Keep in mind that not all creditors have the same motivations.
Fiat creditors are unaffected by the fluctuating BTC price, as long as it stays above a level which gives them a 100% payout. Their motivation more than anything, I assume, is to get this resolved quickly.
I understand that some BTC creditors that took legal advice at the start filed bankruptcy claims against Tibanne and Mark, as well as Mt Gox before the deadline for it closed. This means that if “surplus” flows to shareholders in stead of creditors, they stand to get a triple payout. Obviously this motivates them to inhibit our efforts.
Because Tibanne and Mark are both bankrupt, they are legally protected from law suits, other than claims made to their bankruptcy trustee. Failing that they can be sued when the bankruptcy is all over if they are sitting on a settlement and worth going after, but at that point we may be fighting for slim pickings.
Those with larger claims might bet on smaller creditors dropping-out of the pool if the only way to recoup money is by launching a law suit against Tibanne and Mark after money has been paid to shareholders, leaving them with a larger slice of the pie. A co-operative of smaller claimants with legal representation would dissuade them against this.
And even among BTC creditors who have approved claims solely against Mt Gox, some are happy to wait if it means a better chance at a larger payout, while others just want it all to be over.
Full disclosure: I only have a claim filed against Mt.Gox, for around 100BTC. The information here is my opinion and should not be considered legal advice; only a lawyer can provide that, and if you don’t have one, you should consider getting one: why not contribute to our shared lawyer? We start collecting contributions as soon as terms are agreed with him, (hopefully) by the end of this week.