Of course it is. It's not like he's some ubermensch beyond flaws or with an infinite capacity for reasoning.
You can micromanage 0-20 people to success but it starts to fall apart when you begin to have employees whose names you only sorta remember.
How do you know this business was built by the CEO? It's very frequently the case that this kind of CEO is adding no value and is simply adept at taking credit for their underlings' work.
But the notion of "taking credit" is sort of at odds with the micromanagement of the employees. Also for a CEO that's also a funder the only real question is making money or not. For example I'm sure even when you had a CEO like Steve Jobs who always thanked his workers, the reality is that most people only know who Steve Jobs is rather than individual team members.
No it's not.
"You wouldn't have completed this project if I hadn't been there to correct your mistakes."
Good leaders correct details because they think they're important. Micromanagers correct minor details as a means of making it look like they're adding value (oftentimes this is a lie they tell themselves just as much as it is one they tell others).
Plus, funding a company doesn't buy one a CEO spot. If it did, all startups would be run by VCs.
now if you don't like the ceo or that culture you should leave. although unless the ceo is a trust fund kid with cash to burn i think i'd want to learn something from someone who went from one person to thirty (because that's damn hard to do without outside funding).