Good point, about the enormity of the arbitration, which could come under the heading of "Politics".
But after reading Loop's analysis, and re-reading the SEC filing, I'm solidly in Loop's camp.
Why?
Why would the ICC get involved, unless someone asked them to depart from their normal rules?
Any suggestion that the panel asked for the delay on its own, doesn't pass the smell test, IMO.
Why doesn't it past this test?
If the trigger wasn't pulled, there would be no need to waste 3 1/2 months to announce the decision.
If the trigger was pulled, it would be highly unusual for the panel to PREDICT that it wouldn't have an answer for a SURPRISING 3 1/2 months. (i.e., maybe a 30 day delay, but not 105 days).
Opinions abound. You may well be right, and I thank you.