By Steve Green,
Las Vegas Sun
Wynn Resorts Ltd is disputing a Connecticut investment company’s claim that it’s owed US$32 million for participating in Wynn’s initial public stock offering for its Macau gaming operations.
Wynn Resorts this month sued Atlantic-Pacific Capital Inc. of Greenwich, Conn., in Clark County District Court in Las Vegas. Atlantic-Pacific describes itself as the largest independent global placement agent for alternative investment funds.
Wynn says in its lawsuit that in March 2008, Atlantic-Pacific was hired to raise money for an investment vehicle sponsored by Wynn Resorts that would consist of at least US$1.5 billion of equity capital for the purpose of acquiring interests in gaming and hospitality assets or related securities.
Wynn Resorts says in the suit that the contract with Atlantic-Pacific did not involve any of Wynn’s ongoing projects or interests. The ongoing interests excluded from the deal included Wynn Macau Ltd., which was formed in 2004 to develop hotel-casinos in the Chinese gambling district of Macau, the lawsuit says.
“Atlantic-Pacific (APC) never presented Wynn Resorts with any investors and/or capital for Wynn Macau Ltd.,” the lawsuit says.
But despite having nothing to do with last year’s Wynn Macau IPO, which raised US$1.6 billion, APC is now demanding that it be paid 2 percent or US$32 million of the capital raised by the IPO, Wynn says in the lawsuit.
“APC seeks compensation that it did not earn,” the lawsuit charges.
“Wynn has flatly rejected APC’s demand because APC has not earned it nor is it entitled to any fee whatsoever for the capital raised by the way of the Wynn Macau IPO.”
Attorneys for APC moved the lawsuit to U.S. District Court in Las Vegas on Monday and said APC had filed a demand for arbitration of the dispute as specified by the contract with Wynn Resorts.
“APC disputes the substantive allegations of the (lawsuit) and instead APC’s position is that the parties’ dispute is fully arbitrable,” APC said in its filing. But Wynn, in its lawsuit, said the APC arbitration request was made under streamlined rules usually used for disputes of less than US$250,000.
“Without relief from this court, Wynn Resorts could be forced to arbitrate a dispute that is not subject to arbitration under rules wholly inappropriate for this dispute,” Wynn’s filing said.
