{"id":19129,"date":"2021-06-17T15:52:03","date_gmt":"2021-06-17T15:52:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/?p=19129"},"modified":"2026-04-23T18:27:14","modified_gmt":"2026-04-23T21:27:14","slug":"any-partner-of-las-vegas-sands-had-advantages-in-macau-court-hears","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/any-partner-of-las-vegas-sands-had-advantages-in-macau-court-hears","title":{"rendered":"Any partner of Las Vegas Sands had advantages in Macau, court hears"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Two members of the Macau Casino Gaming Commission at the time of Macau’s licence tender have given testimony in AAEC<\/strong>‘s lawsuit against LVS.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Macau.- The legal showdown between\u00a0Las Vegas Sands (LVS) and Asian American Entertainment Corporation (AAEC)\u00a0<\/strong>has heard testimonies from two members of the\u00a0Macau Casino Gaming Commission<\/strong>\u00a0at the time of Macau’s licence tender. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AEC and Las Vegas Sands had an initial agreement to bid for a Macau casino licence in 2002 <\/strong>and the commission was informed of this partnership, but LVS then severed its ties with AAEC and instead partnered with Galaxy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The bids submitted by AAEC and Galaxy were similar, but the partnership with LVS gave Galaxy the winning card<\/strong>, the court heard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to\u00a0Maria Nazar\u00e9 Saias Portela<\/strong>\u00a0and Eric Ho Hou Yin, Las Vegas Sands<\/a>‘\u00a0experience and prestige gave any party partnering with the US giant,\u00a0higher chances of winning a casino gaming licence<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Portela said: “Las Vegas Sands had abundant experiences in resort management in the Las Vegas Strip<\/strong>, which could help change the structure of Macau gaming.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

She added: \u201cThis did not mean [the Commission] completely prioritised [LVS] but\u00a0any party involving [LVS] had advantages<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eric Ho Hou Yin\u00a0<\/strong>said: \u201cIt is correct to say the Galaxy bid was selected mostly because of [LVS] as Galaxy had no experiences in gaming [at the time] while [LVS] had.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AAEC<\/strong> is suing LVS for lost profits. On September 4 2019,\u00a0it was allowed to increase its initial MOP3bn claim to MOP96.45bn (US$12bn) for lost profits from 2004 to 2018\u00a0<\/strong>while reserving its right to claim for lost profits up to 2022 in due course at the enforcement stage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

LVS<\/a>\u00a0requested a\u00a0postponement of the case in September<\/strong> last year\u00a0due to the travel restrictions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The legal battle resumed on June 16 with debate about\u00a0whether the US casino giant was still a partner\u00a0<\/strong>of AAEC when it partnered with Hong Kong\u2019s Galaxy Entertainment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to Las Vegas Sands, its partnership with AAEC ended before <\/strong>the Macau government announced the results of its licence tender.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its\u00a0legal team stated that a letter sent to Macau\u2019s then chief executive<\/strong>\u00a0Edmund Ho Hau Wah shows the casino had already ended its relationship with AAEC on January 15, 2002.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today, the inquiry will hear from\u00a0Manuel Joaquim das Neves<\/strong>, former director of Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau (DICJ), who was a member of the gaming commission in 2001-02.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Two members of the Macau Casino Gaming Commission at the time of Macau’s licence tender have given testimony in AAEC‘s lawsuit against LVS.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":176,"featured_media":18164,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"is_press_release":false,"is_interview":false,"is_opinion":false,"focusai_summary":"The ongoing legal dispute between Las Vegas Sands (LVS) and Asian American Entertainment Corporation (AAEC) over a 2002 Macau casino license tender has seen former Macau Casino Gaming Commission members testify. Their testimony indicates LVS's extensive experience was a critical factor in the successful bid by Galaxy, with whom LVS partnered after allegedly severing ties with AAEC. AAEC is seeking MOP96.45bn (US$12bn) in lost profits, while LVS contends its partnership with AAEC concluded prior to the tender outcome.","focusai_entities":"Las Vegas Sands (LVS), Asian American Entertainment Corporation (AAEC), Macau Casino Gaming Commission, Galaxy Entertainment, Maria Nazar\u00e9 Saias Portela, Eric Ho Hou Yin, Edmund Ho Hau Wah, Manuel Joaquim das Neves, Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau (DICJ)","focusai_location":"Macau, Las Vegas Strip, Hong Kong, USA","focusai_target_profile":"ceo_executive (0.9), regulator (0.9), compliance_legal (0.95), operator_casino (0.85), investor_analyst (0.95), supplier_vendor (0.7), journalist_researcher (0.9)","focusai_suggestions":[{"label":"LVS Financial Impact?","query":"What is the potential financial impact on Las Vegas Sands' balance sheet and future investment capacity if AAEC's US$12bn claim is upheld, considering LVS's current market capitalization and cash reserves?"},{"label":"Regulatory Precedent?","query":"How might the court's ruling on the LVS-AAEC partnership dispute establish a precedent for future contractual agreements and regulatory compliance expectations within competitive iGaming licensing tenders globally?"}],"footnotes":""},"categories":[16338,439,158],"tags":[1642,23906],"class_list":["post-19129","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-east-asia-news","category-legal-news","category-slider-home","tag-las-vegas-sands","tag-macau-casinos"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19129","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/176"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19129"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19129\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19172,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19129\/revisions\/19172"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/18164"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19129"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19129"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19129"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}