For every OSTK there are 100 companies where the failure-to-deliver numbers are accurate. I believe Leo wanted to find out whether his stock would behave like AMBS after the CUSIP # change and the answer is no. Even the ‘mighty’ loanranger doesn’t have an explanation when I asked him this (on AMBS).

“Either investors really liked the new name or naked short positions were forced to cover. Assuming the company in my example does exist (PM me for name if interested), how do you explain the massive volume after the CUSIP # change?”