←back to thread

Mozilla lays off 70

(techcrunch.com)
929 points ameshkov | 1 comments | 15 Jan 20 19:48 UTC | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
dman ◴[15 Jan 20 21:11 UTC] No.22058629[source]▶
Brendan Eich has a helpful chart of Compensation of Highest paid executive at Mozilla vs Firefox market share over time.

https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1217512049716035584/p...

replies(8): >>22058725 #>>22059044 #>>22059122 #>>22059260 #>>22059384 #>>22059453 #>>22059705 #>>22060015 #
bearcobra ◴[15 Jan 20 22:22 UTC] No.22059453[source]▶
This chart feels a bit disingenuous given that Mozilla's form990s show Eich's salary tracking along basically the same line until his departure in 2014.
replies(3): >>22059687 #>>22060063 #>>22060527 #
Blake_Emigro ◴[15 Jan 20 23:35 UTC] No.22060063[source]▶
It also doesn't take into consideration revenue growth, which according to the corporation's Wiki page grew much faster and higher in multiples than her salary.

As well, according to the same Wiki, "There will be no shareholders, no stock options will be issued and no dividends will be paid." It would be a bummer to run a company of that size, be dedicated to it for so long, and not have any stake in it. Imagine her opportunity cost...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation

replies(2): >>22060201 #>>22060543 #
BrendanEich ◴[16 Jan 20 00:42 UTC] No.22060543[source]▶
Wikipedia is unreliable. Perhaps you missed it, but Verizon bought Yahoo!, realized how Marissa's five year default search deal with Firefox was bleeding money as most users reset their default to Google, and Mozilla and Verizon declared the other party in breach in rapid succession. This will go to court, and my money is on Verizon. There will be no balloon payment of the last two years.

The jump in comp in 2017, as far as I can tell, was predicated on the Verizon payments being fulfilled. I hear it was also a quid pro quo for Foundation board members who demanded (order of magnitude smaller) salaries for their work as board members. Perhaps they do a lot, but in past, board members (including me) worked for no added comp.

Mitchell may be worth it, but I'd want more of a turnaround in market share, new revenue sources, or both. Maybe that is just me.

replies(3): >>22060696 #>>22062892 #>>22081225 #
1. Blake_Emigro ◴[16 Jan 20 01:07 UTC] No.22060696[source]▶
I'm in no way an insider and haven't paid attention to the history of this saga. I was just using public, possibly shaky info like the others. My point was to show that one graph is not the whole story, and it prompted you to add even more details. Your last point is definitely fair. I use Firefox on my phone and recently started learning JavaScript, so um, thank you.