Infomerics Credit Rating Nepal Limited (Infomerics Nepal) has downgraded the credit rating assigned to the long-term bank facilities of Tayo Eco Resort Hotel Private Limited (TERHPL) and moved both its long-term and short-term ratings to the ‘Issuer Not Cooperating’ (INC) category, with notice of withdrawal.
The rating agency has downgraded the rating assigned to the company’s NPR 537.86 million long-term bank facilities to IRN B+ ‘INC’ from IRN BB-. Meanwhile, the rating assigned to its NPR 5 million short-term bank facilities has been moved to IRN A4 ‘INC’. The total bank facilities rated by Infomerics Nepal amount to NPR 542.86 million.
Rating Revision Linked to Non-Cooperation
According to Infomerics Nepal, the rating revision has been triggered by Tayo Eco Resort Hotel’s non-cooperation and failure to provide adequate information despite repeated follow-ups.
The rating agency said it had made several requests to the company’s management through email communications and phone calls for the necessary information required to conduct a detailed review and monitor the assigned ratings.
However, the company did not submit all the essential information requested by the rating agency. Infomerics Nepal stated that the lack of adequate information has created an information availability risk and uncertainty regarding the company’s credit risk profile.
Ratings Based on Best Available Information
Infomerics Nepal said that the availability of relevant and updated information is critical to the credit rating process. In the absence of the required information from the company, the rating agency has assigned the ratings based on the best available information, in accordance with applicable SEBON guidelines.
Accordingly, the ratings for Tayo Eco Resort Hotel’s aggregate bank facilities of NPR 542.86 million have been moved to the ‘Issuer Not Cooperating’ category and denoted as IRN B+/A4 ‘INC’.
The rating agency has advised lenders, investors and other market participants to exercise appropriate caution while using the ratings, as they may not adequately reflect the company’s current credit risk profile.
What the ‘Issuer Not Cooperating’ Status Means
Infomerics Nepal reviews whether the information available about a company is sufficient and commensurate with the rating assigned to it. Since Tayo Eco Resort Hotel did not provide the required information despite repeated requests, the rating agency could not conduct its regular comprehensive assessment. The ratings have therefore been placed under the Issuer Not Cooperating category, along with a notice of withdrawal.
Tayo Eco Resort Hotel’s Project and Operations
Tayo Eco Resort Hotel Private Limited was established with the objective of developing and operating a tourist-standard hotel along with related auxiliary services. The resort is located in Nagarkot, approximately 30 kilometers from Kathmandu, and comprises a 42-key resort, including two suites, spread across approximately 28 ropanies of land.
The project combines traditional architectural elements with modern amenities, incorporating Newari architecture and contemporary facilities. The hotel began operations in January 2023 under the name “Soaltee Westend Resort Nagarkot.”
Promoted by The Stream Investment
Tayo Eco Resort Hotel is promoted by The Stream Investment Private Limited, a subsidiary of Soaltee Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Soaltee Enterprises is also a major shareholder of Soaltee Hotel Limited.
The company’s resort project is positioned as a tourism and hospitality property targeting visitors seeking accommodation and leisure services in the Nagarkot area.
| Instrument/Facility | Amount | Rating | Rating Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Long-Term Bank Facilities | NPR 537.86 million | IRN B+ ‘INC’ | Downgraded from IRN BB- and moved to Issuer Not Cooperating category with notice of withdrawal |
| Short-Term Bank Facilities | NPR 5 million | IRN A4 ‘INC’ | Moved to Issuer Not Cooperating category with notice of withdrawal |
| Total | NPR 542.86 million | IRN B+/A4 ‘INC’ | Issuer Not Cooperating |
Infomerics Nepal has stated that the rating action was based on the best available information due to the company’s non-cooperation in the rating review process.
