Phuket Property Developer Named Among 10 Who Owe Casino $23 Million

Sign up now for our News Alert emails and the latest breaking news plus new features.

Click to subscribe

Existing subscribers can unsubscribe here

By Phuketwan Reporter PHUKET: A gambling casino high-roller named in a $23 million court case in Australia is said to be developing villas on Phuket worth one billion baht.

The ''Phuket property developer'' is named in a court action in Australia along with several other rich Thai ''whales,'' as big casino gamblers are known.

Ten high roller gambling patrons who have not repaid $23 million credit to gamble at Sydney's Star casino are being sued in Australia's Supreme Court after they failed to pay their bills.

Another named is the managing director of a Thai company that imports and sells swimming pools, and a third is a Thai businesswoman involved in direct sales.

The case arose after an operator of group gambling tours known as SilkStar, went bust. SilkStar lent gambling money to casino visitors.

The Star's parent company, Echo Entertainment, told its shareholders last week that "some of the international VIP customers introduced to Echo by SilkStar have outstanding amounts owed to Echo.

"In light of SilkStar's liquidation, Echo has also reviewed the prospects of recovery of these balances. Echo has decided to take a prudent approach and increase the impairment provision against this group of customers,'' the company said.

"As at 31 May 2012, the total write off and impairment provision taken against these customers amounts to $22.9 million.''

"Echo will however continue to vigorously pursue all possible avenues to recover the monies outstanding from these customers.''

Add your comment using the form below.

Want an avatar for your comments? Register with Gravatar.

So if they have been named by the Court, why are you with-holding their name?

Posted by Tbs on June 7, 2012 14:37

Editor Comment:

Because we are a Thai media organisation operating in Thailand, not an Australian media organisation operating in Australia. We would have ti have had our own reporter in court to be sure of the accuracy of the names.

Perhaps the http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au had their own reporter in court.

Posted by Vfaye on June 7, 2012 15:32

Editor Comment:

Perhaps. More and more these days, newspapers rely on second-hand information.

"Because we are a Thai media organisation operating in Thailand, not an Australian media organisation operating in Australia. We would have to have had our own reporter in court to be sure of the accuracy of the names" You know you have been living in Thailand too long when you believe such statements! ...

Posted by Nip on June 7, 2012 15:46

Editor Comment:

I've seen the Australian media in action up close, Nip, for decades. Don't tell me which way is up.

I don't believe Phuket Wan feared getting the names wrong. They feared getting them right. 'Thai media organizations' know which toes can be trod upon and which ones are best avoided. Tbs and Nip you can't blame them for knowing how things work and reporting accordingly.

Posted by Day on June 7, 2012 17:40

Editor Comment:

Wrong again, Day. These people are being sued in Australia and for all we know, they may be as innocent as you are. Or as innocent as you claim to be. This is not a criminal action. These people are not facing arrest warrants. In the absence of formal charges, we have no intention of needlessly and unfairly damaging peoples' reputations, rich or poor. Other Thai media may see it differently. Your view of how and why things happen is a sign of a vivid imagination, although if there is a country in the world where''rich'' doesn't equate to ''powerful,'' please let us all in on the secret.

Nice try, ed, but as the info has been reported elsewhere, all the above readers have your position pegged, and you are wriggling..... Nobody likes to be constantly looking over their shoulder as a journalist in Phuket, eh?

Posted by stu on June 7, 2012 19:53

Editor Comment:

We'd rather make judgements based on fairness, logic and sound journalistic principles than your guesswork any day, stu. Our values aren't set by social media - thank goodness.

The facts of the story are that Thais were named in a formal Sydney court proceeding as owing money to a casino, not if they actually owed the money or not (you don't really think there's a chance that a big casino company with an army of lawyers is unclear on who owes them 23 million do you?). Their reputations have already been sullied in this formal legal action. It's quite noble of you to not want to do more damage, though. What's a few omitted facts here and there in a news report if some embarrassment is avoided?

Where did I claim innocence?

Posted by Day on June 7, 2012 20:08

Editor Comment:

We didn't say you claimed innocence, at least no more than the average casino does, Day. We don't share your propensity for guesswork and supposition. And that's the entire point.