|
|
Enron Mail |
Sorry I am so late in replying! It would seem that the MTM issue is
Bridgeline's decision and would solely be based on whether or not they are, in fact, trading as defined in EITF 98-10. There are about 4 pages of criteria set forth in that document. That may be a question you want to ask Trevor Mihalik, but I do know that initially they did not meet 98-10 criteria. Their business may well have changed by now. I am confused by your suggestion about whether or not to involve commercial. I may not understand, but we do already have a means to track our 40 %. We can certainly mark 60% of any business we do with Bridgeline, but the other 40% should be treated as affiliate business. Wes Brent A Price 05/23/2000 06:07 AM To: Wes Colwell/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Steve Jackson/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Accounting for transaction done with Bridgeline Wes - Are we still anticipating that Bridgeline will be allowed mark-to-market status at some point in the future? If so, what criteria must Bridgeline meet and what is the expected timeline on it? If this is going to happen soon, I would suggest that we avoid getting Commercial involved and developing a process to track our 40% portion of Bridgeline. ---------------------- Forwarded by Brent A Price/HOU/ECT on 05/23/2000 05:57 AM --------------------------- From: Steve Jackson 05/19/2000 12:29 PM To: Brent A Price/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Accounting for transaction done with Bridgeline FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Steve Jackson/HOU/ECT on 05/19/2000 12:28 PM --------------------------- From: Georgeanne Hodges 05/01/2000 04:11 PM To: Steve Jackson/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Wes Colwell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Lynne Ruffer/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Accounting for transaction done with Bridgeline Steve, AA has indicated that our proposal with regard to transactions done between ENA and Bridgeline sounds OK. They did bring up a good point about how the 40% would be shown for purposes of position and loss limits, which under our scenario of just using schedule 'C' to defer the 40% we would effectively be showing the 100% for all other measures. I told them that we would monitor for materiality before putting a manual process in place. I think we should now meet with the commercial folks to explain the real p\l impact. Would you take the lead on deciding who that should be and get a meeting set up? Thanks
|