data/messages.json

{
  "M-000001": {
    "message_id": "M-000001",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/325.",
    "subject": "Re: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-07 08:53:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "george.rahal@acnpower.com",
    "body": "George,\n\n Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not received \nany financials for ACN Power.  \n\nThanks,\n\nPhillip Allen"
  },
  "M-000002": {
    "message_id": "M-000002",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/274.",
    "subject": "Re: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-07 08:53:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "george.rahal@acnpower.com",
    "body": "George,\n\n Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not received \nany financials for ACN Power.  \n\nThanks,\n\nPhillip Allen"
  },
  "M-000003": {
    "message_id": "M-000003",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/321.",
    "subject": "Re: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-07 08:53:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "george.rahal@acnpower.com",
    "body": "George,\n\n Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not received \nany financials for ACN Power.  \n\nThanks,\n\nPhillip Allen"
  },
  "M-000004": {
    "message_id": "M-000004",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/17.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-09 02:27:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/09/2000 \n10:27 AM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000005": {
    "message_id": "M-000005",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/323.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-09 02:27:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/09/2000 \n10:27 AM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000006": {
    "message_id": "M-000006",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/319.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-09 02:27:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/09/2000 \n10:27 AM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000007": {
    "message_id": "M-000007",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/272.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-09 02:27:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/09/2000 \n10:27 AM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000008": {
    "message_id": "M-000008",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/19.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-11 04:31:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/11/2000 \n12:31 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000009": {
    "message_id": "M-000009",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/321.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-11 04:31:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/11/2000 \n12:31 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000010": {
    "message_id": "M-000010",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/271.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-11 04:31:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/11/2000 \n12:31 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000011": {
    "message_id": "M-000011",
    "thread_id": "T-0001",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/318.",
    "subject": "RE: W basis quotes",
    "date": "2000-02-11 04:31:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 02/11/2000 \n12:31 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Rahal\" <george.rahal@acnpower.com> on 02/07/2000 03:13:58 PM\nTo: <Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: W basis quotes\n\n\nI'll get back to them on this.  I know we have sent financials to Clinton\nEnergy...I'll check to see if this is enough.  In the meantime, is it\npossible to show me indications on the quotes I asked for?  Please advise.\nGeorge\n\nGeorge Rahal\nManager, Gas Trading\nACN Power, Inc.\n7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 630\nMcLean, VA 22102-3303\nPhone  (703)893-4330 ext. 1023\nFax  (703)893-4390\nCell (443)255-7699\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com [mailto:Phillip_K_Allen@enron.com]\n> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 5:54 PM\n> To: george.rahal@acnpower.com\n> Subject: Re: W basis quotes\n>\n>\n>\n> George,\n>\n>      Can you please call my credit desk at 713-853-1803.  They have not\n> received any financials for ACN Power.\n>\n> Thanks,\n>\n> Phillip Allen\n>\n>\n\n"
  },
  "M-000012": {
    "message_id": "M-000012",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/38.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-16 06:09:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "steven.south@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/16/2000 \n02:07 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000013": {
    "message_id": "M-000013",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/289.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-16 06:09:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "steven.south@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/16/2000 \n02:07 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000014": {
    "message_id": "M-000014",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/243.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-16 06:09:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "steven.south@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/16/2000 \n02:07 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000015": {
    "message_id": "M-000015",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/290.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-16 06:09:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "steven.south@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/16/2000 \n02:07 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000016": {
    "message_id": "M-000016",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/287.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-21 05:26:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/21/2000 \n01:24 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000017": {
    "message_id": "M-000017",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/39.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-21 05:26:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/21/2000 \n01:24 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000018": {
    "message_id": "M-000018",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/241.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-21 05:26:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/21/2000 \n01:24 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000019": {
    "message_id": "M-000019",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/288.",
    "subject": "Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-21 05:26:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/21/2000 \n01:24 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nStephane Brodeur\n03/16/2000 07:06 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Maps\n\nAs requested by John, here's the map and the forecast...\nCall me if you have any questions (403) 974-6756.\n\n"
  },
  "M-000020": {
    "message_id": "M-000020",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/239.",
    "subject": "Re: Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-22 01:27:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "stephane.brodeur@enron.com",
    "body": "Stephane,\n\n Can you create an e-mail list to distribute your reports everyday to the \nwest desk?\nOr put them on a common drive?  We can do the same with our reports.   List \nshould include:\n\n Phillip Allen\n Mike Grigsby\n Keith Holst\n Frank Ermis\n Steve South\n Janie Tholt\n Tory Kuykendall\n Matt Lenhart\n Randy Gay\n\nThanks.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000021": {
    "message_id": "M-000021",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/285.",
    "subject": "Re: Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-22 01:27:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "stephane.brodeur@enron.com",
    "body": "Stephane,\n\n Can you create an e-mail list to distribute your reports everyday to the \nwest desk?\nOr put them on a common drive?  We can do the same with our reports.   List \nshould include:\n\n Phillip Allen\n Mike Grigsby\n Keith Holst\n Frank Ermis\n Steve South\n Janie Tholt\n Tory Kuykendall\n Matt Lenhart\n Randy Gay\n\nThanks.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000022": {
    "message_id": "M-000022",
    "thread_id": "T-0002",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/286.",
    "subject": "Re: Maps",
    "date": "2000-03-22 01:27:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "stephane.brodeur@enron.com",
