Mozilla chairman's salary vs Firefox market share (as of 2023) : firefox

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

[-] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

I don't like that your graph key indicates the pay line is in $US millions then the axis is in millions not units. Indicating that the values are in millions of millions which seems unlikely

[+] TheTwelveYearOld@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

[deleted]

[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

How much is the Duck Duck Go CEO earning?

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 week ago

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

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 week ago

Honestly I could care less about CEO salaries or company politics. I care about the service they provide. In this case the service is bad.

[+] madthumbs@lemmy.world -13 points 1 week ago

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).