Khan Academy is a 501(c)3 [0] non-profit. "Increase revenue" maybe, or alternatively they may actually believe in their mission. Depends on how cynical you're feeling today I guess.
Non profit doesn't mean what people think it means.
Those expenses could be anything and anyone.
They could be increasing rev to further increase expenses like salaries and exec pay. Not "shareholders" in a typical corporate business way, but still driving profits for a handful of key stakeholders.
Not a bad thing, just don't think non-profit = altruistic orphan saving factory.
I accounted for that by conceding that "increase revenue" would be the cynical explanation. "Increase profit" would strictly speaking be illegal.
Regardless, the idea that Sal Khan specifically isn't fundamentally serious about education and sees this as his personal golden goose is a special kind of cynicism.
A section 501(c)(3) organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, such as the creator or the creator's family, shareholders of the organization, other designated individuals, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such private interests. No part of the net earnings of a section 501(c)(3) organization may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. A private shareholder or individual is a person having a personal and private interest in the activities of the organization.
None of that means that employees of 501(c)(3) organizations can't earn competitive compensation. But I think they'd be on pretty slippery ground if any part of compensation was tied directly to revenue increases.
Understand and agree with your general point, but Sal Khan quit a job at a hedge fund to be a maths tutor and that's how khan academy got started. I genuinely don't think money is his primary motivation. If it was, he would have just stayed at the hedge fund.
[0] https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/261...