Alan, my mistake on your timing. Your first post w

Alan, my mistake on your timing. Your first post was after Mako, that’s why I thought you found the stock after the attack.

The post you linked is the same post I use for the Amarantus example. The poster seems to think naked shorts have to cover.

Quote:

---

Seems from what I have read, a CUSIP change could force the cover of NSS positons if the change is done in conjunction with a name change. It is my understanding that the mechanics of the CUSIP change (with name change) would effectively prevent trading shares of the old CUSIP # and would create an entirely new set of shares through the DTC. By doing this, the DTC is forced to account for ALL of the old shares exchanged for the new shares.

If there is NO DILUTION, a covering of the naked shorted positions should take place due to what's revealed during the accountability process between the DTC after getting the "new inventory" of shares from the CUSIP Service Bureau if there is not only a CUSIP# change, but a name change too.

Because of the CUSIP # change, the MMs will be required to account for each of the old shares with the new shares.

---

If you are right, then Leo and Sullivan made a mistake at changing the name and CUSIP # at a critical time when money was very tight and unnecessary dilution should be avoided. JMHO.