Laserfiche WebLink
breakdcwn in the reorganization process; it is a reflec':icn that <br />the cases could not have been in a positicn where the formulaticr. <br />and ccnfir-ation of a plan during the initial exclusive pericds. <br />A=~ one leading coam<entator has stated, "[I]n a case in c/hich the <br />vecrious creditor a.nd shareholder factions each require extensive <br />time to analyze the debtor's business (usually with the aid of <br />attorneys and accountants and/or investment bankers or other <br />consultants), it i.s unfair to allow the exclusive period to <br />e}:p ire befcre the various creditor and shareholder cons1.ituencies <br />ai•e even ready to negotiate with the debtor." M. Biene~lstock, <br />Bankructcv RecrGanization, 577 (1987). <br />II. CONCLUSION <br />The termination of the Exclusive Periods in the present <br />cases would repre::ent a substantial setback for Debtors and for <br />virtually all creditors and other parties in interest. The <br />Court's approval of the Motion and of the extended Exclusive <br />Periods contemplated by the Motion is in the best interests of <br />a7.1 parties in interest because it will help ensure the continued <br />oz-derly progression of Debtors' cases. <br />For the reasons set forth above, Debtors urge thst this <br />Court grant the relief requested in the Motion and extend the <br />12 <br />