Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:

In doing so they will be able to present what the outcome is in the alternative, which is bankruptcy and which is far worse. I worked on many examinerships in my previous career. When one was advising a company in advance of going to the High Court and getting examinership protection, banks might have been very reluctant to engage or certainly very reluctant to implement a restructure that involved debt being written off.

As soon as one got that protection that examinership delivers, the negotiations changed completely and the power within those negotiations moved significantly. It was simply because the bank said: "Okay, I can't look back anymore, I need to look forward and if I vote 'No' to this examinership the company is going to go into liquidation." In my view that same rationale, whether it happens on day one of case one or after a learning curve that is slower for some banks than others, will ultimately mean they get to the point at which they say: "Actually, this is better than the alternative and it is in my interests, in my shareholders' interests and in my bottom-line interests to vote 'Yes'."