This is the content of an email: OK, I apologize, I've been trying to lock myself to the computer and crunch some #'s, but can't seem to get control of my schedule. Wanted to lay out the core/noncore model that's been pitched (and that CMA showed keen interest in this morning) to see if we're all on the same page; but perhaps this is the analysis that you're already working on: Split takes place either 1.1.03 or 6.1.03. Core and noncore are responsible for the "DWR past purchases" (spread over 15 years). Core will keep IOU gen, QFs and DWR contracts (which would eliminate the short for the core) Noncore, in return for giving up the lucrative IOU gen, effectively accepts the short position (i.e., goes to market) AND does not get sacked with DWR's going forward costs (with "forward costs" defined as all power costs attributable to the "post-core/noncore" transition date. Let me know if this tracks with where we're headed. Thanks. Best,
What was the subject line for this email?
Concept for core/noncore Analysis