|
|
Enron Mail |
The problem with using something other than a quantitative measure (like
percentage) is that we quickly get into something to argue about with the customer. Some alternatives off the top of my head to get the ball rolling: - Gross Error determined by independent arbitrator or possibly an appointed third party (auditor?) - Transaction which differs by more than x% from verified other transactions between independent companies during the same period (not just quotations). - Transaction which does not lie within the boundaries of other transactions between independent companies which occurred on that day. - Transaction which does not lie within the bid-offer hi and lo range identified by industry price reports published for that day. (obvious limitations here) Dave Louise Kitchen@ECT 08/22/2000 02:35 PM To: Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: David Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Gross Error language Is there not something better than a percentage? Noticce the lack of a better answer from me. Andy Zipper@ENRON 22/08/2000 11:44 To: David Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Gross Error language I think 5% is way too small. At certin physical locations for both gas and power, a 5% move is easily achievable in the normal course of business i.e. 35 mwh power to 45mwh or Transco Z6 from 5.00 to 5.50 in the next trade. I think something in the neighborhood of 20% to 25% is commercially reasonable.
|