|
|
Enron Mail |
Colleagues:
I hope that a short note on methodology on accomplishments' valuation will be of help to all of us at this stage. Up to this moment, the current criteria is still the same established by Jim, John, and Gia Team in the last two years. Its purpose was, and still, is to ensure that Public Affairs continues to generate more value than actual expense. The process, hopefully, should drive GA staff to view themselves as "originators" creating bottom-line value through (as an example): revenue enhancement (new opportunity, market expansion) cost reduction (e.g., fee delay, rate decrease). The value calculation process focused on the following rules (called SCORE): Simplicity Consistency Objectivity Reasonableness Equity Perhaps it is helpful to list some of the methodologies submitted so far. With no specific preference, they are: A percentage of Enron's business on a specific hub, or transmission connection (the percentage is subjectively determined) Impact of a specific deal on Enron's stock price (in total or part, again, subjectively determined) The result of what-if analysis to estimate the would be cost had the legislation passed (or did not pass), or a settlement reached (or not reached) The amount of financing needs that was secured for a deal NPV of a project. An extension would be the size of market identified or deals originated. The market size that Enron is targeting. Value at risk in a specific project or activity The methodology adopted by the relevant regulatory regimen to calculated specific cost item that have been deferred, reduced, or avoided. An extension would be the impact of tariffs determination after intervention (in part or total). The buy/sell spread of a portion of the market size that was released after intervention. I shall keep you posted with any change--in any case, it shall not happen without full consultation with you--meanwhile, please let me know if you have any question in this regard. Brgrds AI 713-853-3037
|