this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
105 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

900 readers
240 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

[email protected]
[email protected]


Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Tucked inside Canoo's 2023 earnings report is a nugget regarding the use of CEO Tony Aquila's private jet — just one of many expenses that illustrates the

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] olosta 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The CEO leased the jet from himself with company funds? How is that even legal? How can the investors expect to get anything from this company when the CEO is so blatantly sucking the company dry?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

It's probably legal, but very dumb thing to do if you want to keep investors on board. It should be up to the investors to demand that money back.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They're a startup that doesn't yet have a vehicle in full scale production, so any expense will look big in relation to their revenue.

Having said that, a mil and a half for jet rental is pretty bad.

[–] jqubed 7 points 3 months ago

If it’s “only” a million and a half that’s probably not a tremendous amount for a vehicle manufacturer, but it also seems like with no real production yet it might’ve been better to mostly fly commercial and save the charters for when the commercial schedules were really bad.

[–] qevlarr 13 points 3 months ago

And when they can't find the next investor, they'll go bankrupt. Oops! Now everybody loses their jobs because management wanted to play at the high rollers table with borrowed money