The idea put across is that if you're doing OK, 5% is a target to aim for. It suggests though that less is struggling along. Yet of all the open source projects I work with, WP comes across as the most needy. Apache, Linux, Debian, MySQL, WPSEO, W3TC, Varnish, and many others are all projects on which our and many other businesses are built upon.

And none of those make me feel bad for not using them, or for not submitting the inevitably ignored patches. I could, I suppose, hire a German to sit there creating German translations of everything and they'd definitely go in (unless somebody else beat us to it), or a support assistant to run through the support forums, but that's largely a thankless task for a business which is morally obligated to its shareholders to make a return.

In many ways I'd prefer it if there was something in the middle, between free and the super expensive VIP services or partnerships offered by Automattic. Our business relies on MS Office, and for that we pay an annual license fee. It's a small payment, really, and less than 0.1% of our turnover, let alone 5%, and it feels like a nice straightforward relationship. MS don't make us feel guilty for using their software, and they appear to be doing quite nicely on the back of it.

It's fine to give things away. Really, it is, but if that's not on the back of a sustainable business model then we have a problem. I'm not proposing a solution here, just a feeling. A sense of unease at the way the statement was formed and what it hints for the future. If not enough money and time is being invested into WP then the clients and users won't, by and large, dig deep, but will move onto a platform that *does* invest more, even if it's paid for.

It's an interesting business problem, and one that takes a smarter brain than mine, but I feel that WP needs either a true and openly accountable foundation behind it, or it needs a business behind it which has a model that funds its ongoing development.