Two Take-Two Officers Filed Sale Notices. No Form 4 Yet

Two Take-Two Interactive officers filed notices with the SEC on 2 September 2026 saying they intend to sell stock. Both lots vested the day before. Both notices carry a remark saying the sale covers a tax bill. And no confirming document had been filed by the time we looked, which gives us a checkable date to come back to. That is the whole of this week's Take-Two paper trail, and it is worth setting out precisely, because there is a shareholder vote coming that some coverage is already describing in the past tense. The two Form 144 notices CONFIRMED, from EDGAR. The company filing index was read at 03:00:45 UTC and the submissions JSON at 03:06:00 UTC on 3 September 2026, HTTP 200, 157,841 bytes, for CIK 0000946581. Accession 0001959173-26-006663Accession 0001959173-26-006656 FilerGoldstein Lainie, officerDaniel P. Emerson Shares1,335917 Aggregate market value$290,560.75$199,583.68 Approximate date of sale09/02/202609/02/2026 ExchangeNASDAQNASDAQ BrokerFidelity Brokerage Services LLC, Smithfield, RIFidelity Brokerage Services LLC, Smithfield, RI AcquisitionRestricted Stock Vesting, from issuer 09/01/2026, nature of payment CompensationRestricted Stock Vesting, from issuer 09/01/2026, nature of payment Compensation Both filings carry the same remark, verbatim: Sale includes an amount necessary to cover a tax obligation resulting from the settlement of a vested equity award distribution. That is sell-to-cover language. When restricted stock vests it is taxable as compensation, and selling a slice of the newly vested shares to pay the bill is mechanical rather than discretionary. Both notices say so on their face. The arithmetic, which is ours and not printed in the filings. $290,560.75 divided by 1,335 is $217.6485 per share. $199,583.68 divided by 917 is $217.6485 per share. Identical to four decimal places, so both notices were valued off the same reference price. That price sits above the 1 September close of $216.68 and above the 2 September close of $216.14, and inside the 2 September intraday range of $214.85 to $220.7099. Combined, the two notices cover 2,252 shares and $490,144.43 of aggregate market value. For scale against each officer's own recent history, both filings disclose prior three-month sales. The Goldstein filing lists one, on 06/02/2026, of 31,060 shares for gross proceeds of $6,821,148.73. The Emerson filing lists four sales between 06/02/2026 and 06/16/2026 totalling 38,782 shares and $6,492,897.42 gross. These September notices are small by comparison. Hedges, all mandatory. A Form 144 is a notice of a proposed sale and not a record that a sale occurred. The aggregate market value is a valuation for the notice rather than a realised price. Do not describe either of these as a completed sale, and do not attach any inference about what either officer thinks of the company, because both filings state on their face that the sales cover tax on vested awards. We have written about how easily these notices are misread in our piece on a much larger Take-Two Form 144 earlier this summer. The follow-up we are flagging in advance The document that confirms a Form 144 sale actually happened is a Form 4, and it is due within two business days of the transaction. As of 03:06 UTC on 3 September 2026, no Form 4 had been filed for either 2 September transaction. One would ordinarily be due around 4 September. We are printing that date because it is checkable by anyone, and because flagging a follow-up before it lands is more useful than announcing it afterwards. If Forms 4 appear on or about 4 September confirming these sales, the notices did what notices usually do. If they do not, that is worth a question. Either way, EDGAR indexes on acceptance, so a filing accepted after 03:06 UTC on 3 September would not have shown in what we read. The officer exculpation vote has not happened yet This is the part where coverage keeps slipping into the past tense, so we will be blunt. The vote is on 17 September 2026. It is a future event. Any story treating it as decided is wrong. CONFIRMED, from Take-Two's DEFA14A, accession 0001308179-26-000384, filed 3 August 2026, document read at 03:06:28 UTC on 3 September, HTTP 200. The annual meeting is 17 September 2026 at 9:00 AM, Eastern Time, with a voting deadline of 16 September 2026 at 11:59 PM ET. Proposal 3, verbatim: Approval of a certificate of amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. to limit the liability of certain officers as permitted by Delaware law. The rest of the ballot: election of ten directors, with nominees including Strauss Zelnick, Michael Dornemann and J Moses; an advisory vote on executive compensation; and ratification of Ernst & Young LLP as auditor for the fiscal year ending 31 March 2027. The result of that meeting would ordinarily be disclosed in an Item 5.07 current report afterwards. No such filing exists, because the meeting has not occurred. We covered the proxy when it landed, in our report on the 17 September shareholder vote. The vote lands 63 days before the game ships. The rest of the SEC docket is empty CONFIRMED as a negative finding. Between 18 August and 3 September, the only Take-Two filings on EDGAR are those two Form 144s. There has been no 8-K of any kind since 7 August, which means no Item 8.01, no Item 1.01, and nothing at all disclosing the subpoena campaign, the leak or any litigation. Take-Two has evidently not treated any of it as a reportable event, and that absence is not evidence of a disclosure failure, because ex parte identity-disclosure applications would not normally be material events. The last Form 4 activity was on 18 August, three of them. Before that, a Schedule 13G on 17 August from Starlite Capital INC, and the quarterly report and earnings 8-K on 7 