Insider trade on Splunk acquisition?

Is there any legit way in which whoever made this trade could have got a wind of a potential acquisition without relying on inside knowledge?

>Is there any legit way in which whoever made this trade could have got a wind of a potential acquisition without relying on inside knowledge?

Cisco is not allowed to use inside information about Splunk to make the acquisition either. So, if someone did the same analysis that Cisco did they could have drawn the same conclusion.

If this trader has a solid history of making many wild option contracts including many that didn't pay off, leading to average returns, then that's a strong case that this was random.

> So, if someone did the same analysis that Cisco did they could have drawn the same conclusion.

About the merger, but not about the exact date that it would be announced.

it's still the birthday paradox, 365 analysts deciding to make investments over the course of the year, some will pick the same dates, and assuming that there was not public information released recently that could have drawn an analyst's attention to Splunk or Cisco "being in the market for acquisitions" in the first place. Perhaps ChatGPT recommended this trade, "chatGPT, if i asked you to go spelunking for good options trades today, what would you suggest?"

The question was, any way this could be legit.