    "body": "Stephane,\n\n Can you create an e-mail list to distribute your reports everyday to the \nwest desk?\nOr put them on a common drive?  We can do the same with our reports.   List \nshould include:\n\n Phillip Allen\n Mike Grigsby\n Keith Holst\n Frank Ermis\n Steve South\n Janie Tholt\n Tory Kuykendall\n Matt Lenhart\n Randy Gay\n\nThanks.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000023": {
    "message_id": "M-000023",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/223.",
    "subject": "test",
    "date": "2000-07-10 23:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "brendas@surffree.com",
    "body": "testing"
  },
  "M-000024": {
    "message_id": "M-000024",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/176.",
    "subject": "test",
    "date": "2000-07-10 23:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "brendas@surffree.com",
    "body": "testing"
  },
  "M-000025": {
    "message_id": "M-000025",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/74.",
    "subject": "test",
    "date": "2000-07-10 23:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "brendas@surffree.com",
    "body": "testing"
  },
  "M-000026": {
    "message_id": "M-000026",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/222.",
    "subject": "test",
    "date": "2000-07-10 23:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "brendas@surffree.com",
    "body": "testing"
  },
  "M-000027": {
    "message_id": "M-000027",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/221.",
    "subject": "Re: New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-07-11 02:12:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com",
    "body": "please add mike grigsby to distribution list.\n"
  },
  "M-000028": {
    "message_id": "M-000028",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/222.",
    "subject": "Re: New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-07-11 02:12:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com",
    "body": "please add mike grigsby to distribution list.\n"
  },
  "M-000029": {
    "message_id": "M-000029",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/175.",
    "subject": "Re: New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-07-11 02:12:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com",
    "body": "please add mike grigsby to distribution list.\n"
  },
  "M-000030": {
    "message_id": "M-000030",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/159.",
    "subject": "Re: New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-07-26 03:46:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com",
    "body": "please add mike grigsby to distribution"
  },
  "M-000031": {
    "message_id": "M-000031",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/205.",
    "subject": "Re: New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-07-26 03:46:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com",
    "body": "please add mike grigsby to distribution"
  },
  "M-000032": {
    "message_id": "M-000032",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/206.",
    "subject": "Re: New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-07-26 03:46:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com",
    "body": "please add mike grigsby to distribution"
  },
  "M-000033": {
    "message_id": "M-000033",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/128.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-08 05:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 \n12:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000034": {
    "message_id": "M-000034",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/141.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-08 05:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 \n12:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000035": {
    "message_id": "M-000035",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/99.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-08 05:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 \n12:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000036": {
    "message_id": "M-000036",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/146.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-08 05:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 \n12:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000037": {
    "message_id": "M-000037",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/131.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-11 09:57:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/11/2000 \n04:57 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000038": {
    "message_id": "M-000038",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/135.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-11 09:57:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/11/2000 \n04:57 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000039": {
    "message_id": "M-000039",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/93.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-11 09:57:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/11/2000 \n04:57 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000040": {
    "message_id": "M-000040",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/140.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-11 09:57:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/11/2000 \n04:57 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000041": {
    "message_id": "M-000041",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/84.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-19 09:35:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/19/2000 \n04:35 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000042": {
    "message_id": "M-000042",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/138.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-19 09:35:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/19/2000 \n04:35 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000043": {
    "message_id": "M-000043",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/126.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-19 09:35:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/19/2000 \n04:35 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000044": {
    "message_id": "M-000044",
    "thread_id": "T-0005",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/131.",
    "subject": "Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls",
    "date": "2000-09-19 09:35:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/19/2000 \n04:35 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/08/2000 05:21:49 AM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net> \nSubject: Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n\n\nEnclosed is the preliminary proforma for the Westgate property is Austin\nthat we told you about.  As you can tell from the proforma this project\nshould produce a truly exceptional return of over 40% per year over 3 years.\nThis is especially attractive when the project is in a market as strong as\nAustin and we are introducing new product that in a very low price range for\nthis market.  This is the best project in terms of risk and reward that we\nhave uncovered to date in the Austin market.\nThe project does have approved zoning and will only require a site plan.  As\nit is in the \"Smart Growth Corridor\" area designated by the City of Austin\nfor preferred development, this will be fast tracked and should be complete\nin less than 6 months.  Additionally, many of the current and more severe\nwater treatment ordinances have been waived.  I have estimated the lot\nimprovement costs based on a 28 lot development we investigated in North\nAustin, which included a detention/retention and filtration pond and street\nwidening.  Even though this property is not likely to require street\nwidening and will have less of a detention/retention and filtration pond\nrequirement, I used this data to be cautious.\n The Lone Star gas line easement in the lower portion of the property is not\nexpected to impact sales significantly.  Other projects have been quite\nsuccessful with identical relationships to this pipeline, such as the\nadjoining single family residential and a project at St. Edwards University.\nAs with most infill projects, the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods\nis uneven.  We have included a fence around the entire property, but may\nonly put it on Westgate and Cameron Loop.  Gated communities are far\npreferred so this is a good idea for both screening and current buyer\npreferences.\nThe seller accepted our offer Thursday evening with a price of $680,000 and\nan extended escrow.  This will enable us to probably obtain an approved site\nplan before closing on the contract, which will mean that we can close into\nan A&D Loan rather than into a land loan and then an improvement loan.