While you all strike good points, from what I gathered from reading the filing, the equity holders—though they oppose the DIP Facility for all the reasons already mentioned in this thread (hence the objection filing)—also oppose it for the closed-door arrangements that Delta made with Pinnacle (sub rosa plan as they state).

Towards the end of the "argument" section in that document, it states, "...the requirement required thereby essentially constitute a sub rosa plan that cannot be approved in its current form."

I'd be interested to see if the judge, instead, requires the terms of the DIP Facility to change in one way or another to keep everyone happy as a way to avoid Ch. 7.