All: I have once again revised the confirm for the EBS Raptor deal. There will be only one swap transaction: Harrier I LLC/Talon I LLC. Please note the following changes: (1) the Initial Equity Notional Amount has been corrected (2) I have expanded the definition of Cash Dividends (3) I have ADDED a provison for "Payment Obligations" to avoid confusion for those of you unfamiliar with the 1996 Equity Definitions. Since I have removed the interest payment feature, the only payments changing hands will be upside/dividends and downside. The "Equity Amount Payer" pays the upside (difference between Initial Price (on the relevant Valuation Date) and Final Price) and dividends; the other party pays the downside. (4) I have retained the concept of multiple optional termination dates. (5) Kevin: I NEED the Harrier account/notice information. This confirm should serve as a template for additional Raptor equity share swaps so please review and comment. Thanks. Sara
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Raptor swap
I have added a cycle '0' to all pipelines in the database...per our discussion, this cycle will be used only in an 'emergency' type situation (we didn't scrape any data (for whatever reason), and there is some available that can be manually entered). By being '0', this also shouldn't affect the logic of Yan's reports, since he pulls the latest cycle available (read the largest number; if ANY scraped data gets in the DB, it will be returned in place of any cycle 0 data). Any questions, feel free to ask... Chris
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Cycle 0 For All Pipeliines
From the NYT article: The business that Thomas D. Gros is building for Enron remains untested. But his entire career seems to have been aimed at the opportunity. He studied aerospace engineering, worked as an analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency, earned an M.B.A. and set up a natural-gas trading operation -- competing against Enron -- for British Petroleum. He also did a
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Tom Gros
INTERNAL COMMUNICATION REGARDING DELAYS IN RETAIL COMPETITION IN TEXAS October 29, 2001 The main purpose of this memo is to inform EPMI and EES commercial teams regarding the implementation status of retail competition Texas, particularly in non-ERCOT regions, which include parts of the areas served by the following utilities: ? Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEPCO) and West Texas Utilities Company (WTU) - both in the SPP region ? Entergy Gulf States (EGSI) - in the Energy-SERC region As most of you probably have heard, the Texas Utility Commission has been examining, in the last few weeks, the readiness to implement retail competition in those areas. The Public Utility Commission of Texas (Staff) has filed petitions seeking a determination of whether market institutions are ready for retail competition in above areas, to start January 01, 2002. There is a concern among the Commission and many other participants that non-ERCOT-Texas regions are not ready for competition. This concern has two major causes: - Lack of a vibrant, efficient wholesale market in those regions, where newly established REPs could have full access to others suppliers, on a non-discriminatory basis - Lack of success in the retail pilot programs developed in 2001 - no alternative suppliers and no customer shifting at all; a recent hearing has confirmed most REPs absolute lack of interest in those regions - at least for the time being SPP Last Week, the Public Utility Commission decided to delay competition in SPP Texas. Or, more accurately, "to delay customer choice", in the Commission preferred language. Enron, who was requested to file a testimony, opposed to any delays, under the argument that SPP is not a "perfect market", but REPs could trade in this market as other marketers do. No final dates have been established yet. However, one estimates that the delay may vary from 12 to 18 months. The Commission has established some clear actions and milestones before retail competition is implemented: - Support SPP to begin wholesale market operations, which involves refinements and upgrades in a few of existing systems, such as settlement; - Reform in SPP Tariffs and implementation of a market based congestion management; - Continue the pilot, attract new competitors and open the market. As part of this effort, the Commission created a Southwest Power Pool Market Readiness Implementation Project (Docket # 24869) to develop the necessary steps to transition to full competition, identify milestones, monitor progress and report to the Commission on a regular basis. Enron will be supporting this effort. SERC SERC regions bear resemblance with SPP, in terms of Commission's intent to delay competition. The most important difference is that the incumbent utility, EGSI, an Entergy subsidiary, has strongly supported timely implementation. The Commission fears that Entergy will benefit from its "monopolistic" position in the region, in the absence of other REPs. No final decisions have been made yet. Entergy Gulf States, in conjunction with the Commission Staff and other interested parties have gone through a settlement process, whereby retail competition will be delayed until September 15, 2002. The subject is still being examined by the Commission and no final decisions have been made. However, we expect the Commission to approve the Settlement Agreement, therefore delaying competition until September 15, 2002. ERCOT All the discussion about delays in competition focuses on non-ERCOT Texas only. There are rumors and ongoing discussions about delaying competition in ERCOT-Texas, which is scheduled to take place on January 01, 2002. For example, Nancy Hetrich from Enron, will be attending the Legislative Oversight Committee on Friday, November 02. She will be appearing in her capacity of Chair of RMS Sub-Committee. Contrary to non-ERCOT, there is a strong support from most industry participants to have retail competition on time. Besides, the results from the pilots were successful and ERCOT is supposed to provide vibrant wholesale competition. Therefore, unlike SPP and Entergy, there should be no material reasons or fears to delay retail competition in ERCOT-Texas. We will keep you apprised as things evolve.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Retail Competition In Texas - Internal Communication