tobyjack My apologies for previously sounding like a smart ase....

tobyjack

My apologies for previously sounding like a smart ase. That was poor of me.
To better answer your question, if the creditors such as Rodan and others were to propose a scheme or Deed of Company Arrangement it is possible that the company could be thrown a life line by the creditors and resume as normal.
Rodan holds the security over the PNG subsiduary 'Summit' and its assets which inturn owns the licence. Also he is the largest shareholder so effectively he has the best of both worlds. So this can work for or against shareholders at this point.
This begs the question, would he see any reason to save the shareholders or would he prefer to take it away and start a fresh. Some may be thinking that this is when Sir Jonah will kick off in London for example. Or has Rodan had enough and wants to see it gone and he and other creditors try and recoup some money.
Creditors meetings have been set down to discuss and decide where to from here. That is when a Deed of Arrangement would be tabled if they intend to save the company.
Presumably if no positive outcome is reached, then in the not to distant future the administration may become liquidation as it did last time.
Last time it was aquired for $4million by Union Pacific which was actually paid by IDC holders after a CR if you refer to the early anns 2011.
But either way the administrators are going to be fairly expensive I would think and that would need to be considered. That in itself can effect the outcome.
If it were to go into liquidation once more it may not be worth much at all. I say this because of the dreadful status quo at Porgera, PNG mining in general is cooling down or closing down in some places, POG is low, no road, no licence renewal in sight, all nearby chopper companies and suppliers have been Mt Kare creditors at one time or another, issues with locals, failed landowner study, extra conditions have been annexed to the exploration licence. And the list goes on and on.
Add these together and the value of the asset may be very low.
On that point, I beleive that Madison-Buffalo were closer to mining than IDC is or was. They had agreements with locals and less restrictions over the licence, camp was occupied by friendlies which is not the case today as it is currently vacated. So that may be a comparison of the current value of their $100 million investment against Madisons $160 miilion that ended up at $4 million.
Plus you would need to consider that the next company then has to go about the regulatory process all over again. This would include a full restart on the landowner support campaign. In my opinion the asset is in worse shape than ever before.
With that said, although it looks extremely grim there are a few options available for shareholders if they were homogeneous but time is against them.