More from the Aceris Law article: "A common trend, recognized by most arbitral institutions, is that there is generally a need to reduce both the time and cost of international arbitration, which is why institutions are working on implementing various techniques for controlling time and cost in arbitration and updating their procedural rules accordingly.
It should finally also be noted that, while the time and costs of arbitration are often interrelated, as costs typically depend on the time spent by tribunals and legal counsel on the case, this is not always the case. Different arbitral institutions have different methodologies for calculating their administrative fees and the fees of arbitral tribunals (see The Costs of Arbitration). In addition, certain arbitration law firms offer capped fee arrangements to their clients for the entire arbitration, instead of billing their clients on an hourly basis, which can not only lead to a significant cost reduction but also demonstrates that the time and cost of arbitration are not always linked."
This certainly not the case with this Arbitration. As noted before, this Arbitration will have been in session for 22 months at the end of August which is well beyond the average and mean duration.
One could read many scenarios into this:
Size of the compensation (award) requested
Complexity of the Case
Both parties may be working on a compromised deal