I disagree. All shares have to be accounted for due to the name/CUSIP change. I think most will agree with me on this. Whether the shorts have re-shorted after covering is another story.

I understand why you must insist on naked shorts don't have to cover. If you agree they have to cover, then your naked shorting theory in IPIX can be refuted easily.

Thanks to Leo, I'm sure that most investors have realized by now that naked shorting in IPIX wasn't a big problem as evident by the trading actions after the name/CUSIP announcement.

Quote:

---

I expected none ot the naked shorts to cover and none did.

---