August. We have covered the silence across the 31 August session already, and it has continued. The tape, and where two sources stop agreeing Take-Two closed at $216.14 on 2 September 2026. That figure agrees exactly across both sources we could reach: Nasdaq's historical API, fetched at 03:03:36 UTC and re-pulled identically at 03:06:39 UTC, and stockanalysis.com, fetched at 03:04:12 UTC. Closing prices agree exactly for every session in the window. Volumes do not, for the three most recent sessions. We are printing both figures wherever they disagree rather than picking one. DateClose, both sourcesVolume, NasdaqVolume, stockanalysis.comDifference 02/09/2026$216.142,488,2052,459,95228,253 01/09/2026$216.682,802,3402,755,73246,608 31/08/2026$219.706,853,6546,847,2316,423 28/08/2026$235.393,711,4093,711,409agree 27/08/2026$233.004,228,0574,228,057agree 26/08/2026$233.452,171,6622,171,662agree 25/08/2026$232.931,593,5021,593,502agree 24/08/2026$233.502,714,4922,714,492agree 21/08/2026$239.621,627,9061,627,906agree 20/08/2026$240.152,445,7572,445,757agree Every session from 20 to 28 August agrees to the share. The three most recent sessions do not. The likeliest explanation is that recent-session volume revises as consolidated tape corrections flow through, which fits the pattern exactly, but that is an inference and we are labelling it as one. Nasdaq disagrees with itself by 26 shares The sharpest version of the same problem is internal to a single publisher. Nasdaq's info endpoint, fetched at 03:04:12 UTC, reports 2 September as a last sale of $216.14, a net change of -0.54, a percentage change of -0.25 per cent, and a volume of 2,488,231. Nasdaq's own historical endpoint, fetched 36 seconds earlier at 03:03:36 UTC, reports 2,488,205 for the same session. A 26-share disagreement between two endpoints operated by the same company, queried half a minute apart. Neither is wrong in any meaningful sense, and the gap is trivially small against 2.49 million. It is worth printing because it is a clean demonstration of why a volume figure should always carry the name of the source that produced it, and why two articles quoting different volumes for the same session are not necessarily in conflict. Also from that endpoint: a 52-week range of 187.63 to 265.94. And for the fuller picture on the confirmed closes, our own arithmetic gives a fall of $24.01, or 10.00 per cent, from the 20 August close of $240.15 to the 2 September close of $216.14. The causation hedge, which is not optional A price move is a fact. Its cause is inference. Nothing in this article attributes any part of that decline to the leak, the subpoenas, the Google withdrawal, the officer notices or any other single event. Nothing in our research establishes a cause, the 31 August session also carried routine month-end index and rebalancing flow, and we are going to state the numbers and stop. One related null, and we are labelling it honestly rather than dressing it up. We could not run an owner-wide sweep of Take-Two or Rockstar trademark applications today, because the USPTO trademark search API returned HTTP 404 on GET and HTTP 405 on POST across two attempts. Any line about there being no new Grand Theft Auto VI, Vice City or Leonida trademark filings is therefore a WEAK NEGATIVE resting on TTABVUE and individual status lookups only, and it should not be read as a firm finding. What is and is not established CONFIRMED, from EDGAR: two Form 144 notices filed 2 September 2026. Lainie Goldstein, 1,335 shares, $290,560.75. Daniel P. Emerson, 917 shares, $199,583.68. Both cover stock that vested 1 September, both list Fidelity as broker and NASDAQ as the exchange, and both carry the sell-to-cover remark quoted above. CONFIRMED by our own arithmetic: both notices value the shares at exactly $217.6485, above the 1 September close of $216.68 and the 2 September close of $216.14, and inside the 2 September intraday range. Combined, 2,252 shares and $490,144.43. Explicitly not claimed: that either sale occurred. A Form 144 is a notice of a proposed sale. The confirming Form 4 had not been filed as of 03:06 UTC on 3 September, and one would ordinarily be due around 4 September. That is a checkable follow-up, flagged in advance. CONFIRMED, from the DEFA14A: the annual meeting is 17 September 2026 at 9:00 AM Eastern, with a voting deadline of 16 September at 11:59 PM ET, and officer exculpation is Proposal 3. That vote is a future event. Any coverage treating it as decided is wrong, and no Item 5.07 filing exists because the meeting has not happened. CONFIRMED as a negative finding: between 18 August and 3 September the only Take-Two filings on EDGAR are the two Form 144s. No 8-K of any kind since 7 August. CONFIRMED, and the disagreement printed rather than resolved: closes agree exactly across two sources for every session checked, while volumes disagree for 31 August, 1 September and 2 September, by 6,423, 46,608 and 28,253 shares. Nasdaq's own two endpoints disagree on 2 September volume by 26 shares, at 2,488,231 and 2,488,205, queried 36 seconds apart. Explicitly not claimed: any cause for any price move. WEAK NEGATIVE, labelled: no new Grand Theft Auto VI trademark filings were found, but the USPTO search API refused us at 404 and 405, so no owner-wide sweep was possible. Method limits printed as limits: two price sources rather than three, because Yahoo's chart API returned 429 on three attempts and Stooq refused twice; EDGAR indexes on acceptance, so anything accepted after 03:06 UTC on 3 September is outside this reading. Our running record of what Take-Two and Rockstar have actually put on paper is on the wiki, alongside the rest of today's filings work on the news desk. If none of this is why you came, the servers list and the leaderboards are a better way through the next 77 days.