|
|
Enron Mail |
lets try to work through this one. it will be a good example of potential
energy deals and give us a good feel of how far out of the zone this is or whether it will simply take some work. bs To: Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT@ECT, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edmund Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Indicative request to buy Unfortunately, it's not quite that simple. Duke Energy Trading & Marketing is a marketing sub and does not prepare separate financials. The S&P rating is based on an implied guaranty from Duke Energy. Legal would also need to review this counterparty from the standpoint of confidentiality agreement violations. Also, as a trading counterparty, Sempra Energy Trading is not authorized for credit derivative trading, because the existing guaranty does not explicitly cover this type of transaction. If Sempra wishes to transact out of this entity, we can look into amending the guaranty to cover this product. This will require legal efforts and approval. Rod Tomas Valnek 03/02/2000 08:36 AM To: William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rod Nelson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, Edmund Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT cc: John Metzler/LON/ECT@ECT, Martin McDermott/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Indicative request to buy Both of these entities have an E-rating of 3. Any issues? Tomas ---------------------- Forwarded by Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT on 02/03/2000 14:36 --------------------------- John Metzler 01/03/2000 15:41 To: Martin McDermott/LON/ECT@ECT, Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Indicative request to buy Reference Name: Duke Energy Trading & Marketing (sub of Duke energy -- he claims they have their own debt) Counterparty: Sempara Energy Trading Term: 2 years Notional Amount: $2 million (I made that up) John
|