zlacker

>>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.

>>yupper+5b
$350k salaries _are_ lavish, though. It seems strange to me that people would argue otherwise.

>>JohnFe+Uf
Sundar Pichai gets ~$250M. Parag Agrawal gets something like $30M.

>>mcguir+Qq
Apples and oranges, you should instead compare it with other non-profits. According to top links in search for 'non profit ceo salary' give me average salary numbers about $150k

>>zihotk+0v
I'd say it's still a tricky comparison because the WMF is (reductively) a tech company, and tech sector salaries remain pretty high. For a lot of roles they need to fill, they're competing with other tech companies for those employees, not just other nonprofits. A salary that's fantastic by average-nonprofit standards might be vastly underpaying someone who's deciding between a job at the WMF or Google.

>>kemayo+rD
WMF is not a tech company, and their value is not in their tech. Their value is in their user created and populated content .

>>LegitS+HW
WMF is a company that's mostly engaged in maintaining a tech product, and much of its hiring needs are for people who'd otherwise be working in tech. If it's not in the tech sector then there's not any meaning to that category.