What is the best outcome?, page-12

I think many long-time holders feel the same frustration.

Can SDL get re-listed if they win the legal battle?

Technically, yes, if they win the arbitration and a significant settlement or asset recovery comes through, there’s a pathway to restructure and seek re-listing on the ASX. But that depends on the outcome and how much capital they can secure to resume operations.

Could this actually become something if they get control back?

If they regain control of the Nabeba and Mbalam projects (or get meaningful compensation), those are tier-1 iron ore assets. But infrastructure is still a hurdle. They’d still need a deep-pocketed partner or buyer (which they had in the past with Hanlong and China Rail before things fell apart). So yes, in theory, but only if the assets come back and someone credible steps in.

What are the chances of any of this happening?

It’s hard to put a number on it. The case is with the ICC in Paris. It’s serious and expensive to be there, and litigation funding suggests they’ve got a case. But outcomes take years, and enforcement in Congo or Cameroon is a whole separate issue. Even if Sundance wins, getting paid or regaining the concession isn’t guaranteed. Governments don’t always follow international rulings, just ask other juniors who’ve been burned.

Why are they still operating?

Because the Board believes in the legal case, and they’ve locked in litigation funding, so they’re not drawing down shareholders’ cash for it. If they win, it could be a windfall. If they don’t, the company folds, but at least they tried. It’s a leveraged legal play at this point.

What are the realistic outcomes?

1. They win the arbitration and get a payout, apossible upside for shareholders.
2. They win, but enforcement fails, ‘was it worth it’s victory’.
3. They lose the case, SDL likely winds up.
4. They settle out of court, which could mean partial compensation.

So yeah, still a lottery ticket.