Path: ...!news.misty.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeds.news.ox.ac.uk!news.ox.ac.uk!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!nntp.terraraq.uk!.POSTED.tunnel.sfere.anjou.terraraq.org.uk!not-for-mail
From: Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: rPI Goes Public
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 09:44:24 +0100
Organization: terraraq NNTP server
Message-ID: <wwvcyojx6af.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
References: <WtqcncEXG8y0nPT7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com>
	<v4bisq$1hptf$1@dont-email.me> <wwvr0d0g5la.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
	<v4fgrm$2cbhf$1@dont-email.me> <v4g2eq$2hm97$1@dont-email.me>
	<v4gsge$2phal$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: innmantic.terraraq.uk; posting-host="tunnel.sfere.anjou.terraraq.org.uk:172.17.207.6";
	logging-data="91008"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@innmantic.terraraq.uk"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9zwv+E2i//QFZCLGvRxnLtTM2gI=
X-Face: h[Hh-7npe<<b4/eW[]sat,I3O`t8A`(ej.H!F4\8|;ih)`7{@:A~/j1}gTt4e7-n*F?.Rl^
     F<\{jehn7.KrO{!7=:(@J~]<.[{>v9!1<qZY,{EJxg6?Er4Y7Ng2\Ft>Z&W?r\c.!4DXH5PWpga"ha
     +r0NzP?vnz:e/knOY)PI-
X-Boydie: NO
Bytes: 2803
Lines: 33

Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes:
> On 14/06/2024 01:21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 20:21:25 +0100, Pancho wrote:
>>> My point was that The Raspberry Pi Foundation is a charity.
>> That’s not the company that has gone public.
>
> The Raspberry Pi Foundation and Raspberry Pi Ltd (Or whatever it is
> called) are intimately linked. Raspberry Pi Ltd is a subsidiary.

Raspberry Pi Holdings plc. 49% owned by the foundation if I’m reading
the prospectus correctly.

> So the Raspberry Pi Foundation now has a large share of an asset worth
> 100s of millions. Shares that are easily convertible into cash. The
> people who control Raspberry Pi Foundation have control over the
> shares in Raspberry Pi Ltd.
>
> People who control charities have a number of ways to enrich
> themselves. Paying themselves large salaries is one way, employee
> share ownership schemes are another.

You can look up the salaries for the senior staff in the prospectus, if
you want. Personally I don’t think they’re unreasonable in context.

> Both of these methods are influenced by the perceived value of the
> organisation. They will tell you they are growing the value of the
> charity for the good of humanity, but they coincidentally get rich in
> the process.

Personally I think the people behind the Pi deserve to get rich, they’ve
made a product that’s both practically and socially useful.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/