QUESTION: Good morning to all of you at Enron. I wanted to make you all aware of two major new capabilities that FriedWire is soon to deploy. One will be the new PJM intelligence module that will be an add-on to the existing Traffic Report. The other is a brand new version of the Traffic Report itself that incorporates real-time electricity prices and news/commentary from THE major provider of this content. FriedWire will be making some announcements shortly describing the strategic alliance between our firm and this content partner, and should be able to start showing the enhanced, jointly developed version of the Traffic Report in October. Regarding the PJM module; we are now scheduling 30-40 minute, remote (Internet-based) overviews with clients who actively trade in PJM. These will begin the week of September 24th. If any of you or your colleagues would like to participate in a very informal session that looks at the capabilities of this new tool, please contact me and I can help set-up a date and time. Some of the content and functionality in the PJM module includes: } Real time price and loadcharts that present current conditions in historical context } Real-time and day-ahead LMP data along with the public FTR data to provide a real-time estimate of FTR value } Easy interface for querying FTR data to provide competitive intelligence in the primary and secondary FTR markets } Tools for valuing FTRs in the monthly FTR auction } PJM load charts displaying PJM ISO load forecast bias } Eastern Interconnect frequency monitoring } LMP charts and maps } Customizable displays in the form of personalized Watchlists, tables and chart building tools Thanks and contact me with anything you might need. Take Care, Stuart Wright Director FriedWire Inc.
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: New from FriedWire...
I am confirming my conversation with you yesterday and my conversation a minute ago with Lori Volpi at Dynegy Canada. As we discussed, Dynegy Canada is trading with both ECC and ENA, with the bulk of its trading being done with ECC. Instead of getting two ISDA Master Agreements in place, we will enter into an ISDA Master Agreement between ECC and Dynegy Canada, and then just back-to-back any ENA trades down to Houston by virtue of the Services Agreement for Financial Agreements we have in place between ECC and ENA. Per my conversation with Lori, this will also work with the EOL trades since the Electronic Trading Agreement provides that any financial trades done for either ECC or ENA will be transacted under the respective master agreement in place with either ECC or ENA. Works for me...!
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Dynegy Canada, Inc.
As we begin to work on our board/senior management retreat for 2003, we would like to test your interest in the possibility of holding the meeting in Shanghai during the week of June 15, 2003. The tentative schedule would be to travel on Monday, June 16, arriving in Shanghai on Tuesday. Meetings would take place Wednesday through Saturday, with departures on Sunday. Please let me know if such a schedule would be feasible for you, keeping in mind that at this point we're simply trying to determine if you would be able to devote this week to the trip. Alecia DeCoudreaux
Answer: Board/Senior Management Retreat - June 2003
Here is an email: How did everything go this AM? I hope well. Today is you're first day of class, right? Have a good day. I love you. D
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: Good Morning
Q: Ken and Jeff: Glen Darden, the President and CEO of Quicksilver Resources, Inc., is a longtime personal and professional friend of mine. Recently, he has asked whether I would consider serving as an outside Director on the Board of Directors of Quicksilver. Before meeting with Glen to discuss this further, I want to make sure that Enron does not have any objections. Headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas, Quicksilver is a natural gas and crude oil production company engaged in the development and acquisition of long-lived producing natural gas and oil properties. Quicksilver began trading publicly in March of 1999 on the American Stock Exchange (KWK). Quicksilver has a long standing business relationship with Enron. Enron has historically entered into pre-pays and hedging transactions related to natural gas production and continues to do so today. Enron (via JEDI) also provided some financing at the time of the merger of Quicksilver and Mercury Exploration and was a significant shareholder of Quicksilver at the time of its initial public offering. I believe JEDI has since divested this stockholding. If I were to serve on the board of Quicksilver, I expect that there will be related party transactions of a routine ongoing nature that would need to be disclosed and which I would need to abstain from voting on as a member of the board. However, I do not feel there would be any material conflicts of interest as Quicksilver's core business is complementary to Enron, not competitive with Enron. As a personal matter, it is an experience that would be beneficial and would provide valuable personal visibility in our industry. I am scheduled to meet with Glen and others at Quicksilver later this month to further discuss this possibility. Would each of you please let me know after due consideration whether you have any objection to or concern with the position. Please do not hesitate to call me (x67713) if you have any questions or wish to discuss this further. Thanks.
Propose a subject line
A: Quicksilver Resources
Here is an email: Mark, Jeff and Greg, There has been some recent noise at CalPERS regarding Enron, some of which you may be aware. I wanted to update you in case any questions were raised tomorrow on the conference call. In October CA state Senator Steve Peace sent a letter to the CEO of PERS raising "questions about the prudence of CalPERS continuing to invest and partner with Enron under its current management". I discussed this with the Alternative Investment (AIM) staff (with whom I deal with regularly regarding JEDI II). They indicated at the time that a senior staff meeting was being held (on Friday Nov 2nd) to discuss the letter and how PERS might respond. Subsequent to that, staff informed me that the board had put Enron on the agenda to discuss during today's (Tuesday the 13th) Investment Committee meeting. I have not received an update as yet today on today's meeting. The fact that the board was meeting to discuss Enron has been reported in the media. Meanwhile, on Friday the 9th, Dan Szente the CIO resigned from PERS. Articles indicate it may be a result of 7.2 percent loss in the funds' investments. PERS holds approx 2.6 million shares of Enron. This has also been mentioned in articles discussing Dan's resignation - thus attempting to link his resignation with our poor performance?? Earlier in the year their proxy vote indicated they owned 3.5 million shares. [BTW - they voted against Item 1 - specifically mentioning Lay, Wakeham and Winokur as having relationships with Enron that could cause conflicts of interest.} PERS assets total $151 billion. It appears they may have liquidated some of their position. I am not sure but I think their position has been one they have held for a long time - possibly since beginning our relationship with JEDI back in 1993. The JEDI II partnership has been a successful partnership for PERS and current IRRs indicate they could earn in excess of 50% on their investment based on the September 30 capital account. This of course, assumes we can liquidate the assets in JEDI I for their current fair value. Also - PERS purchased approx. 7.2 million shares in NPW for $40 million - a cost basis of $5.50 a share. If you have any questions, I am available this evening at 713-218-6460. Shirley
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A:
CalPERS