\nThis analysis shows your investment at $700,000 for a 50% interest in the\nprofits of the project.  As we discussed in San Marcos, we can also discuss\nhaving you invest only in the lots, sell the lots to the construction entity\nwith your profit in the lot.  I believe this would facilitate the use of a\n1031 Exchange of the proceeds from this deal into another project that is a\nrental deal or at least into the land for a rental project that would then\nbe the equity for that project.  You would need to discuss this with an\nexchange expert first.  Larry Lewter knows an expert in the field in San\nAntonio if you do not know anyone.\nI will send you a package on the property that was prepared by the broker,\nby Airborne Express today for Saturday delivery.\nOnce you have read the package and reviewed this proforma, we would want to\nschedule a tour of the site and the area.  Please get back to me as soon as\nyour schedule permits regarding the site visit and feel free to call at any\ntime.  You can reach me over the weekend and in the evening at either\n512-338-1119 or 512-338-1110.  My cell phone is 512-748-7495 and the fax is\n512-338-1103.   I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you\non this project that is sure to be a major winner.\nI regret that it took so long to get back to you, but we had some unusual\nevents these past few weeks.  A small freakish wind storm with severe 60+mpg\ndowndrafts hit the South part of Austin where we are building 10 town homes.\nOne of these units had just had the roof decked with the siding scheduled to\nstart the next day.  The severe downdraft hitting the decked roof was enough\nto knock it down.  The City shut down the project for a week and it took\nanother week to get every thing back on tract.  Then last week I had to take\nmy wife  to emergency.  She has a bulge in the material between the vertebra\nin her spine and it causes her extreme pain and has kept her bedridden this\npast week..  There is nothing like having your wife incapacitated to realize\nthe enormous number of things she does everyday.   Fortunately, it looks as\nif she will be ok in the long run.\nGeorge W. Richards\nCreekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n - Westgate Proforma-Phillip Allen.xls\n"
  },
  "M-000045": {
    "message_id": "M-000045",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/71.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:26 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000046": {
    "message_id": "M-000046",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/150.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:26 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000047": {
    "message_id": "M-000047",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/113.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:26 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000048": {
    "message_id": "M-000048",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/118.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:26:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "pallen70@hotmail.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:26 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000049": {
    "message_id": "M-000049",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/112.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "kholst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000050": {
    "message_id": "M-000050",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/151.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "kholst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000051": {
    "message_id": "M-000051",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/117.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "kholst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000052": {
    "message_id": "M-000052",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/70.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-09-26 09:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "kholst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 \n04:28 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000053": {
    "message_id": "M-000053",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/357.",
    "subject": "Re: natural update",
    "date": "2000-09-26 11:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "msagel@home.com",
    "body": "Mark:\nYou've called it right thus far.  \n\nLet's plan to get a drink after work on the 19th.\nThanks,\nJohn\n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 09/26/2000 10:23:06 AM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: natural update\n\n\n\nJohn:\n?\nI wish I had a lot to pass along, but not much has changed on  my work.? All \nthe analysis is still very bullish and expecting higher  levels.? I am \nreceiving hourly \"9\" type strength patterns, which means the  up move must \nconsistently continue from here.? Any drop under today's lows  is a negative \nfor natural.? On my daily work, natural will see a new type  of strength \npattern today.? It is not a \"9\" type topping pattern, but one  that normally \ncomes out along the way as price moves higher.? This would  suggest a \npotential short-term high over the next 2-3 days, but nothing of major  \nimportance.\n?\nI have tentative plans to be in Houston on Thursday, October  19.? Are you \ninterested in meeting so that I may show in much greater  detail what the \nwork is doing and how it can enhance your activity?? Let me  know if that day \nworks for you.? Thanks,\n?\nMark Sagel\nPsytech Analytics\n(410)308-0245\nmsagel@home.com\n?\n\n"
  },
  "M-000054": {
    "message_id": "M-000054",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/172.",
    "subject": "Re: natural update",
    "date": "2000-09-26 11:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "msagel@home.com",
    "body": "Mark:\nYou've called it right thus far.  \n\nLet's plan to get a drink after work on the 19th.\nThanks,\nJohn\n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 09/26/2000 10:23:06 AM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: natural update\n\n\n\nJohn:\n?\nI wish I had a lot to pass along, but not much has changed on  my work.? All \nthe analysis is still very bullish and expecting higher  levels.? I am \nreceiving hourly \"9\" type strength patterns, which means the  up move must \nconsistently continue from here.? Any drop under today's lows  is a negative \nfor natural.? On my daily work, natural will see a new type  of strength \npattern today.? It is not a \"9\" type topping pattern, but one  that normally \ncomes out along the way as price moves higher.? This would  suggest a \npotential short-term high over the next 2-3 days, but nothing of major  \nimportance.\n?\nI have tentative plans to be in Houston on Thursday, October  19.? Are you \ninterested in meeting so that I may show in much greater  detail what the \nwork is doing and how it can enhance your activity?? Let me  know if that day \nworks for you.? Thanks,\n?\nMark Sagel\nPsytech Analytics\n(410)308-0245\nmsagel@home.com\n?\n\n"
  },
  "M-000055": {
    "message_id": "M-000055",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/344.",
    "subject": "test",
    "date": "2000-09-28 09:16:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "body": "home.enron.com\n\nthis is home.enron.com."
  },
  "M-000056": {
    "message_id": "M-000056",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/159.",
    "subject": "test",
    "date": "2000-09-28 09:16:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "body": "home.enron.com\n\nthis is home.enron.com."
  },
  "M-000057": {
    "message_id": "M-000057",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/147.",
    "subject": "Re: Natural update",
    "date": "2000-10-04 01:14:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "msagel@home.com",
    "body": "Mark:\nLet's keep the present system for the short-term.  I would like to continue \nlooking at your work for another couple weeks.  We'll talk later,\nJohn\n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 10/03/2000 02:29:47 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\nJohn:\n?\nThe price behavior of the past couple days has been  disappointing.? My \nshort-term market patterns suggested a more robust price  rally and natural \nappears to be waning at present.? Volume on this rally is  poor, particularly \nsince yesterday was a decent day to the upside.? The  market appears to be \nusing a lot of its energy but spinning its wheels.? If  we are at these same \nprice levels in another two weeks, that would be extremely  bullish.? Right \nhere, the risk/reward to being long is not so great.?  Recommend a neutral \nstance short-term on natural.? Bigger picture is still  very bullish.? \nHowever, this market needs another 1-2 weeks of what I would  call horizontal \nprice action to set the stage for a big move to the  upside.\n?\nLet me know if this stuff is useful for you.? I certainly  don't want to \nwaste your time.? In addition, if you prefer I call when I  have something to \npass along, let me know.? I don't know how often you  check/see your e-mail.? \nThanks,\n?\nMark Sagel\n\n"
