zlacker

[return to "Once again so many people are led to think Wikipedia is broke and must be saved"]
1. yupper+5b[view] [source] 2022-09-14 17:57:19
>>akolbe+(OP)
Sure but pointing out $350k executive salaries as somehow lavish is strange. That seems low for an executive at one of the most important (or at least, most viewed) websites on the planet.
◧◩
2. JohnFe+Uf[view] [source] 2022-09-14 18:18:54
>>yupper+5b
$350k salaries _are_ lavish, though. It seems strange to me that people would argue otherwise.
◧◩◪
3. mcguir+Qq[view] [source] 2022-09-14 19:04:29
>>JohnFe+Uf
Sundar Pichai gets ~$250M. Parag Agrawal gets something like $30M.
◧◩◪◨
4. Dma54r+BF[view] [source] 2022-09-14 20:09:14
>>mcguir+Qq
People working for them earn 100k+, Wikipedia has volunteers writhing the content for free.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. yupper+gO[view] [source] 2022-09-14 20:54:12
>>Dma54r+BF
If you want to compare it based on the people working for each company:

Parag has around 3900 employees. Wikipedia has around 550. Around 7x multiplier.

$30m / 7 = ~$4.3mil

Sundar has around 135k employees. 245x multiplier.

$250m / 245 = ~$1mil.

$350k seems like a steal no matter how you put it.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. akolbe+iW[view] [source] 2022-09-14 21:35:27
>>yupper+gO
How about comparing it to the Internet Archive (2019)? 169 employees, $11M salary costs:

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/943...

Wikimedia Foundation (2019): 291 employees, $56M salary costs.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200...

Less than twice the US employees, more than five times the salary costs. (Both orgs also have some non-US employees included in the salary costs total, but they are a small minority of the staff.)

[go to top]