Sure, the board may rarely actually hold a vote on a given direction, but their ability to vote to remove the CEO is a huge threat hanging over the CEO.  If a majority of the board favors a certain direction, even if they don&#x27;t hold a vote on it, that exerts enormous pressure on the CEO to follow that direction.<p>In that sense, we are saying the same thing.  I agree that &quot;control&quot; does not require voting by the board.  I do assert that investors with board seats exert far more control that those without, and investors with higher equity positions exert more control than those with less.  I also assert that an equity stake of 1.5% exerts very little control.  Again, YC exerts _influence_ (call it control if you want) simply because of their reputation for being good at what they do, but 1.5% ownership barely changes that equation.