  },
  "M-000058": {
    "message_id": "M-000058",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/332.",
    "subject": "Re: Natural update",
    "date": "2000-10-04 01:14:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "msagel@home.com",
    "body": "Mark:\nLet's keep the present system for the short-term.  I would like to continue \nlooking at your work for another couple weeks.  We'll talk later,\nJohn\n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 10/03/2000 02:29:47 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\nJohn:\n?\nThe price behavior of the past couple days has been  disappointing.? My \nshort-term market patterns suggested a more robust price  rally and natural \nappears to be waning at present.? Volume on this rally is  poor, particularly \nsince yesterday was a decent day to the upside.? The  market appears to be \nusing a lot of its energy but spinning its wheels.? If  we are at these same \nprice levels in another two weeks, that would be extremely  bullish.? Right \nhere, the risk/reward to being long is not so great.?  Recommend a neutral \nstance short-term on natural.? Bigger picture is still  very bullish.? \nHowever, this market needs another 1-2 weeks of what I would  call horizontal \nprice action to set the stage for a big move to the  upside.\n?\nLet me know if this stuff is useful for you.? I certainly  don't want to \nwaste your time.? In addition, if you prefer I call when I  have something to \npass along, let me know.? I don't know how often you  check/see your e-mail.? \nThanks,\n?\nMark Sagel\n\n"
  },
  "M-000059": {
    "message_id": "M-000059",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/330.",
    "subject": "Re: TEST",
    "date": "2000-10-04 03:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "zyft02@yahoo.com",
    "body": "Received\n\n\n\n\nz <zyft02@yahoo.com> on 10/04/2000 08:48:55 AM\nPlease respond to zyft02@yahoo.com\nTo: john.arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: TEST\n\n\nThis is a test from Yahoo email. Please reply if\nreceived.\n\nDon Adam\nTeam Lead, Trader Support\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!\nhttp://photos.yahoo.com/\n\n"
  },
  "M-000060": {
    "message_id": "M-000060",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/145.",
    "subject": "Re: TEST",
    "date": "2000-10-04 03:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "zyft02@yahoo.com",
    "body": "Received\n\n\n\n\nz <zyft02@yahoo.com> on 10/04/2000 08:48:55 AM\nPlease respond to zyft02@yahoo.com\nTo: john.arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: TEST\n\n\nThis is a test from Yahoo email. Please reply if\nreceived.\n\nDon Adam\nTeam Lead, Trader Support\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!\nhttp://photos.yahoo.com/\n\n"
  },
  "M-000061": {
    "message_id": "M-000061",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/328.",
    "subject": "Re: Natural update",
    "date": "2000-10-04 09:11:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "msagel@home.com",
    "body": "Mark:\nWe are still on for drinks on the 19th.  You have called the market very well \nsince you started sending me updates.  Unfortunately for both of us, a couple \nof good calls does not a soothsayer make.  Thus, keep sending me your updates \nso I can at least get a little broader judgment of your abilities.   In terms \nof my trading style, I take positions to make $.25-$1, not $.05.  Too much \nnoise in this market to trade differently for me.  \n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 10/04/2000 02:55:41 PM\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: Natural update\n\n\nJohn:\n\nI hope you know I was just fishing for a reaction on the phone before.  I\nassumed we would discuss a potential relationship when I'm in Houston on the\n19th.  We're still on for drinks after work, right?  By then, you should\nhave a comfort level with the quality of my work.  I think the analysis I've\ngiven you has been quite accurate as to market turns and price behavior.  It\nwould be helpful if I had some idea of how you trade/view the market.  Are\nyou mainly day-trading or do you hold positions for several days/weeks?\nThat way I can structure my comments in order to best serve your interests.\nLet me know.  Thanks,\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\nTo: <msagel@home.com>\nSent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 9:14 AM\nSubject: Re: Natural update\n\n\n\nMark:\nLet's keep the present system for the short-term.  I would like to continue\nlooking at your work for another couple weeks.  We'll talk later,\nJohn\n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 10/03/2000 02:29:47 PM\n\nTo:   \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  Natural update\n\n\n\nJohn:\n\nThe price behavior of the past couple days has been  disappointing. My\nshort-term market patterns suggested a more robust price  rally and natural\nappears to be waning at present. Volume on this rally is  poor,\nparticularly since yesterday was a decent day to the upside. The  market\nappears to be using a lot of its energy but spinning its wheels. If  we\nare at these same price levels in another two weeks, that would be\nextremely  bullish. Right here, the risk/reward to being long is not so\ngreat.   Recommend a neutral stance short-term on natural. Bigger picture\nis still  very bullish. However, this market needs another 1-2 weeks of\nwhat I would  call horizontal price action to set the stage for a big move\nto the  upside.\n\nLet me know if this stuff is useful for you. I certainly  don't want to\nwaste your time. In addition, if you prefer I call when I  have something\nto pass along, let me know. I don't know how often you  check/see your\ne-mail. Thanks,\n\nMark Sagel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000062": {
    "message_id": "M-000062",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/143.",
    "subject": "Re: Natural update",
    "date": "2000-10-04 09:11:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "msagel@home.com",
    "body": "Mark:\nWe are still on for drinks on the 19th.  You have called the market very well \nsince you started sending me updates.  Unfortunately for both of us, a couple \nof good calls does not a soothsayer make.  Thus, keep sending me your updates \nso I can at least get a little broader judgment of your abilities.   In terms \nof my trading style, I take positions to make $.25-$1, not $.05.  Too much \nnoise in this market to trade differently for me.  \n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 10/04/2000 02:55:41 PM\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: Natural update\n\n\nJohn:\n\nI hope you know I was just fishing for a reaction on the phone before.  I\nassumed we would discuss a potential relationship when I'm in Houston on the\n19th.  We're still on for drinks after work, right?  By then, you should\nhave a comfort level with the quality of my work.  I think the analysis I've\ngiven you has been quite accurate as to market turns and price behavior.  It\nwould be helpful if I had some idea of how you trade/view the market.  Are\nyou mainly day-trading or do you hold positions for several days/weeks?\nThat way I can structure my comments in order to best serve your interests.\nLet me know.  Thanks,\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\nTo: <msagel@home.com>\nSent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 9:14 AM\nSubject: Re: Natural update\n\n\n\nMark:\nLet's keep the present system for the short-term.  I would like to continue\nlooking at your work for another couple weeks.  We'll talk later,\nJohn\n\n\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 10/03/2000 02:29:47 PM\n\nTo:   \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  Natural update\n\n\n\nJohn:\n\nThe price behavior of the past couple days has been  disappointing. My\nshort-term market patterns suggested a more robust price  rally and natural\nappears to be waning at present. Volume on this rally is  poor,\nparticularly since yesterday was a decent day to the upside. The  market\nappears to be using a lot of its energy but spinning its wheels. If  we\nare at these same price levels in another two weeks, that would be\nextremely  bullish. Right here, the risk/reward to being long is not so\ngreat.   Recommend a neutral stance short-term on natural. Bigger picture\nis still  very bullish. However, this market needs another 1-2 weeks of\nwhat I would  call horizontal price action to set the stage for a big move\nto the  upside.\n\nLet me know if this stuff is useful for you. I certainly  don't want to\nwaste your time. In addition, if you prefer I call when I  have something\nto pass along, let me know. I don't know how often you  check/see your\ne-mail. Thanks,\n\nMark Sagel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000063": {
