13 ms·
You’ve pointed out two examples of “big personality” CEOs that are colloquially understood to “own” their company, but your argument seems to be that they must
by KyeRussell 5y ago
You’ve pointed out two examples of “big personality” CEOs that are colloquially understood to “own” their company, but your argument seems to be that they must own them by virtue of it sounding preposterous to a layperson that they don’t?
Tesla would probably exist without Musk as CEO. Amazon would certainly exist without Bezos as CEO.
- HWR_14 5y agoI kept using the word "employee", not "owner". And I think most people would agree that the largest shareholder who is CEO is not an employee in the standard use of the word. Since the OP responded in a different post that Zuckerberg, by virtual of control of the majority of Meta stock isn't an employee, he's clearly referring to power, not to equity. And I think it's true that Bezos (if he chose to reassert himself) or Musk can do whatever they want with their respective companies. I mean, even if he doesn't control more than 20% of the stock, who do you think is going to stand up to Musk? The institutional investors? A coalition of people who bought into Tesla because they worship him? The minority that is none of the above?
- KingOfCoders 5y agoThe second he loses trust he's gone.