name and cusip change will not force a cover on ab

name and cusip change will not force a cover on abusive shorts and as we
all got to *see* .. legal ratcheted up .. not down .. btw if memory serves
next round of dated *legal* is due out AH's .. but i'll double check on that
and grab the link to port here

edited in links for *legal*

yep it's today ah's

http://www.finra.org/industry/short-interest/...-due-dates

http://otce.finra.org/ESI

best analogy i can give is to visualize an iceberg .. Retail sees the tip .. NR
*handles* the mass

what will get NRs' *attn* is mgmt's ability to execute and the timing of that execution

in case it was missed .. what i'd like to see out of aware and savvy OTC mgmt teams
that have *survived* years of abuse .. is a sequence of material events
which would include .. partnership with a cash payment which allows mgmt to issue
a special one time cash div in conjunction with mgmt's advance work re: BoD
and internal protocols specific to uplisting requirements for Naz ..

any how .. looking forward to seeing what mgmt has to file and update investors
with next ..

4kids

Quote:

---

Fair enough. In case you missed it I actually tried to test the "theory" by asking management to do a cusip as well if they ever did a name change (Cellceutix was hard to pronounce).

Management replied with (paraphrasing). (I'll run the idea by our lawyers)

So, I assume the lawyers said it would indeed expose "naked shorts" if they were there.

It was a unique chance to actually "test" the theory.

It fell flat on it's face.

I certainly believe 3 days to report non delivery is an antiquated time frame now (HFT happens in fractions of a second for example) so that should be changed.

I'm serious though when I say I will do exactly what Alan does if I ever start shorting a stock.

It scares those who don't understand it and it causes conflicts that occupy the message boards by discussing "shorts" nonstop.

The irony of this very post I am writing is not lost on me by the way!

---