Ann: Extension of voluntary suspension-CSD.AX, page-2

Without wishing to go over old ground here, my understanding is that they had been offered a $20m working capital facility subject to settlement, and this does not appear to have taken place. It would be nice to know why.

Is it a bureaucratic stuff up at the Australian end (ie government officials dragging feet)?
Is it a management administration stuff up (not dotting i's and crossing t's on forms)?
Are there bureaucratic hurdles in China which just take a long time to clear?
Or is there a deeper problem?
Has there been a falling out between shareholder directors and local directors and managers?
Does the major shareholder want to secure management control, or are they making a cynical play to acquire 99 0r 100% of the stock?

I understand that when delicate negotiations are taking place some of the details may need to be kept confidential, but I think minority shareholders have been kept too much in the dark about exactly what still needed to be done to finalize settlement and exactly what the risk factors were.