3 ms·
> The company generated $886,000 in revenue Plenty of companies spend more than that on just AWS egress fees. I’m not saying money spent on a private jet is r
by alberth 3y ago
> The company generated $886,000 in revenue
Plenty of companies spend more than that on just AWS egress fees.
I’m not saying money spent on a private jet is right or wrong.
But when a company is not profitable, you could compare this to anything. Like the headline could have easily been “Canoo spent double its annual revenue on AWS egress fees”
- acdha 3y agoAWS egress fees serve a legitimate business function. They might be higher than what they could be with optimization but they go towards a business service. What we’re seeing here is more like if those egress charges were due to him hosting the business on his own cloud service even though it cost more.
- bombcar 3y agoDid it cost more? From a quick search the amount seems reasonable for "years worth of private jet use". If CEO travel is a legitimate business function, you're now arguing "AWS vs server in your closet" kind of questions and haggling on price.
- acdha 3y agoYes, it did. The question is whether there’s enough value generated by taking a private jet instead of normal plane flights, which is unlikely to be the case for a business losing money.