See the new versions of the netting agreement forms below. All that has been done is to move the Force Majeure concept to paragraph 2(a) from 14(b). This allows the daily limit concept to stand in the UMAs, but it won't elevate to a default under the master netting arrangements. In certain instances if you want to "kill" the day limitation completely in the underlying agreement, you can always use the previous 14(b) language from the emailed docs earlier today. The docs remain at v1 (version 1).
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: FORM CHANGE AGAIN!
David: Thank you for the email. I left a message for you to call (let me know what's convenient and I'll make myself available) because we were trying to make the language generic enough to include all future products which might fall into this category. We considered the following: Alternative 1: "For purposes of any Transaction in a Commodity for which there is either no market or for which the market is illiquid, Party B recognizes that (i) this market is less liquid than other OTC derivatives markets; . . ." Alternative 2: "For purposes of any Transaction in which the relevant Commodity is traded in a market that is newer or less liquid than other OTC derivatives markets, Party B recognizes that (i) such market is newer or less liquid than other OTC derivatives markets; . . . " We also considered adding some type of statement that specifies newer products without limiting future applicability (i.e.. "including but not limited to paper and pulp"). Also, "newer market" may not mean illiquid. "No market" could mean that we are the only market maker. Your language places the onus on us to continually identify these illiquid products either in the Schedule, by amendment to the Schedule or in a separate writing. Can we please discuss? I am free all afternoon. Thanks. Sara
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: paper and pulp language
In reviewing Jeff Shields' expenses for the previous two months, I have found two travel itineraries which came without prices on them. Jessica and Mollie have both checked their e-mail and confirmed that the only documents sent did not detail the cost of the trip. The prices I need are from the following trips: Itinerary only - August 28, Alaska Airlines, PDX-SeaTac-Helena-SeaTac-PDX, Reservation # AS/WXOKNK (reservation made August 24) Itinerary only - Sept. 6 to 7, Delta Airlines, PDX-Salt Lake City-Spokane-PDX, Reservation # DL/V2KIC3 (reservation made September 6) Thank you so much for your time.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Travel Invoices
Jeff, this Agreement should replace the GISB and any other gas agreement between the parties. The collateral language is incorporated into the document. Also, with respect to the Collateral Agreement for Duke Energy Merchants LLC ("DEM"), Duke would like to propose assigning all of the Enron transactions with DEM into one Enron entity and then using the form of collateral agreement submitted to ENA (with some tweaking to allow for a Guaranty from Duke Capital Corporation) to cover the transactions between the Enron counterparty and DEM. Duke can present a list of companies which it has outstanding transactions with if Enron would like. Please let me know if you have any questions in this regard. Thanks - Joe (See attached file: DETM Master 10-29-01.doc) - DETM Master 10-29-01.doc
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Master Gas Agreement