|
|
Enron Mail |
Probably not my place to comment but I haven't seen anything from Bryan yet.
We need to find a better way around this no-one is ever going to consent if that is required for specific customers. But on the major point , having spoken to Bryan over th elast couple of days, I believe he is not going to quote on any entity we have a big relationship with initially. I have seen the first pass at the list but know that Bryan wasn't happy with it as it included people like TXU. On the other point do you actually mean consent or notification - if we send them a notice, follow up with a phone call on the big ones then we can make a business decision about how they feel. Do they actually need to agree on paper? Louise To: Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Consent Apparently there was some miscommunication. It was very clear to me after our meeting in Louise's office that with respect to proposed Reference Entities with which Enron has an existing business relationship you were going to add the consent to the notice letter. It was that consent that was to dramatically speed up the process of determining which Reference Entities could be listed. As we discussed last week, without that consent each proposed Reference Entity must be evaluated separately regarding whether or not a confidentiality agreement is in place and whether or not the existing business relationship is extensive enough to require consent. Neither of these evaluations will be easy or quick. While Enron North America has been reasonably good about compiling lists of confidentiality agreements, it is by no means clear that all other Enron entities have done so. We have not yet determined a process for evaluating the extent of the existing business relationships with our customers but that process will necessarily require significant amounts of legal and commercial time at a high enough level to make important judgment calls. My impression was that you were willing to add the consents to the notice letters since in one fell swoop it resolved a difficult legal issue and moved your earliest possible launch date forward by weeks if not months but also on the assumption that if a customer was not willing to give us their consent we should not be taking the commercial risk that it was precisely those customers whose relationships would be jeopardized by proceeding to use them as a Reference Entity. We will now move forward to develop the processes necessary to conduct the evaluations mentioned above. Please send the list of proposed Reference Entities as soon as possible. Bryan Seyfried 01/19/2000 06:35 AM To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Consent Just to clarify, we do not intend to ask for consent from every reference credit, we do intend to send introductory letters to the relevant parties at the initial set of reference credits which notifies them of our intentions and why it is good for them. My hope is that there are very few reference credits that we need to get consent from and then we can make the commercial decision of whether it is better to get consent or not quote on them. As an initial step, I think we need to understand which reference credits have confidentiality agreements in place and determine those names that we have a potential fiduciary responsibility. The latter obviously will not be black and white but hopefully we can make some progress. I would expect that are really deep relationships are likely to be with either really small counterparties or a very small subset of our large counterparties. Hopefully I am restating what everyone already thought but if not apologies for the miscommunication. Call me if you want to discuss further. bs
|