firefox and there is Chrome. Everything else is just a fancy reskin of either one of them.
firefox is not gecko, but yeah there is a depressing lack of viable alternatives
Without Firefox there is no Gecko
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.
Just the other day, I’ve been forced to watch at least 10 ads for Chrome on Youtube. Falls upon deaf ears with me, but others, I can imagine, will just mindlessly click and download that shit.
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.
The argument is if you don’t pay a CEO enough, they will go elsewhere where they are paid more. I don’t know whether that is a good argument or not, but (at least some) CEOs have a skill set critical to the success of an organization. It would be interesting to know how the pay of CEOs in general has changed over time. That would tell you if this is shitty or not. My expectation is that it is somewhere in the middle leaning toward acceptable
Is it adjusted for an inflation?
I smell some spurious correlation.
Yeah the obvious answer is chrome’s absolutely explosive dominance at a time when trust in Google was at an all time high. People forget that using Gmail and chrome and all of that stuff was basically a lifestyle flex back then, almost to the level of being an apple fanboy.
And say what you want about Google now, chrome was hands-down the greatest browser when it came out. Nothing was as lean and clean.
I also wonder how much the shift toward mobile devices in browser market share (>60% today from nearly non-existent 20 years ago) played into declining Firefox market share.
Not only was Chrome lean, clean and fast at the time, it was also the default option on mobile for Android. Same for Safari on iPhone. Since (most?) people use the default option, especially if it worked well during early adoption on mobile, it seems pretty understandable why we see chrome / safari where they are in browser market share.
Anyway, I’m glad we still have options like Firefox, and hope we don’t see decreasing support for the Gecko browser engine associated with the lower market share.
Crossing my fingers for Ladybird to get out there!
Nobody said this was causal… But also 14x increase is not inflation.
Its just that its a window into whats wrong with mozilla. Ofcourse many other things led to their downfall aswell.
The CEOs salary has almost zero affect on Firefox’s market share.
That decline can be explained relatively simply by two things.
One, people are increasing using mobile devices and very very rarely do they install another browser so they are using Chrome on Android and Safari on Apple devices.
Two, Google was/is using Google dot com to promote chrome. That is not something Mozilla could ever replicate.
Then there is the other bit where Mozilla tries to diversify their revenue sources and the faithful skewer them for it and tell them “just work on Firefox” when it is clear the market is unwilling to pay for a browser at all.
Still, increasing payment while market share is falling seems to be the wrong incentive, doesn’t it?
If you look at it from an incentive view point you have to pay people more to Capitan a sinking ship.
Also worth noting is that market share may or may not be relevant. Android has a higher market share world wide compared to Apple, however Apple users generate more revenue.
All this to say that the op graph is at best an incomplete picture of things designed to rile up people who lack critical thinking.
The point is that Firefox market share isn’t indicative of anything useful.
A better comparison would be something like revenue - if Mozilla makes more money, the CEO can earn more.
Mozilla does a lot more than just Firefox and I’m fact increasing revenue from other sources should have been a priority anyway
22% inflation vs 700% increase for the CEO between 2016 and 2022?
Minimum wage went up to $35 an hour, so nothing to see here. /$
But inflation for the wealthy was a lot more than inflation for everybody else. If you earn over a million a year, your income MUST increase by at least 2x PER YEAR in order to stay competitive against the rest of the ruling class! Won’t somebody think of the billionaires!!!
We need our CEO to be the greediest, most unethical, unemphatic selfish prick we can get to try to gobble up as much cash for the company as possible. If we pay any less, the greedy assholes won’t apply and we might get someone who gives some of the value back to the customer
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
Do you have examples for this claim?
Wtf That’s some serious BS
This is just hyperventilation. There’s no scam, there’s no conspiracy, it’s just the (sad) way the system works.
I think you mean hyperbole
maybe op suffers from asthma
The market share plot looks suspiciously clean, where are those numbers from?
Edit: looks like they’re from page view data. I know I spoof my browser to show chrome for better compatibility, I wonder how common that is among Firefox users.
I spoof my browser (Librewolf) as Firefox for privacy and I don’t encounter issues from not reporting my user agent as Chrome/Chromium. I think it’s pretty uncommon for a website to not work on Firefox, so I don’t see how this is necessary. The Chrome Mask extension is meant to be used on a per-site basis.
Do you use this extension? it allows you to do that on a site-by-site basis. Maybe only do it for sites with compatibility issues? You can report them right from the extension.
Also, I was curious if users were going down or if chrome was growing faster. Looks like it is going down, but not as much as the market share would suggest.
Lowest position pays 2M roubles a month?! Are they selling cocaine?!
ad-free cocaine, yeah.
If this inclusive to all the forks? Alot of folks run forks cus they don’t like both ff and chrome. Just sayin.
Doesn’t matter, all the forks combined make up a fraction of FF.
Plus people moving to forks still hurts Mozilla
Well they can suck the doodoo out my butthole cus that’s what they get if they keep going the wannabe big tech company route.
Probably not a coincidence that the share plummets around the same time as the smartphone explosion.
I’d be curious to see just desktop browsers, to see how much there’s really an exodus of Firefox users vs. new devices being added that restrict third-party browsers.
Also salary should be inflation-adjusted.
Neither probably changes the graph too much though.
Right, Firefox has the same situation with Chrome on mobile, as it had with Internet Explorer in Desktop.
I mean the graph starts in 09, and Chrome launched in 08. I assume that did more to them, but both were probably notable.
