Nothing forcing years old illegal naked shorts, which are a figment of the imagination, to cover? LOL! The only way that would be true is if the short (which dont exist in the real world, but Ill play along) is if they knew with 100% certainty PCYT was going to ZERO
Othewise they would be totally destroyed in a short squeeze. So, if they did exists, the time to cover would have been over the last several years when PYCT sat at .0001 assuming such an INVISIBLE short was made at a price higher than .0001.
Of course the idea that PYCT is illegally naked shorted is totally absurd and has never happened once in pink sheet history.
Sure, illegal nakes shorts occurred in REAL listed companies on major exchanges, but down in one legged pinky land? Never happened, not once.
Not to mention the PROs would have forced a short squeeze years ago to oollect all that loot as the price soared.
Illegal/legal naked short theories on micro pinks are as common as grains of sand on a beach and the last ditch desperate attempt by stuckholders to try and stimulate buying to take their shares off their hands as buyers of such stocks are scarcer than hens teeth. LOL!
Look at the volume. The tall tales of illegal naked shorting continues to to be mocked by real penny tock Pros as demonstrated by their near total lack of interest in buying PYCT commons junk shares.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
