Of course, you are correct in referencing Mr. Lynch's observation.  My point was that the most obvious reason for his selling (if he did) may not have been a reason at all if he was indemnified.  When I asked about that, I received the Heisman.  The same Heisman I received when I asked for the details of the "moisture" ruining Q1 fuel sales numbers.

Your observation about the 10K/A is, in large measure, the reason for my questions.  Somebody is not telling the truth, but I don't know who it is.  I want to find out.

Depending on when he parted with 850,000 shares (if he did), that is a pretty good chunk of change.  As has been observed, perhaps he wanted to pay cash for a new home.  Or maybe he liked the looks of a Lamborghini Reventon or a Bugatti Veyron and decided his garage was incomplete without one of them in it.