|
|
Enron Mail |
You're right that AA insisted on the reference to it being a sale from
storage. Remember we are explaining a variance in NET revenues, not GROSS revenues. An ordinary sale wouldn't generate enough NET revenue to cause a variance that needs to be explained. From: Drew Fossum 11/03/2000 08:31 AM To: Bob Chandler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron@Enron, Tracy Geaccone/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Harry Walters/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Dave Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kent Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Enron 3rd Qtr 00- 10Q Ugh. Do we need to say "from storage inventory" or can we just mention gas sales? I seem to recall that we already discussed that and the accountants wanted to mention the source of the sold gas, but if I'm wrong, lets make the reference less specific. Thanks. DF From: Bob Chandler 11/03/2000 07:48 AM To: Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron@Enron, Tracy Geaccone/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Harry Walters/ET&S/Enron@Enron Subject: Enron 3rd Qtr 00- 10Q Here are the paragraphs in the 3QTR 10Q relative to ETS that contain references to our base gas sales. We have suggested the change shown to de-emphasize the fact that there were sales in both years. Do you want to suggest any further changes in the next draft we receive for review? ---------------------- Forwarded by Bob Chandler/ET&S/Enron on 11/03/2000 07:44 AM --------------------------- Allen Joe 11/01/2000 02:15 PM To: Bob Chandler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Enron 3rd Qtr 00- 10Q Attached are proposed changes to Enron's 10Q for 3rd Qtr 00 on ETS net revenues section.
|