Amplitude Chief Commercial Officer Reports Sale of 300,000 Shares Under Trading Plan
A Form 4 filed with the SEC records Nathaniel Glenn Crook's sale of 300,000 Amplitude shares at $12.9925 each.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 9, 2026, 10:09 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 9, 2026, 10:09 p.m. ETFirst report
Amplitude Chief Commercial Officer Reports Sale of 300,000 Shares Under Trading Plan
Nathaniel Glenn Crook, Chief Commercial Officer of Amplitude, Inc. (ticker: AMPL), sold 300,000 shares of common stock at $12.9925 per share on September 4, 2026, according to a Form 4 insider transaction record filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The filing lists Crook's address as San Francisco, California, and the company's principal office as San Francisco, California.
The Form 4 record states that the transaction was made under a trading plan. After the sale, Crook held 1,622,696 shares, according to the filing. The total value of the shares sold, based on the reported price and share count in the record, was $3,897,750.
The filing does not state a reason for the sale beyond the trading plan designation. The record does not indicate any connection between the transaction and the company's operations or performance.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 02:15current
First published.
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 02:09current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.