As you are aware I forwarded and offer to VNG that included 4 transactions whereby ENA would sell quantites to Sequent. In addition, I requested that Sequent provide ENA with an offer to serve the Hopwell transaction ( did not tell VNG that it was Hopewell, just described the general service). Dana Grams told me last week that they were concerned about entering into an agreement to get back their assets, because they felt we may file bancruptcy at which point they would get the assets back for "free". This is a lame excuse and I generally told him so. I told him that we were not going to give back the assets and if he wanted them back we needed to get the same or better value to terminate our deal early. He said they would revisit the arrangement and let me know. I will keep you posted. Frank
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: VNG update
Per my conversation with Chris this morning, she wanted me to pass this information on regarding some of the things that we have found that have to do with our TBS/End User problem. We have some end user daily volumes that are more than the physical daily volume at their related TBS (which also may have to do with the problem that we have with 16 and 31 day charts not being read) - when that happens we end up overbilling the LDC. The ones that we are having a problem with are Wisconsin Power and Light and Wisconsin Gas. If you need any other details on this, please let me know or you can bring them up at our meeting on Monday. Thanks,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Measurement TBS/End User Problems
Mike: Here are my comments. Apologies for the fact that they are quick and dirty. All Enron's public statements that I have read, including, I think, statements made to financial analysts, state that our exposure in California is not "material." Dennis' declaration says that the situation in California has been a "financial disaster," that "Enron has lost over $300 million," and that "Enron stands to lose millions more." The losses are described as "huge." Perhaps this is information that has since been communicated to the market, but I'm not aware of it. And if it hasn't, it could represent a significant conflict with previous statements. Seems prudent to run this by IR and perhaps others before releasing. Regarding the statements about our hedging strategy. It would seem prudent to run this through the organization for comment and discussion prior to making public. Very minor technical point--I don't think that AB 1890 was passed
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Comments on Dennis' Declaration in UC/CSU Lawsuit
Chris, I can assure you that I was not part of the "organization". Got the books - going throough now and I will get back to you. Keep Avista's feet to the fire. speak with you soon. Regards
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Update