Canoo spent double its annual revenue on the CEO's private jet

Self-dealing and Conflicts of Interest

• Many see the jet arrangement (company reimbursing a CEO-owned entity for jet use and office “shared services”) as classic self-dealing and WeWork-style related‑party transactions.
• Critics argue that even if technically legal and disclosed, it’s ethically dubious for a near-insolvent, tiny‑revenue public company to funnel millions to entities controlled by its CEO.
• Some say conflicts should be treated as presumptively shady until robustly cleared, not hand‑waved as “normal business.”

Scale, Optics, and Clickbait Debate

• Several posters note the headline is sensational because revenue is nearly zero; in the context of hundreds of millions in annual losses, $1.7M is numerically small.
• Others respond that for a distressed startup, $1.7M is meaningful (multiple high‑impact hires) and the specific use (luxury travel, to a CEO’s own company) makes it egregious.
• There’s disagreement on whether this is mostly optics vs. a substantive governance problem.

Defenses of the CEO and Arrangement

• Defenders emphasize the CEO has personally bought over $200M of company stock, arguing he’s deeply in the red and not plausibly “looting” via a jet.
• Some say the reimbursements appear roughly market‑rate for operating a private jet, suggesting no obvious overcharge.
• A minority view: if the travel is legitimately for corporate business and cheaper than alternatives, renting the CEO’s existing jet can be rational and tax‑efficient.

Governance, Shareholders, and Legality

• Commenters stress that “bad look” ≠ “illegal”; if the board approved and it’s disclosed, it’s unlikely to be fraud.
• Others counter that public‑company CEOs cannot treat firms like private vehicles just because they are large shareholders; minority shareholders may still be harmed.
• Several suggest the board is failing its oversight role; some call for suspending the jet deal, reimbursing past amounts, or CEO resignation to restore confidence.

Broader Themes: Inequality, Jets, and Startup Culture

• Strong sentiment that private jets for small, loss‑making companies symbolize a wider “feudal” system: elites operate under different rules, with tax‑optimized perks and related‑party structures.
• Some argue private jets only rarely make true business sense; for most CEOs they are status consumption “because they can.”
• Others note that executive time, scheduling flexibility, and perceived status can have real business value, though the threshold for justifying this at a struggling EV startup is seen as very high.

EV Startup and Market Context

• Discussion touches on how capital‑intensive car manufacturing is, the difficulty of new EV entrants, and Canoo’s precarious “going concern” language.
• Some see Canoo as one of the few EV startups with plausible fleet demand and orders; others view the jet arrangement as a signal the CEO is extracting value while he can.