[dangrossman]

From Reddit discussions, if they can be trusted, there is nobody who can remove Matt from any position. It's a private company and the investors were given non-voting shares.

[ValentineC]

> It's a private company and the investors were given non-voting shares.

My understanding is that the investors signed proxy voting rights over to Matt. They are mostly ordinary shares, and may be revocable. [1]

[1] https://ma.tt/2021/08/funding-buyback-hiring/

[rs186]

I am confused -- so if investors don't like the CEO, there is nothing they can do? Other than maybe taking their part of the money out?

[wavemode]

Even "taking their part of the money out" is not guaranteed. Again, it's a privately traded company, so there's no open market. You have to find someone willing to buy your shares from you and make a deal with them.

[mritchie712]

he'd already be out if it was simple to force him out

[lenerdenator]

Let this be a lesson to anyone investing in a startup: don't give any cash unless there's real corporate governance.

[em-bee]

but the opposite is true too: don't take money from investors unless they let you keep control of your company. for every case like this there are probably a dozen cases where investors took control of a company and ruined it for the sake of making money.

[pclmulqdq]

How did they "ruin" a company if that company made money?

[diggan]

Not all humans are driven by the same motivations.

[pclmulqdq]

Presumably if you as a founder are not driven by a desire to make money and your investors are, you 100% should be ousted. This is the principal-agent problem at work.

[toomuchtodo]

Same with trading your time for stock options (that you hope are eventually negotiable shares); trust is earned in drops and lost in buckets.

[SJC_Hacker]

Dilution is a real problem. If they want you to act like a Founder, you should have protected equity like one.