Interesting story but the meandering style was off putting. He repeated some things multiple times and didn’t really delve into others. The sexual misconduct allegations were dealt with strangely, he brings them up many times but never really examines them or what they mean.

It was a very surface level book and I think any sort of insight into the people or “why” of doing this would be have been very welcome.

I found it strange that the chapters about the Fenn hunt weren’t in chronological order. He writes about the man who found the treasure then a bit later had a chapter about seeing the treasure himself and how he hadn’t seen or met the finder yet? Why not have that first, then the zoom with the finder?

The whole book felt like he wrote a bunch of unrelated essays over several years and then randomly jammed them together to make the book without actually reading over them to see if it flowed or made sense. Why didn’t anyone edit this?