    "message_id": "M-000063",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/307.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2000-10-11 03:16:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "82\n\n\n\n\nmichael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com on 10/11/2000 08:17:21 AM\nTo: michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      +49\nLast Week      +78\n\nThanks,\nMichael Byrne\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000064": {
    "message_id": "M-000064",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/122.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2000-10-11 03:16:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "82\n\n\n\n\nmichael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com on 10/11/2000 08:17:21 AM\nTo: michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      +49\nLast Week      +78\n\nThanks,\nMichael Byrne\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000065": {
    "message_id": "M-000065",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/111.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2000-10-14 10:00:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "pira's certainly got the whole market wound up.  I've seen a wave of producer \nselling for the first time in two months over the past two days.  Most \nselling Cal 1 off the back of Pira.  Pira certainly commands a lot of respect \nthese days.  Too much, probably.\nThe problem with all these bull spreads (ie F-H) is the thought process in \nnatty is that if Jan is strong, just think what happens when you get to March \nand run out of gas.  The spread game is very different than playing crude.  \nThese spreads haven't moved for the past 1000 point runup.  You know there \nwere guys bullish this market trying to play it with spreads and haven't made \na penny.  \nJust to clarify, Pira said 3 bcf y on y for Z1?  That seems hard to believe.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 10/13/2000 09:42:43 AM\nTo: jarnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: mkts\n\n\n\ncmon give me some credit-you think ive been doing this this long w/out know\nwho's doing what! im i ny for the pira conference-thyre pretty bearish cal 01\nand 02-will be interesting to see if/when the producers start to take that to\nheart. here's one for you to think about... of pira's rite-ie production gonna\nbe up 1-1.5 bcf by year end. does increased deliverabilty mean these winter\nsprds in producing areas-ie jan-apr and the fact the mkts gonna be more\nconcerened about running out in march than in jan suggest big invererese will\nnot be sustainable but will happen only on a weather event??? be curoius your\nthots-i maybe thinking too much but makes some sense to me-have a good weekend\njohnny.\npira says decm 01 prod up 3 bcf y on y!\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000066": {
    "message_id": "M-000066",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/296.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2000-10-14 10:00:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "pira's certainly got the whole market wound up.  I've seen a wave of producer \nselling for the first time in two months over the past two days.  Most \nselling Cal 1 off the back of Pira.  Pira certainly commands a lot of respect \nthese days.  Too much, probably.\nThe problem with all these bull spreads (ie F-H) is the thought process in \nnatty is that if Jan is strong, just think what happens when you get to March \nand run out of gas.  The spread game is very different than playing crude.  \nThese spreads haven't moved for the past 1000 point runup.  You know there \nwere guys bullish this market trying to play it with spreads and haven't made \na penny.  \nJust to clarify, Pira said 3 bcf y on y for Z1?  That seems hard to believe.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 10/13/2000 09:42:43 AM\nTo: jarnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: mkts\n\n\n\ncmon give me some credit-you think ive been doing this this long w/out know\nwho's doing what! im i ny for the pira conference-thyre pretty bearish cal 01\nand 02-will be interesting to see if/when the producers start to take that to\nheart. here's one for you to think about... of pira's rite-ie production gonna\nbe up 1-1.5 bcf by year end. does increased deliverabilty mean these winter\nsprds in producing areas-ie jan-apr and the fact the mkts gonna be more\nconcerened about running out in march than in jan suggest big invererese will\nnot be sustainable but will happen only on a weather event??? be curoius your\nthots-i maybe thinking too much but makes some sense to me-have a good weekend\njohnny.\npira says decm 01 prod up 3 bcf y on y!\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000067": {
    "message_id": "M-000067",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/283.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2000-10-17 12:12:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "It's funny the spreads in gas.  First, in gas, you can play the seasonality \ngame.  Does anybody want to buy M/N at 1 back.  No, of course not.  But in \ncrude, m/n at .10 back is normal.  definitely a game as you try to keep month \non month spreads somewhat within reason while preserving year on year spreads \nand creating equilibrium for where cal 2 on back hedging and spec demand is.  \nthat's why cal 2 is as high as it is.  \nwhen was the last time the most bullish part of the nat gas curve was prompt \nmonth.  i can't remember w/o looking at charts.  it's always the mentality \nof: if it's tight now what about July or what about winter.  i think that's \nwhy the winter spreads are a piece.  the z/f/g fly is interesting.  i think \nz/f can and will settle backw.  just a high prob it goes cantango first.\nStill seeing sellside interest in term.  definitely a result of pira.  will \nprobably get absorbed in the next two weeks as everybody forgets about them \nand watches the front of the curve.  previous to that conference, the \nproducers just didnt want to sell anything.  tired of writing us a big check \nevery month.\nso not only am i in on weekends, but they just put a computer in my house so \ni can work at home at night.  it's really my only time to sit and think \nwithout the phones and eol going crazy.  they better pay me for the decline \nin my lifestyle .\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 10/15/2000 09:26:31 PM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: mkts\n\n\n\nwhat is a young pup like you doing working on saturday? yea ill check again \nthe\nnumbers but pretty sure they said  +3 bcf by dec. ill let you  know/its been\nalong week/weekend of partying in ny so my memory mite be failing me. i know\nthis isnt same as crude-less mature but getting there so im always wondering\nif/when the mentality will start to go more that way-ie inverses shud be for\nonly 1 reason-that supply/demand balance will get less tite than it is today.\n    some length has gotten out of winter sprds but i know from a few i talk \ntoo\nthey still in-im out even slitely short not much cuz i think growing\ndeliverabilty if it occurs is bearish the sprds-and 30 cts inverses will be \nhard\nto maintain unless we have crazy weather. we're only 2 weeks from withdrawel\nperiod so unitl i see cash backwardate im not gonna be bullish these sprds \nuntil\nall the length bails.\n    your rite on the mkt-the anticipation is in the mkt-you gotta have flat px\nto make money,my approach in the short term as well. that said everyone at \npira\nincluding pira all bull bull the winter-will be good i think for a\nwin/sum01/win02 inverse play even tho its not cheap.\n   fyi-pira also bearish crude-not saying they rite but will have impact on\nnatgas producers sentiment short term-esp as mideast starts to fiad. for you \nbe\ncareful of the politics effecting heating oil, natgas watching too. there will\nbe some action in my opinion next 4 weeks by govt that cud impact ho futs\nnegatively and therefore may roll to natgas-ie if ho goes a big discount to\nnatgas before any major cold-gas will get hit i think. if i hear anything on \noil\nside ill be happy to pass it on-apprec comment on producers not that im\nsurpirsed, wonder if they start going out further esp with forward sparks\ngetting hit lately??\n   good luck man-talk soon. pira was good. you go next year ill set up you \nsome\ninteresting people,good to network cuz we never know where we'll end up.\n    by the way-you bullish sum 02/win 02 or are you rolling a short? non of my\nbiz but i was on the other side-ill add if it narrows more. inkjections next\nsummer will be huge albeit from low stx-curve will mean revert eventually.\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000068": {
