You’re presuming here that CEOs cause companies to make profit instead of serving as a scapegoat for their often unavoidable market dynamics (at best).

▲

jameslk a day ago | parent [-]

In a 1-person company, who or what generates a profit?

▲

root_axis a day ago | parent | next [-]

One person isn't a company. Legally maybe, but there's no point in a company if you can profitably do all the labor yourself.

▲

sokoloff a day ago | parent | next [-]

I may be able to do all the labor myself, but need investors because I can’t afford the capital.

I may be able to do all the labor myself, but want to ensure continuity beyond my ability or interest to do the labor myself. (Sometimes this is by my wish; sometimes by the wish of consumers of my service.)

I may be able to do all the labor myself, but not want to expose my entire net worth to the financial obligations of the company.

There are plenty of cases where a single person company makes good sense.

▲

jameslk a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

At what point does a company become a company if one person doesn’t make a company? What’s the threshold for non-labor where a company becomes a company?

	▲	root_axis a day ago \| parent [-]
		I'd start with division of labor as a minimum.

▲

speleding a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There are holding companies with zero employees. They typically pay a management fee to someone.

▲

raegis a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Attorneys commonly do this.

▲

binary132 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

“I am actually the CEO of my basement office business” was not the corporate topology I was addressing with my comment.