You are correct - arguably there could have been ways to restructure DSH without putting it into VA. There are a couple of problems with doing this at present:
1. You can't restructure a business, with a lot of leases, without going through VA because of ipso facto clauses (i.e. ability to terminate contract due to restructuring or insolvency appointment even if there are no monetary defaults) destroying business value
2. Insolvent trading laws mean directors act conservatively and put businesses in VA at first sign of insolvency
3. ATO director penalty notices (making director personally liable for unpaid tax debts if unpaid within a short timeframe) provide no scope for restructure and require a business to be put in VA or liquidation to avoid personal liability
4. Director's with significant personal wealth tied up in the company they operate (i.e Mr Abboud with 6% o/ship of DSH) are unlikely to pursue capital raising or debt to equity swap restructuring options due to self interest in avoiding destruction in value of their personal wealth (even though not pursuing such options results in total wealth destruction at a later date when VA occurs due to delusions of being able to save the company with debt)
If a defence to insolvent trading allowed directors to trade a business insolvently (but not recklessly) through a restructure with input from relevant professionals (and ipso facto clauses were unenforceable during this period) you would probably see the number of r/ships and VAs similar to DSH reduce materially. You'd probbly also see cheaper professional fees in doing this as the people responsible for setting and approving remuneration are a knowledgable board - not a largely unknowledgeable creditor / committee of creditor base blindly accepting hourly rates (even with fee caps) as the best means of remuneration.