    "message_id": "M-000068",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/98.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2000-10-17 12:12:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "It's funny the spreads in gas.  First, in gas, you can play the seasonality \ngame.  Does anybody want to buy M/N at 1 back.  No, of course not.  But in \ncrude, m/n at .10 back is normal.  definitely a game as you try to keep month \non month spreads somewhat within reason while preserving year on year spreads \nand creating equilibrium for where cal 2 on back hedging and spec demand is.  \nthat's why cal 2 is as high as it is.  \nwhen was the last time the most bullish part of the nat gas curve was prompt \nmonth.  i can't remember w/o looking at charts.  it's always the mentality \nof: if it's tight now what about July or what about winter.  i think that's \nwhy the winter spreads are a piece.  the z/f/g fly is interesting.  i think \nz/f can and will settle backw.  just a high prob it goes cantango first.\nStill seeing sellside interest in term.  definitely a result of pira.  will \nprobably get absorbed in the next two weeks as everybody forgets about them \nand watches the front of the curve.  previous to that conference, the \nproducers just didnt want to sell anything.  tired of writing us a big check \nevery month.\nso not only am i in on weekends, but they just put a computer in my house so \ni can work at home at night.  it's really my only time to sit and think \nwithout the phones and eol going crazy.  they better pay me for the decline \nin my lifestyle .\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 10/15/2000 09:26:31 PM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: mkts\n\n\n\nwhat is a young pup like you doing working on saturday? yea ill check again \nthe\nnumbers but pretty sure they said  +3 bcf by dec. ill let you  know/its been\nalong week/weekend of partying in ny so my memory mite be failing me. i know\nthis isnt same as crude-less mature but getting there so im always wondering\nif/when the mentality will start to go more that way-ie inverses shud be for\nonly 1 reason-that supply/demand balance will get less tite than it is today.\n    some length has gotten out of winter sprds but i know from a few i talk \ntoo\nthey still in-im out even slitely short not much cuz i think growing\ndeliverabilty if it occurs is bearish the sprds-and 30 cts inverses will be \nhard\nto maintain unless we have crazy weather. we're only 2 weeks from withdrawel\nperiod so unitl i see cash backwardate im not gonna be bullish these sprds \nuntil\nall the length bails.\n    your rite on the mkt-the anticipation is in the mkt-you gotta have flat px\nto make money,my approach in the short term as well. that said everyone at \npira\nincluding pira all bull bull the winter-will be good i think for a\nwin/sum01/win02 inverse play even tho its not cheap.\n   fyi-pira also bearish crude-not saying they rite but will have impact on\nnatgas producers sentiment short term-esp as mideast starts to fiad. for you \nbe\ncareful of the politics effecting heating oil, natgas watching too. there will\nbe some action in my opinion next 4 weeks by govt that cud impact ho futs\nnegatively and therefore may roll to natgas-ie if ho goes a big discount to\nnatgas before any major cold-gas will get hit i think. if i hear anything on \noil\nside ill be happy to pass it on-apprec comment on producers not that im\nsurpirsed, wonder if they start going out further esp with forward sparks\ngetting hit lately??\n   good luck man-talk soon. pira was good. you go next year ill set up you \nsome\ninteresting people,good to network cuz we never know where we'll end up.\n    by the way-you bullish sum 02/win 02 or are you rolling a short? non of my\nbiz but i was on the other side-ill add if it narrows more. inkjections next\nsummer will be huge albeit from low stx-curve will mean revert eventually.\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000069": {
    "message_id": "M-000069",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/281.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2000-10-18 02:47:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "34\n\n\n\n\nmichael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com on 10/18/2000 08:21:15 AM\nTo: michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      +42\nLast Week      +62\n\nThanks,\nMichael Byrne\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000070": {
    "message_id": "M-000070",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/96.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2000-10-18 02:47:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "34\n\n\n\n\nmichael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com on 10/18/2000 08:21:15 AM\nTo: michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      +42\nLast Week      +62\n\nThanks,\nMichael Byrne\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000071": {
    "message_id": "M-000071",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/95.",
    "subject": "Re: test",
    "date": "2000-10-18 03:00:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "leah.arsdall@enron.com",
    "body": "test successful.  way to go!!!"
  },
  "M-000072": {
    "message_id": "M-000072",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/100.",
    "subject": "Re: test",
    "date": "2000-10-18 03:00:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "leah.arsdall@enron.com",
    "body": "test successful.  way to go!!!"
  },
  "M-000073": {
    "message_id": "M-000073",
    "thread_id": "T-0003",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/53.",
    "subject": "Re: test",
    "date": "2000-10-18 03:00:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "leah.arsdall@enron.com",
    "body": "test successful.  way to go!!!"
  },
  "M-000074": {
    "message_id": "M-000074",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/47.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-10-24 06:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 10/24/2000 \n01:29 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000075": {
    "message_id": "M-000075",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/166.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-10-24 06:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 10/24/2000 \n01:29 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000076": {
    "message_id": "M-000076",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/94.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-10-24 06:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 10/24/2000 \n01:29 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000077": {
    "message_id": "M-000077",
    "thread_id": "T-0006",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/89.",
    "subject": "Investment Structure",
    "date": "2000-10-24 06:29:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 10/24/2000 \n01:29 PM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"George Richards\" <cbpres@austin.rr.com> on 09/26/2000 01:18:45 PM\nPlease respond to <cbpres@austin.rr.com>\nTo: \"Phillip Allen\" <pallen@enron.com>\ncc: \"Larry Lewter\" <retwell@mail.sanmarcos.net>, \"Claudia L. Crocker\" \n<clclegal2@aol.com> \nSubject: Investment Structure\n\n\nSTRUCTURE:\nTypically the structure is a limited partnership with a corporate (or LLC)\ngeneral partner.  The General Partner owns 1% of the project and carries the\nliability of construction.\n\nLAND OWNERSHIP & LOANS\nThe property would be purchased in the name of the limited partnership and\nany land loans, land improvements loans and construction loans would be in\nthe name of the limited partnership.  Each of the individual investors and\nall of the principals in Creekside would also personally guarantee the\nloans.  If the investor(s) do not sign on the loans, this generally means\nthat a larger amount of cash is required and the investor's share of profits\nis reduced.\n\nAll loans for residential construction, that are intended for re-sale, are\nfull recourse loans.  If we are pursuing multifamily rental developments,\nthe construction loans are still full recourse but the mortgage can often be\nnon-recourse.\n\nUSE OF INITIAL INVESTMENT\nThe initial investment is used for land deposit, engineering &\narchitectural design, soils tests, surveys, filing fees, legal fees for\norganization and condominium association formation,  and appraisals.  Unlike\nmany real estate investment programs, none of the funds are used for fees to\nCreekside Builders, LLC.  These professional expenses will be incurred over\nthe estimated 6 month design and approval period.\n\nEARLY LAND COSTS\nThe $4,000 per month costs listed in the cash flow as part of land cost\nrepresent the extension fees due to the seller for up to 4 months of\nextensions on closing.  