IPI Holdings is also reorganizing itself, some of the casino officials told the Commonwealth Casino Commission on Thursday last week. The parent company is headed by a board of directors chaired by Cui Li Jie and comprises different committees.
In a press briefing on Monday, Dotts said IPI is now relying on funding from its parent company.
“My understanding is that the parent company has committed to further finance this IPI,” Dotts told the reporters.
So as long as the parent company will finance the embattled casino operator, all its financial obligations should be met, he added.
In its “Annual Results for the Year Ended 31 December” IPI Holdings stated: “the Group reported a net loss of HK$3,904,270,000 for the year ended 31 December 2019 and had net current liabilities of HK$4,674,582,000 and capital commitments of HK$544,960,000 as at 31 December 2019.”
It also mentioned “the expected impact from the coronavirus disease 2019…pandemic, which has also resulted in the temporary closure of its casino operation in Saipan.”
Still, IPI Holdings added, “The Directors consider that the Group will have adequate funds available to enable it to operate as a going concern, based on the Group’s business forecast and cash flow projection which…take into account the past actual operating performance of the Group and the following: (a) subsequent to the end of the reporting period, the Company has raised new unsecured loans for an aggregate amount of HK$192,174,000 from independent third parties, which are repayable in 2021.”
The District Court for the NMI has found IPI in breach of promissory note with its former contractor, Pacific Rim Land Development LLC.
The court then issued a civil judgment in favor of Pacific Rim in the amount of $6.8 million, which includes attorney’s fees and costs.
To pay for the judgment, which IPI has appealed, Dotts said his client is offering some of its properties on Saipan to Pacific Rim.
Dotts said there are some subsidiaries affiliated with IPI that also have different properties around the island.
He said all these properties should be adequate to satisfy the $6.8 million judgment.
During the casino commission meeting last week, Pacific Rim President Keith Stewart said IPI failed to live up to its commitment time after time, adding that the commission should “get rid of them,” referring to the casino investor.
“If IPI does not pay employees, doesn’t pay its bills, and can’t meet its commitments, then why do you keep them here? Why are they being protected?” he asked the commissioners.
“I believe the best thing for the CNMI is for IPI to recognize they failed and to leave. It is not until IPI is gone that CNMI can take the necessary steps, to rebuild and solve the problems that IPI left us,” he said.
Asked for comment, Dotts said: “There are two sides to every story. IPI has filed counter-claims because there are issues with the breach of contract side, there is an issue with regards to the promissory note, which has provision that requires mediation and there is also an issue with the formation of promissory note.”
He added, “What I can say is that IPI is a regulated entity required basically to be in good financial standing, which means being able to pay its obligations. There are always going to be disputed obligations with any large business. So Pacific Rim’s is also in the category of disputed claim. That is why we are in court. And although the judge has ruled in Pacific Rim’s favor, there is an appeal. At the end of the day, if Pacific Rim prevails on the appeal, then it’s technically no longer a disputed claim and IPI has to pay. But until the end of the day, as long as it’s in a good faith dispute, then we have to go through the legal system.”
