Two can play this game

As I understand the rules (Company Law & ASIC), compulsory acquisition can only occur when one party owns 95 % of the O/S shares of a publicly traded company (unless otherwise through an agreed scheme of arrangement). If we assume that a scheme of arrangement merger which requires a 75% vote in favour of the scheme by those voting does not occur because of the QUB consortium negative vote, the almost 15% of AIO shares owned now by BF serves to accomplish the same thing in reverse.
(I welcome corrections to this scenario by legal or merchant banking types btw.)
So what are the scenarios that could ensue:
1. A move to acquire 51% or more of AIO shares by either parties (the consortium or BF) to control the entity which could see the loser with a toothless(?) minority holding. Does Board representation come automatically with a significant holding of X % or is it controlled by the majority owner (a Board reflecting the majority owner's wishes) who may or may not accede given Board harmony considerations and/or political and business inclinations?
2. An effort to acquire 100% of AIO which would cost the winning interested party dearly to give up the hunt and the "loser "simply walk away with a nice tidy profit-maybe not a loser after all.
3. Do interested parties have the financial wherewithal to accomplish either of the preceding outcomes (which would come at a cost) and do they have the political will to do so. The numbers are large.
4. Do all parties sit around a table and discuss/negotiate a mutually satisfactory outcome? Keep in mind though that the ACCC has a say in whether the BF control of major Australian infrastructure assets are in the country's best interests and the FIRB also has an important say in the matter. Frankly, that's a tough call for the ACCC notwithstanding how strongly BF seems to suggest being accommodating to their concerns when they are known. I also note the change in date for the court hearing (of the scheme) to a time which permits the input of the ACCC deliberation. Perhaps a wise move.
I am sure that there are countless number of other possible outcomes not mentioned above and I invite their inclusion in this thread.
As said before, item 4 above seems the initial (at the very least) and the most logical option to pursue and I, for one, will watch this space for an education if nothing else. The above is expressed as only IMO but the events make for good viewing. For the record, I have no sentiment re AIO (nor a holder) but am a holder of QUB.