Q: UBS have organized an important meeting will be held tomorrow for all employees who : 1) have accepted offers or 2) intend to accept offers ( to the best of their knowledge) but who have issues that are being resolved All employees in these categories should attend Buses will be provided for those who do not have their own transport and will pick up from the south side of the north building - please assemble in the Java plaza area from 8.30am to 9.30am ( last bus leaves @ 9.30 am ) The meeting will last until approximately 1pm and will be presented by senior managers from UBS on the firm and it's strategy. There will be breakfast available at the Hotel from 9am to 10am and there will be sandwiches afterwards. If traveling independently please make sure you leave sufficient time to park (it will be very busy) and get to the Grand ballroom Employees need to bring their id's or drivers license with them to gain access to the meeting I'm sorry for the short notice on this - please call out to anyone who should be attending who will not get this message in time Tammie Schoppe on behalf of UBS HR
Propose a subject line
A: URGENT REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ACTION : Welcome to UBS meeting tomorrow 10.15 am @ the Houstonian
IN: Jason, The following reductions will be deducted from Peoples daily SIQ purchase of 125,000 MMBtu/day. For the 19th, our Transportation Services area reports that Peoples was cut by 1,158 MMBtu (780 @ TTP and 378 @ Border Will County to ANR Contract 104684). Here is a revised breakdown of the 19th: PGL Baseload 103,081 PGL SIQ 123,842 (125,000 minus 1,158) PGL DIQ 0 Revised Total Purchase 226,923 Peoples @ North Shore (10,050) Revised Will County ( 39,622) Upstream Volume 177,251 Sell Back to Enron (50,000) @ Gas Daily minus $.01 Enron @ TTP Net 127,251 For the 20th, Peoples was cut by 2,025 MMBtu (1,272 @ TTP and 753 @ Border Will County to ANR Contract 104684). The 20th should now look like the following: PGL Baseload 103,081 PGL SIQ 122,975 (125,000 minus 2,025) PGL DIQ 0 Revised Total Purchase 226,056 Peoples @ North Shore (10,050) Revised Will County ( 39,247) Upstream Volume 176,759 Sell Back to Enron (50,000) @ Gas Daily minus $.01 Enron @ TTP Net 126,759 For the 21st, Peoples was cut by 96 MMBtu (62 @ TTP and 34 @ Border Will County to ANR Contract 104684). The 21st should now look like the following: PGL Baseload 103,081 PGL SIQ 124,904 (125,000 minus 96) PGL DIQ 0 Revised Total Purchase 227,985 Peoples @ North Shore (10,050) Revised Will County ( 39,966) Upstream Volume 177,969 Sell Back to Enron (50,000) @ Gas Daily minus $.01 Enron @ TTP Net 127,969 Call me if you have questions. Jer

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Final cuts regarding gas days May 19th thru May 21st
IN: This is an email
I think Dennis, Shawne and I were supposed to work more on #2, but since I can't recall, I'm sending to all. First, I apologize. I tried to work directly with the excellent spreadsheet Carolyn put together, but I kept fumbling, butchering, etc. So I canibalized her great stuff and created a new spreadsheet, attempting to incorporate the "clarifications" (yeah, right) that Prof McCullough distributed via email, and the stuff we talked about during break (i.e., timing of cash flows). The answers are at the bottom of the work sheet. And I've also included the report (though I did not peruse it for errors, relevancy, etc.). My biggest concern is question 6. My answer (despite some outliers) sez that there ain't no loan in June. (This may mean my spreadsheet's got a fatal flaw--significant probability.)

What is the subject?

OUT: Team Project #2---Problem #2
QUESTION: Rick - further to our discussion, here is the change Enron Americas are requesting in their limit structure: Eliminate volumetric limits on net open position and maturity gap; Eliminate limits on individual commodities within the business unit; Replace with one limit, expressed in VaR, for the entire business unit, of $100MM. I am not uncomfortable with $100MM, given the opportunity set and the required returns from this activity. ETL at this level could be in the region of $340MM. I think the other things to consider in making the decision are as follows: Does the VaR tell us sufficient about the risk ? I think it does since we have the ability to see components of it in some detail and it backtests well Tail Risks Generally we have the most data on tail risks for US gas and power and we are most confident about the EVaR and ETL measures for these commodities. Liquidity This should be a key point in removing volumetric limits because they give us a concept of size. Our recent analysis has shown that our ability to unload risk in US natural gas certainly is high (50% reduction, 10 days) - but we need to continually revisit this analysis. Administration of Risk Generally I think we are comfortable - deal capture is good since so many trades are picked up through EOL. Delegation of authority using VaR limits at desk level is strong But since VaR is so dependent on MTM values and curves I would still recommend a review of: curve validation results; ageing of confirmations outstanding (in and out); flash to actual differences (if any) Compliance with Policy The policy requires limits under the business unit by "commodity groups" in some combination of volumetric and VaR limits. We also must approve products/commodities for a business unit. One interpretation of this is to define the commodity "group" as the aggregate of gas, power, coal, crude, and approve those products, in which case the aggregate limit for the business unit is the commdity group limit also - so we can have one limit. Our concern about the Firm blowing up because everyone is short crude, for example, is covered by the fact that we can still see all the components of our aggregate risk to a single commodity, which is also capped by the concentration limits. The only question is from a governance standpoint, how you prevent yourself bumping up against those and having to explain it to the board. Another side of this argument is the "10K analogy" - if I put $100MM into my 10K via a mutual fund I am likely to want them to declare in which markets they invest it. To summarize, I think we could justify losing volumetric limits for this business. On the question of level of risk and commodity limits, I think we should talk it over with Greg / Ken. DP
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: Limit Revision - Enron Americas
Dear Dr. Lay: Today was Diwali, the festival of lights. As I sat and prayed this evening my thoughts turned to you and I said a small prayer for all of my friends at Enron. I have as you would expect been following the events of the last few weeks with concern. I wish you all the strength and resolve as you commit yourself to leading Enron through these difficult times. You have always been a leader to those who have worked closely with you and have surely faced more difficult times than these and successfully. Best Wishes from all of us at THOT Capital,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Message
Mark, Thanks for the opportunity to meet with you and the rest of the Transwestern team. Attached is a generic overview of the Weather Markets...please call with questions. I look forward to working with you .
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Weather Risk Management