Q: Dear Mr. Skilling, Thank you very much for taking the time to meet with me today. Joannie told me how extremely busy your schedule is, and I feel honored that you were willing to spare some of your time to get to know one of your interns; it really says a lot. Best of wishes to you and your brother, and I hope that we get a chance to meet again...next year! Sincerely,
Propose a subject line
A: Thank You
IN: Another Tino-gram. DOE disclosed to Team Tino that they pay a $7.06/mo demand charge per KW in addition to the $.053/kwh energy charge. Tino didn't know whether that was per KW of monthly demand, per KW of non-coincident peak usage, or what. The PNM tariff for govt. service is priced at $7.16/KW of "demand above 10,000kw during peak period" (peak period is daytime) so I assume that is how it is calculated. If that is the tariff ("Schedule 4000B") under which DOE really takes service, this is interesting because that is not a very big discount off of the stated rate. It is also interesting that DOE is paying $.053/kwh for energy since the Schedule 4000B energy rate is $.05072/kwh (maybe the difference is surcharges or something). Tino's consultant has figured out that the demand charge equates to an incremental $.011 in addition to the $.053/kwh energy charge, for a total delivered PNM rate to DOE of $.064/kwh. This is not as good as the 7 cent number Tino threw around earlier in the week, but its still not terrible. If the bogey is a 10% reduction to the current rate, our number to beat is $.0576/kwh. Tino promised us copies of DOE's actual energy bills to confirm these numbers. That would be great and solves the due diligence problem you and I talked about yesterday, Kevin. Tino also passed along a rumor he heard from the Isleta's consultant that the Cobisa Belen project is dead. Do we know anything about this??? Interesting. I'm waiting to hear back from Bill Votaw to line up a due diligence call to Tino's government contracts lawyers in DC to confirm whether the "sole source" strategy is legit. Kevin, I'll let you know when this is scheduled in case you want to be on the call. Thanks. DF

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Pueblo
IN: This is an email
Hi. I've got all the paperwork. The bill (on my bill) for you guys is $740. I'll get you the paperwork tonite. Sorry for the mix-up (should I ask Squaw for a discount due to all the mess!?!?). Best,

What is the subject?

OUT: Grand total is....!
QUESTION: Mark: I just wanted to update you on where things stand currently with respect to the Domain Name Transfer Agreement that we are negotiating with Risk Management Solutions, Inc. After visiting with Scott about the reps and warranties, he became concerned about the overall scope of the agreement and in particular, what in addition to the URL domain name (weather-desk.com) EEL was being asked to transfer and the restrictions that RMS wanted to place on EEL with respect to this Domain Name and "any variations thereof." We went back to RMS and told them basically that all we were willing to do was transfer them the URL domain name with no strings attached. I'm not sure that this will be acceptable to them given their future intentions which is to acquire from another third party the name "weatherdesk.com" , register it and use it with respect to the products that they offer. All of these discussions that we have had over the past week with respect to our domain name have lead Seth, Scott and I to question what Enron's intent is with respect to the name or any variations thereof given the fact that according to Scott we have submitted applications to register similar names. We were hoping that you could help us answer this question or at least lead us to the right people that could. It seems odd that we would be wiling to transfer this name and yet feel that it is important to pursue registering these other names. I look forward to hearing from you.
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: Domain Transfer Agreement
Ken, I'm sorry about all of the negative press you are receiving. We missed you at the forum meeting this past Monday. The only valid critism anyone can lay on you is that you were too good of a corporate citizen for our city. We're thinking of you. Peter - C.DTF
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: personal
Respond by January 10, 2002 and no later than 4:00 p.m. Enron Corp. is circulating this Questionnaire to directors, executive officers and key employees to develop and verify information that will be used in connection with the sale by the Company of its business of wholesale trading of natural gas and electricity with customers in North America. In a nutshell, we need to disclose any transactions between you and Enron Corp., Enron North America Corp. or Enron Net Works relating to the trading business since September 30, 1999. We expect to be in position to sign the purchase documents upon completion of the auction scheduled for Thursday, January 10, 2002. Unfortunately, that means we need your responses to the questionnaire as soon as possible, and in no event later than 4:00 p.m. of January 10, 2002. Regards,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Sent on behalf of James Derrick, Jr.