Of course, you are correct in referencing Mr. Lync

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.