this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
138 points (93.1% liked)

Firefox

19052 readers
143 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sugar_in_your_tea 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Here are Mozilla's financials (PDF, covers 2022 and 2023), and skme highlights:

  • "royalties" (Google) - ~$500M
  • investment income - $10-50M ($1B in investments)
  • SW dev expenses - $220-260M

They're putting quite a lot of that Google money into investments, probably in case the gravy train dries up.

Mozilla has ~750 employees, about 700 of which work on Firefox in some capacity.

So, if we take $260M/700, we get $370k per employee. That's pretty high, though I guess it makes more sense in SF. If they moved their operations to a less expensive state, they could cut that in half or more.

However, if the Google money ends, they would need to drastically cut their workforce, like by more than half, or raise a ton of cash some other way.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe they should really consider moving then. If they have trouble recruiting elsewhere can't they do remote work?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 1 points 12 hours ago

Yeah, probably. But just moving isn't going to close that gap, they would need a significant reduction in haedcount or a significant increase in income.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Google pays them hundreds of millions annually. That's not the kind of money you find lying around or can quickly make by spinning up another branded service like a VPN.

Their only realistic hope for getting that kind of money is another search provider and the only ones who are big enough and might pay that I can think of off the top of my head would be:

Bing (Microsoft) who'd probably pay less,

Yandex (people would whine they're Russian even though they're a multinational and admittedly their market in the west is pretty weak so their incentive to pay for something like this low unless they're trying to expand, again they'd likely pay less),

I don't think there is a third. There are lots of other search engines but few that can afford to casually toss away a few hundred million a year to be set as default on a browser with less than 5% market share. If a third existed it would probably be some Chinese search company trying to break into the western market and again people would whine about their character for geopolitical reasons and accuse Mozilla of being bought by them.

Apple could also afford to do this but they themselves take Google's money to set Google as a default search engine in safari and are too interested in bundling software with hardware to ever offer something to everyone like that.

They should try and trim costs it's true. Start with CEO pay (though at 7 million it's only a small piece of the costs that need to be cut to be safe should they lose this money) and work on through. The problem I think is Mozilla doesn't consider Firefox the end all, be all of their mission and that's unfortunate because at this point it's the only thing they do of any worth. We think of Mozilla as Firefox but they think of Firefox as just another big project that if it gets cut isn't the end, the CEO will still have their job, there will still be busy-working pretending to be an advocacy body and soliciting money for that despite the fact that Firefox existing is the only reason anyone still cares what they have to say as they're part of the web development consortium.

There's no quick and easy way out from their relationship with Google. The government could force a quick divorce but that would lead to Firefox imploding. Assuming that doesn't happen it'll be a long, slow slog of a process and I don't see any easy solutions. They've tried branded VPN, they've tried things like pocket and fakespot. They don't have any services they can offer the corporate world which is unfortunate as many companies sustain free public offerings off of charging corporations fees.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Google funds probably 95% of Mozilla. Hundreds of millions a year.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 8 points 1 day ago

More like 75-85% (PDF of financials), but yeah, it's massive.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Be sure and tell them how they’ll replace the funds while you’re at it.

[–] lemmeBe 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Finding a cheaper CEO would probably do it.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago

Mozilla made about $480 million from Google in 2022. The CEO made about $7 million that year.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I keep telling myself to donate to them, but I still haven't.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Most of your money goes to CEO salary and not towards developing Firefox.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I've donated in November after I switched back to Firefox as my main browser. I read about the search deal dependency and wanted to contribute to what Mozilla called "reclaim the internet". Feel something akin to 'buyer's remorse' when I now read how little goes to development of Firefox/Gecko (the only multi-platform alternative engine for rendering the internet) and how much goes into CEO salaries.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

Your donation money does not go towards the salary of the Mozilla Corporation CEO. But yes, it does not go to Firefox development either. The Mozilla Corporation, which develops Firefox, needs to have enough money independent of donations, because the devs' livelihoods depend on that. Well, and the donation money isn't nearly enough to cover those costs anyways.
So, the Mozilla Foundation (which owns the Mozilla Corporation and which you donate to) uses the donation money instead for political activism, for community work (which may lead to more contributors to Firefox) and sometimes they award some of that money to other open-source projects, which are also vital for an open web, but which are not visible enough to collect donations.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

CEO salary is paid mostly from default search engine deals. But the same holds true for Firefox development, so you're right that the money doesn't go towards developing Firefox.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What’s weird to me is that Mozilla Foundation can probably sustain Firefox development from it’s investment income alone (e.g. $37.5M in 2023): https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/wiki/File:501c3_2023_990_Mozilla_Foundation_-_Full_Filing_-_Nonprofit_Explorer_-_ProPublica.pdf

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It might be possible to build Firefox for less than the IIRC ~$500M that's currently budgeted, but $37.5M seems optimistic.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's more like $260M, from their financials. Salaries in SF are expensive.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 19 hours ago

And keep in mind that there's also a big part that's not in SF.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

We don’t need to build Firefox though. Keeping up with the web standards and general maintenance does require a lot of work, but the base is there already.

Also, with a $100k salary, $37.5M/yr is 375 developers. If we allow EU devs where 50k€ would be a reasonable salary, that’s 690 developers now.

I understand there’s also admin work and a lot of marketing (which Firefox so desperately needs), and altogether it’s a stretch, but I believe that it is possible to pull it off.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Mozilla today also has that base, but it still has about 1000 employees IIRC. It also pays more than $100k, even for EU devs, and of course also has to pay taxes and what not on top of that. And don't forget the infrastructure, for running builds, distributing the software, running Firefox Sync, etc., which does not come cheap.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 4 points 1 day ago

750 employees, but the point stands.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

50k would be reasonable because the company then pays a big percentage to social security both for pensions and health service. I'm around that number currently, but if I account the amount the company pays to the government, not the money they withhold from be for taxes the money THEY pay to get for my salary, I would be around 75k easily. This is something a lot of people don't understand when comparing US vs EU salaries, then go to the US and get taxed plus made to pay insurance and shit until they end up with less disposable income than me.

Please remove the shitty EU salary interpolation. Thanks.

[–] kewko 9 points 1 day ago

A little too late