I'm not going to take sides on this one, because I've heard stuff both ways. But consider that Earll was being paid in shares that he wasn't supposed to sell (not sure whether it was restricted shares, or his contract specified not to sell for a length of time, or PQ just asked him not to). But those shares were Earll's paycheck. He wasn't doing the work to invest in SFMI, that was his job, and he had expenses and workers to pay. So he's supposed to hold these shares (his "paycheck") and not cash them in and watch the value drop? Would you hold on to a paycheck if the value dropped every day you didn't cash it? Not a good spot to be in. As I said, I'm not going to take sides because I don't know all the facts (and frankly, any "facts" I get from PQ are suspect), but I definitely think there are two sides to this one.