THE Lau brothers are to pay themselves $9.6 million in directors' fees from Evergo International Holdings. News of the fees follows the announcement last week that neither Evergo or Chinese Estates, which are controlled by the brothers, would pay a dividend for 1992. According to Evergo financial controller Mr Lam Kwong-wai, the amount of directors' fees was the same as the previous year. It is well below the Laus' 1990 remuneration. Then executive directors' fees amounted to $45.8 million from the Evergo group of companies, which at that time included Evergo, Chinese Estates, Paul Y International and China Entertainment. The last two have since been privatised. Mr Joseph Lau Luen-hung and Mr Thomas Lau Luen-hung are the controlling shareholders in Evergo. The company has cited plans to spend more than $200 million on its China projects and on the refurbishment of Windsor House and Fleet House as the reason for not declaring any dividend to investors for 1992. According to Mr Lam, the company expected to spend over $100 million on the China projects and another $100 million on the refurbishment of the two buildings and, as such, had to reserve the capital to finance the expenditure. ''We chose not to mortgage the buildings to finance the company's expenditure because the present mortgage market is not so favourable,'' said Mr Lam. He further explained that the privatisation of Evergo subsidiary China Entertainment had reduced the group's level of cash resources. The company also announced the appointment of Jones Lang Wootton as the leasing agent of Entertainment Building, which is owned by another Lau brothers-controlled company, Chinese Estates. The premises are expected to be fully leased and generating rental income by October. Some analysts have suggested that without any dividend payout this year, Chinese Estates' market price would fall, giving the Laus an opportunity to buy more control and making it easier to privatise the company. ''It is not normal practice for a company to not pay a dividend just because it is financing a development,'' said one local broker, who declined to be named. ''There are no existing rules governing the policy on a company's dividend payout. Usually, only companies making losses, or those recovering from losses, do not pay dividends.''. Evergo and Chinese Estates have both recorded good profits in the last two years. In 1992, Chinese Estates enjoyed a 48 per cent growth to $640 million, while Evergo posted a 120 per cent growth to $279 million. The two companies have not paid any dividend since the interim results of the 1991 financial year. Evergo Holdings, which failed in its controversial scheme to privatise Chinese Estates last April, was not allowed to raise such a proposal again for at least one year. That moratorium has now expired. ''There is a rumour that the Laus are waiting for investors to sell their shares so that the brothers can buy the stock cheaply,'' said Mr Adrian Ngan Wai-hung, associate director of Vickers Ballas. ''Given the attraction of the stock and the recurrent income, following the refurbishment of the buildings, there is a possibility for Evergo to privatise Chinese Estates this time,'' said Mr Brian Parker, research manager of Kim Eng Securities. Chinese Estates is trading at over 50 per cent discount to its net assets value (NAV). ''Our valuation of the Entertainment Building is $2.4 billion and the NAV of Chinese Estates is $7.90 per share,'' said Mr Parker. It has been the Lau brothers' long-standing intention to restructure and rationalise activities of the Evergo group. Evergo successfully privatised China Entertainment and Paul Y. International last year. In the past three years, Evergo has twice tried and failed to privatise Chinese Estates.