|
|
Enron Mail |
Cc: glenn.leslie@blakes.com, peter.keohane@enron.com,
richard.b.sanders@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: glenn.leslie@blakes.com, peter.keohane@enron.com, richard.b.sanders@enron.com X-From: "VELMA GALLANT" <velma.gallant@blakes.com< X-To: <Robert.Hemstock@enron.com< X-cc: <glenn.leslie@blakes.com<, <peter.keohane@enron.com<, <Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com< X-bcc: X-Folder: \Richard_Sanders_Oct2001\Notes Folders\All documents X-Origin: Sanders-R X-FileName: rsanders.nsf With respect to Rob Hemstock's email of August 31st, and Richard Sanders and Glenn Leslie's comments of this morning, it would appear that the coalition being discussed could have a major benefit to Enron and in the normal course of events would be something that Enron would participate in. Having said this, Rob Hemstock's comment that the safest course of action is not to participate is accurate. In the event that Enron determines to proceed with the coalition, notwithstanding Project Stanley, it is my view that a low key role with the right to withdraw from the coalition at any time may be the appropriate way to go given that as Project Stanley proceeds, we are going to have to work hand in hand with Powerex from time to time. In my view this is something that we should consider further in the next few days
|