As an alternative, we can close into a land loan at\nprobably 70% of appraised value.  With a land value equal to the purchase\nprice of $680,000 this would mean a land loan of $476,000 with estimated\nmonthly interest payments of $3,966, given a 10% annual interest rate, plus\napproximately 1.25% of the loan amount for closing costs and loan fees.\n\nEQUITY AT IMPROVEMENT LOAN\nOnce the site plan is approved by the City of Austin, the City will require\nthe development entity to post funds for fiscal improvements, referred to as\nthe \"fiscals\".  This cost represents a bond for the completion of\nimprovements that COA considers vital and these funds are released once the\nimprovements have been completed and accepted by COA.  This release will be\nfor 90% of the cost with the remaining 10% released one year after\ncompletion.  Releases can be granted once every 90 days and you should\nexpect that the release would occur 6 months after the start of lot\nimprovement construction.  These fiscals are usually posted in cash or an\nirrevocable letter of credit.  As such, they have to be counted as a\ndevelopment cost, even though they are not spent.  Because they are not\nspent no interest is charged on these funds.\n\nThe lot improvement loan is typically 75% of the appraised value of a\nfinished lot, which I suspect will be at least $20,000 and potentially as\nhigh as $25,000.  This would produce a loan amount of  $15,000 on $20,000\nper lot.  With estimated per lot improvement costs of $9,000, 'fiscals' at\n$2,000 and the land cost at $8,000 , total improved lot cost is $19,000\nwhich means $0 to $4,000 per lot in total equity.  The investment prior to\nobtaining the improvement loan would count towards any equity requirement\nprovided it was for direct costs.  Thus, the additional equity for the\nimprovement loan would be $0-$184,000.   Even if the maximum loan would\ncover all costs, it is unlikely the bank would allow reimbursement of funds\nspent. The higher estimates of equity investments are shown in the\npreliminary proforma to be on the safe side.  The engineer is preparing a\ntentative site layout with an initial evaluation of the phasing, which can\nsignificantly reduce the cash equity requirement.\n\nPhasing works as follows.  If the first phase was say 40 units, the total\nlot improvement cost might average $31,000 per lot.   Of this, probably\n$13,000 would be for improvements and $19,000 for the land cost.  The\nimprovements are higher to cover large one time up front costs for design\ncosts, the entry road, water treatment costs, perimeter fencing and\nlandscaping, and so on, as well as for 100% of the land.  The land loan for\nundeveloped lots would be 70% of the appraised raw lot value, which I would\nestimate as $10,000 per lot for a loan value of $7,000 per lot.  Then the\nloan value for each improved lot would be $15,000 per lot.  This would give\nyou a total loan of $992,000, total cost of $1,232,645 for equity required\nof $241,000.  This was not presented in the initial analysis as the phasing\nis depended on a more careful assessment by the Civil Engineer as the\nseparate phases must each be able to stand on its own from a utility\nstandpoint.\n\nCONSTRUCTION LOANS\nThere are three types of  construction loans.  First, is a speculative\n(spec) loan that is taken out prior to any pre-sales activity.  Second,  is\na construction loan for a pre-sold unit, but the loan remains in the\nbuilder/developers name.  Third, is a pre-sold unit with the construction\nloan in the name of the buyer.  We expect to have up to 8 spec loans to\nstart the project and expect all other loans to be pre-sold units with loans\nin the name of the builder/developer.  We do not expect to have any\nconstruction loans in the name of the buyers, as such loans are too\ndifficult to manage and please new buyers unfamiliar with the process.\n\nSpec loans will be for 70% to 75% of value and construction loans for\npre-sold units, if the construction loan is from the mortgage lender,  will\nbe from 80% to 95% of value.\n\nDISBURSEMENTS\nDisbursements will be handled by the General Partner to cover current and\nnear term third party costs, then to necessary reserves, then to priority\npayments and then to the partners per the agreement.  The General Partner\nwill contract with Creekside Builders, LLC to construct the units and the\nfee to CB will include a construction management and overhead fee equal to\n15% of the direct hard cost excluding land, financing and sales costs.\nThese fees are the only monies to Creekside, Larry Lewter or myself prior to\ncalculation of profit, except for a) direct reimbursement for partnership\nexpenses and b) direct payment to CB for any subcontractor costs that it has\nto perform.  For example, if CB cannot find a good trim carpenter sub, or\ncannot find enough trim carpenters, etc., and it decides to undertake this\nfunction, it will charge the partnership the same fee it was able to obtain\nfrom third parties and will disclose those cases to the partnership.\nFinally, CB will receive a fee for the use of any of its equipment if it is\nused in lieu of leasing equipment from others.  At present CB does not own\nany significant equipment, but it is considering the purchase of a sky track\nto facilitate and speed up framing, cornice, roofing and drywall spreading.\n\nREPORTING\nWe are more than willing to provide reports to track expenses vs. plan.\nWhat did you have in mind?  I would like to use some form of internet based\nreporting.\n\nBOOKKEEPING\nI am not sure what you are referring to by the question, \"Bookkeeping\nprocedures to record actual expenses?\"  Please expand.\n\nINVESTOR INPUT\nWe are glad to have the investor's input on design and materials.  As always\nthe question will be who has final say if there is disagreement, but in my\nexperience I have always been able to reach consensus. As you, and I presume\nKeith, want to be involved to learn as much as possible we would make every\neffort to be accommodating.\n\nCREEKSIDE PROCEEDURES\nCB procedures for dealing with subs, vendors and professionals is not as\nformal as your question indicates.  In the EXTREMELY tight labor market\nobtaining 3 bids for each labor trade is not feasible.  For the professional\nsubs we use those with whom we have developed a previous rapport.  Finally,\nfor vendors they are constantly shopped.\n\nPRE-SELECTED PROFESSIONALS, SUBS AND VENDORS\nYes there are many different subs that have been identified and I can\nprovide these if you are interested.\n\nI know I have not answered everything, but this is a starting point.  Call\nwhen you have reviewed and we can discuss further.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGeorge Richards\nPresident, Creekside Builders, LLC\n\n\n\n\n - winmail.dat\n"
  },
  "M-000078": {
    "message_id": "M-000078",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/43.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2000-11-08 09:15:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "alan_batt@oxy.com",
    "body": "Alan:\nI received your email.  I'll make sure it goes through the proper channels.   \nIt may help if you give specific positions that interest you most as Enron is \nsuch a big place, it will help focus the resume to the right people.\nJohn"
  },
  "M-000079": {
    "message_id": "M-000079",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/228.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2000-11-08 09:15:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "alan_batt@oxy.com",
    "body": "Alan:\nI received your email.  I'll make sure it goes through the proper channels.   \nIt may help if you give specific positions that interest you most as Enron is \nsuch a big place, it will help focus the resume to the right people.\nJohn"
  },
  "M-000080": {
    "message_id": "M-000080",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/225.",
    "subject": "RE: Resume",
    "date": "2000-11-10 05:57:00-08:00",
    "from": "alan_batt@oxy.com",
    "to": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "body": "John,\n\nThanks for the email and the offer to route my resume in the most\nexpeditious way.  I saw only one job that was posted on Enron's website that\nlooked like a good fit.  It was an asset evaluation and integration job for\nEnron North America: job # 0000105886.\n\nMy primary strengths are:\n\nNatural gas asset acquisition and management\nSupporting a trading organization by providing excellent futures and\nderivatives execution\nTrading proprietary books (fixed price or otherwise)where there is a\ncompetitive reason to be     in the market, i.e. transportation spreads,\nstorage, physical presence\nGood customer relations/account development\nAbility to focus on and analyze a wide range of problems/opportunities\nStong negotiator\n\nI know that Enron is a big, happening place and it is invaluble to have\nsomeone like you to help me sort out the opportunities.  Where I am coming\nfrom is that I have to more valuble to Enron than I am to Oxy because Oxy is\ndoing frustratingly little to leverage itself and Enron is setting every\ntrend imaginable in leveraging itself.\n\nI appreciate any help you can provide.\n\nThanks.\n\nAlan\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 5:15 PM\nTo: Alan_Batt@oxy.com\nSubject: Re: Resume\n\n\n\nAlan:\nI received your email.  I'll make sure it goes through the proper channels.\nIt may help if you give specific positions that interest you most as Enron\nis such a big place, it will help focus the resume to the right people.\nJohn"
