Dear FJ,
With regrets for not doing the required maths on the said table, I find two entries in the options table most interesting, both are listed as 'not disclosed.
See Options dated 2015 06 12 & 2015 10 12 row 103 & 106 of:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_6VSZGqigLbjQyh_LJxMfpa4fc7pTbaj_8wtvRVDEW0/edit?pli=1#gid=2028980574
Would not options be issued to an individual working for the most secretive company in the world logically be listed as 'not disclosed' for work he did with the TRAB, particularly since the issue date coincides with the black hole on information not issued by the company around that period. Obviously someone was thought to be doing something sufficiently important to justify reward yet could not be named to protect some NDA agreement perhaps.
Is TB that person do you think? And is this further evidence of my pet theory.
Sula
