It's the job of an executive to manage risks. If he thinks that security should be delayed, it's his to make that decision.
That said, you should make sure that it's an educated decision. As always, this needs a as-thorough-as-possible list of threats, likelihood and possible damages that could happen. So for example someone could steal the customer database. Or a backdoor could be installed in your products.
The problem here is that the likelihood is most often unknown or you're in a N*M situation where N is the likelihood and M is the damage and N is many order of magnitude smaller than M. It's like the nuclear plants in Japan: The possible damage is huge but the probability of an incident is really, really tiny. "Once in 100'000 years". That "once" can be tomorrow (and it was in several cases as we all have seen). So in this case, the resulting number if pretty worthless.
What I would do is make sure that the executive is making an educated decision: I would connect his wage with the risk. If he's right, he gets a fat bonus. If he's wrong, the damages should go against his personal wealth, first.
This kind of safety net usually makes sure that people don't take too much risk. But it can also kill your start up since the manager might stop taking any risks.