FWIW, Mozilla can't be sold, as a non-profit foundation cannot be bought by anyone. Mitchell has outlined that a number of times as something very positive, don't take it away from us.
That said, I of course know that there's extensive review involved in what Mozilla uses, esp. in an area as critical as this. My question wasn't trying to be negative but genuine interest of why we made that choice (which I'm not sure was answered so far), given that others are facing similar decisions.
When you say "we run a dedicated instance", does that imply that their code is completely open or do we have a licensed copy that we run on (virtual) machines that are under our control?
Again, I'm genuinely interested in the backgrounds of the choice here and wonder in what circumstances the same is a good choice for others out there and where the trade-offs are.