Basically, you are consulting for the company to solve an issue, and the open source is an enabler.
And $240k/year is what they pay an individual contributor. You are basically being paid for your time and expertise and not really for your product.
Source code is freely available. We sell ready-to-run binaries, almost entirely to individual end users (desktop application).
I am curious as to what you're selling, and why wouldn't anybody just download a free copies from somewhere else?
I've tried to build a community where supporting the continuous full time development of the software is seen as a social good, and thus worth participating in even if the software itself is available at no charge. Most of our income comes from "subscriptions" which have nothing to do with the licensing-style arrangements seen today, but are merely a recurring payment agreement that gives us a consistent income, allowing us to avoid endless "got to make a new release" mania.
[1] https://discourse.ardour.org/t/another-month-missing-the-fin...
> There’s more people (perhaps another dozen) pitching in with translation, release engineering (preparing Ardour for users), Mantis triaging (“Mantis” is the bug database used to keep track of known problems, “triaging” the process of prioritizing/verifying bugs) and other necessary tasks.
http://ardour.org/support_expectations.html
I have a hard time believing that $240k/year is enough to pay an honest market rate to all these people for their time.
There is also additional revenue flow via Harrison Consoles' Mixbus, which is a separate commercial product based on Ardour. The amount that flows "directly" to Ardour is small, but the overall amount does add another person at Harrison working on the software in a mostly-full-time capacity.
Also, which market should we be aiming for when defining "market rate" ?
That's a very good question :)