John, I talked to Dale Nesbitt. He suggested that the best way to evaluate his model is to go through a one week intensive project with assistance of somebody from his company. Our cost is a flat fee of $12,500 that would be deducted from the purchase price of $55,000, in case we buy the software package. The price of 55K is indicative and will be adjusted based on the required level of support. Dale will be in Houston next week. I have tentatively invited him to visit with us on Tuesday, November 7, at 3:00 p.m. He will adjust if you are busy at this time. Please, let me know what you think. Vince
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Dale Nesbitt
Sorry. I forgot that we went in and deleted the annex a short while ago to save some fax time and paper. I have gone back and pulled a confirmation that was prepared on the EOL GTC when the annex was still attached.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: EOL template
Have we suggested to FERC staff that they force the ISO and PX to open the "blackbox" to show how they determine dispatch? In addtion, if you are not on the distribution list for Belden's memo on utility behavior in California this summer, I will forward it to you. It suggests some other areas FERC ought to be looking into.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: FERC investigation
A heads up - The Forward Obligation report for 3/28 will show Short Term Northwest with a 50 MWh short position off-peak at NP-15. This is due to an option that Sean and Diana decided not to exercise. Thought that might clear up at least one of the many discrepancies we may find on that report..... Kate
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Forward Ob explained variance 3/28