Here is an email: Jim and Rex: The Lehman Bros. form of "put" works fine from a legal perspective. Yesterday, I faxed to you one of the "puts" with underlined language reflecting differences in securities language from our prior swap/forward deals with Lehman. The differences may be alright for purposes of the "puts". Please let Jeff know if the "puts" are acceptable for execution (from the securities perspective). I have already initialed the documents from the swap perspective. Let me know if you have any questions. As usual, thanks for your help.
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: Lehman Bros. "puts"
Here is an email: We have received a letter dated 2/6/01from Chamberlain, Hrdlicka, counsel to Fletcher Challenge, with respect to the acquisition of Fletcher Challenge by Shell Overseas Holdings Limited, and Shell's proposed subsequent assignment of the Fletcher Challenge Canadian nat gas trades to Apache Corporation. I am sending copies of this letter to Russell Diamond, Mary Cook, Greg Johnston & Joe Hunter. Russell, I need to know if we would agree to the assignment of the trades to Apache. Russell, Mary: With respect to such assignment, we have an old ERMS ISDA Local Currency Master Agreement in place. Do we want to continue to transact w/Apache under this master, or use this as leverage to get a revised ISDA master in place? Among the issues I quickly spotted in the Apache master were: 1. It's a Local Currency Form, so we cannot transact cross border/cross currency products under it 2. We have a 3rd Party Cross Default to Enron Corp. of $25,000,000 3. We've got market quotation instead of loss for terminations 4. No arbitration language 5. Hard to believe, but we've made no choice of law election (maybe I'm blind) 6. Don't have trade option rep (which probably doesn't matter anymore) 7. ISDA Defintions refer to 1987 Interest Rate & Currency Exchange Agreement-time to update 8. Setoff language old and doesn't have affiliate language in it 9. Market Disruption Events not standard 10. Old "ERMS" Collateral Annex 11. $10,000,000 Exposure Threshold-is this sufficient all this business? 12. Credit Event Upon Merger triggers -0- threshold
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: ECC/Fletcher Challenge Acquisition/Assignment
Here is an email: Here is the ABB contract you referenced in your email. I am working on a 97-10 compliant EPC contract for NEPCO/EECC. However, I wonder about the challenges presented with the need for NEPCO to enter into subcontracts and purchase orders which preserve the accounting treatment all the way down the line. This is a very tall order given the contracting environment. Your email is an excellent description of the challenges of doing a deal off the balance sheet, and worthy of further discussion. Kay
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A:
ABB Purchase Agreement - Final Version