|
|
Enron Mail |
Justin:
I agree with the comments of both Alan and Mark regarding this issue. In particular, it would seem to be important to act on Mark's comments regarding the impact of the FCM status of Enron Trade Services, Inc. Jeff Justin Boyd 10/16/2000 05:22 AM To: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Enron Metals Gentlemen, I met with Craig Young (MG US) last week, who is keen to progress metals business with large US corporates (e.g. Anheuser Busch), on the following basis: o Assume ENA and US Corporate are existing parties to ISDA/Credit Support Documents (the "Master"). o ENA and US Corporate would agree to expand range of OTC products to include OTC metal derivatives under the Master. The principals to the metals trades would therefore be the US Corporate and ENA. These trades would however be "arranged" by MG London Inc. (an FCM) as "arranger" in the US for ENA. o Enron Metals Limited (EML) from London would agree to provide metals prices to ENA and/or MG London Inc. in the US, and in return receive a commission from MG London Inc. o ENA would back-to-back OTC metals derivatives with EML via an intra-group ISDA Master. Look forward to your views. Thanks. Justin
|