|
|
Enron Mail |
Mary- I have briefly reviewed your re-write and will take it on the plane to
Houston. The tone of the letter is still to Enron centered instead of Cal PX centered. I think you began the process of softening the tone in your rewrite, but I think we should go further. For example, We recognised that that the Market Monitor has a difficult task of better understanding the unintended consequences of new rules on the Market, and Enron wants to help. When we met recently, we thought we were accomplishing this shared goal. Now, as a consequence, you propose to publish a letter that blames us for the problems on the __________ and may cause us to be sued based on your findings. As we prepare to defend ourselves, we find ourselves at a disadvantage because the severak conclusions and factual findings are not supported and we need a better understanding of how you reached several of the conclusions in your letter. As we discussed, I believe a meeting to discuss these matters would be helpful to reaching a mutually acceptable resolution. After this meeting, Enron can promptly provide a response that better addresses your concerns, as may be necessary. We would like to help the market monitor in these endeavours, but we cannot continue to be placed at a disadvantage through those efforts. ... In addition, we need to add Walley as the contact instead of Richard. From: Mary Hain @ ECT 12/08/99 08:37 PM To: Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Important - Letter to Cal PX I agree with the concept of the short letter. I have drafted some changes: some taking more of a conciliatory tone and others suggesting a potential settlement proposal. Due to all the PRC meetings today, I was unable run this by anyone, so this product is simply my suggestions.
|