|
|
Enron Mail |
I see your point that the put should be higher up on the list. In my
opinion, this will be the biggest issue with ABB. From: Eric LeDain@ECT on 07/14/2000 09:25 PM MDT To: Greg Johnston/CAL/ECT@ECT, Rob Milnthorp/CAL/ECT@ECT, Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Moore - changes needed to ABB contract I think the put to ABB should be at $3 MM US and the term 6 months from agreement execution, as a first cut. Let's put this higher in the list (right after the cost items). The "law" items probably need cleaning up as you suggest Kay - the first dealt with overall Cdn laws and statutes, the second to specs and standards and local laws. The force majeure item (11) should just say that costs for handling through storage due to FM shall be at the cost of Seller, if Seller is claiming party. ---------------------- Forwarded by Eric LeDain/CAL/ECT on 07/14/2000 09:16 PM --------------------------- From: Kay Mann @ ENRON 07/14/2000 04:33 PM To: Eric LeDain/CAL/ECT@ECT, Greg Johnston/CAL/ECT@ECT, Laura Luce/Corp/Enron@Enron, Fred Mitro/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rusty Stevens/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gregg Penman/Corp/Enron@Enron, Thomas Suffield/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Moore - changes needed to ABB contract I've made a rough stab at an exhibit to capture the changes which are necessary for the ABB contract. Please comment on the attached, suggest changes, etc. I will add a rep. or condition about receiving all the change orders, etc, FYI, I will be working on this over the weekend, should you care to comment. Kay
|