I performed a rough estimate of the average price at which stock was shorted and obtained 26 1/4. This is as of March 8. It would seem that the average short is still in the black at the current price. With the low prices recently I would think some shorts have covered, probably those who shorted at the lowest price. Thus I would expect the average cost basis for the short population to be somewhat higher than 26 1/4 now--maybe 27.
The recent chart strongly suggests to me that the market is not sure whether cash flow will be positive or not. The price advance in recent weeks may well reflect below average cost shorts exitting their positions while they can.
I disagree with TLWatsons analysis. I see the battle between shorts and longs as more balanced, with neither having an upper hand. It is apparent that this stock has been eminently tradable on *both* the long and short side. My understanding is that the 1.3 million shorts simply represent the short side traders in opposition with a like number of long-side traders. At positive market extremes it is profit taking by longs and adventuresome forays by shorts that stop the rise. At negative extremes, the reverse occurs.
As a long-term investor I normally wouldn't be concerned with the short term battles. However as a naive long term investor I entered this stock in a big way a year ago and obtained a cost basis well above its average trading price. Had I the market savvy of the average ANLT short my cost basis would have been five points lower. Perhaps I will learn something from them.