  },
  "M-000081": {
    "message_id": "M-000081",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/212.",
    "subject": "re:mkts",
    "date": "2000-11-21 13:16:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "Hey:\nHaven't had the best of months.  Like you had some good positions but others \nwiped out everything.  Unbelievable how the whole curve moves as one for 6 \nmonths and then separates completely.  The z/f/g and f/g/h flies are \namazing.  Something definitely out of whack.  Hard to believe cash in Z will \nbe cantango to F and front spread, F/G, will be 40.  Spreads definitely \nimplying we will see some $10+ prints on daily cash at the hub this winter.  \nHell, already seeing it in the West.  The system is just broken there.  \ninteresting to see if it is a sign of what can come in the east later.  \ndefinitely more flexibility in the east so the blowouts won't occur until \nlatter part of the winter.   the inelasticity of demand continues to be \nunbelievable.  who would have thunk it.   Gas can be 3 times what it was one \nyear ago and not a significant loss of demand.   \nmarket definitely trained to buy the dips at this point.  continues to be a \nvery trending market.  most days finish on the intraday high or low.  \nPira told the boys to hedge jv and cal 2 and the impact has been \nsignificant.  i quote bids on term strips 5 times a day.   understand they \nare changing their view somewhat tomorrow.  wait and see if it relieves some \nback pressure.  very surprised at lack of spec long interest in jv at 4.5 \nconsidering the scenario that's being painted.   \n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 11/21/2000 01:06:40 PM\nTo: jarnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: re:mkts\n\n\n\njohnny, hope things re treating you well. this month has been frustrating for\nme-generally caught many mkt moves but had 2 postions that nearly cancelled \nall\nthe rest. im finding it really really hard to assess risk now in oil and gas\ntherefore im taking a step back esp in front of holidays and year end. was \nlong\nmar gas vs backs which worked great but i took profits waayyy too early\n  flat px i think is pretty clear-if weather stays normal to below we keep a\nflaoor at 5.80-6.00 bucks for another 40 days at least. if we have sustained\naboves we drop like a rock in part due to back en d pressure.\n\n   but spreads-what the hell do we do with em?????????? was just saying to \nmark\nsilverman there is a huge opportunity here staring us in the face but i hve no\nidea what it is-i have equal arguements for why sprds shud fall or move out. \nany\ngreat insites? hope all is well and enjoy the long weeknd-we both deserve it.\n   guess the curve will stop blowing out when/if we see the back end selling \ndry\nup??\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000082": {
    "message_id": "M-000082",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/36.",
    "subject": "re:mkts",
    "date": "2000-11-21 13:16:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "Hey:\nHaven't had the best of months.  Like you had some good positions but others \nwiped out everything.  Unbelievable how the whole curve moves as one for 6 \nmonths and then separates completely.  The z/f/g and f/g/h flies are \namazing.  Something definitely out of whack.  Hard to believe cash in Z will \nbe cantango to F and front spread, F/G, will be 40.  Spreads definitely \nimplying we will see some $10+ prints on daily cash at the hub this winter.  \nHell, already seeing it in the West.  The system is just broken there.  \ninteresting to see if it is a sign of what can come in the east later.  \ndefinitely more flexibility in the east so the blowouts won't occur until \nlatter part of the winter.   the inelasticity of demand continues to be \nunbelievable.  who would have thunk it.   Gas can be 3 times what it was one \nyear ago and not a significant loss of demand.   \nmarket definitely trained to buy the dips at this point.  continues to be a \nvery trending market.  most days finish on the intraday high or low.  \nPira told the boys to hedge jv and cal 2 and the impact has been \nsignificant.  i quote bids on term strips 5 times a day.   understand they \nare changing their view somewhat tomorrow.  wait and see if it relieves some \nback pressure.  very surprised at lack of spec long interest in jv at 4.5 \nconsidering the scenario that's being painted.   \n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 11/21/2000 01:06:40 PM\nTo: jarnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: re:mkts\n\n\n\njohnny, hope things re treating you well. this month has been frustrating for\nme-generally caught many mkt moves but had 2 postions that nearly cancelled \nall\nthe rest. im finding it really really hard to assess risk now in oil and gas\ntherefore im taking a step back esp in front of holidays and year end. was \nlong\nmar gas vs backs which worked great but i took profits waayyy too early\n  flat px i think is pretty clear-if weather stays normal to below we keep a\nflaoor at 5.80-6.00 bucks for another 40 days at least. if we have sustained\naboves we drop like a rock in part due to back en d pressure.\n\n   but spreads-what the hell do we do with em?????????? was just saying to \nmark\nsilverman there is a huge opportunity here staring us in the face but i hve no\nidea what it is-i have equal arguements for why sprds shud fall or move out. \nany\ngreat insites? hope all is well and enjoy the long weeknd-we both deserve it.\n   guess the curve will stop blowing out when/if we see the back end selling \ndry\nup??\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000083": {
    "message_id": "M-000083",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/197.",
    "subject": "re:mkts",
    "date": "2000-11-27 10:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "Z/F !!!!   wow.    Who would have thunk it.  Prompt gas at $6+ and Z/F as \nwide as last year.  Hard to think of a better scenario for it to flip.  \nRather, hard to think of any scenario for any z/f to be contango.   if it \ncouldn't do it this year....\nA lot of boys max withdrawing out of storage because that's what the curve \ntold them to do last bid week.  Obviously, more gas trying to come out than \nis being burned, so you have to incentivize an economic player, like an \nEnron, to inject.  Problem is if we stick it in the ground now, we're pulling \nit out in G.  When you had z/g at 35 back and cash getting priced off g, \ncash/z looks awfully weak, thus putting a lot of pressure on z/f.  Storage \neconomics will always dictate this market except maybe latter half of \nwinter.  Buyers of h/j at 70 certainly hope so anyways.  \nAgree with you that back half of the winter should be strong.  storage boys \nare withdrawing today and buying that.   bottom fishing in f/g yet or is it \ngoing to zero?\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 11/22/2000 06:50:46 AM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: re:mkts\n\n\n\nagree on jan/feb-i cudnt resist sold a little yest at 39-will prob end up \nbuying\nem back at +45 and piss away the rest of my month\n\nfyi-if you ever have a chance to speak on the phone feel free to call-my time \nis\nbusy but managed only by me not paper flow and eol. so i dont bother you with\ncalls just an occasional email to give you the time to respond when you have \nthe\ntime. im also susprised about dec/jan-mad a few bucks trading it both ways but\none cant help wonder given these loads-gass crazy out west-the so called \nimpact\nof husbanding by end users yet the frontn of the curve still cant backwardate \nat\nall-indeed makes all the sprds look very rich agaon.\n   also will be curious how these \"loan deals\" by pipes work ouut. man these\nguys cud really be getting themselves in trouble-another big reason dec cash\nhasnt been able to go over jan-but i think it will make them strong longs in \nthe\nback of the mkt?? ie are they taking the gas back in march, april?? shud keep\nthat part of the curve very strong agree?\n  be cool my man-talk later\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000084": {
    "message_id": "M-000084",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/25.",
    "subject": "re:mkts",
    "date": "2000-11-27 10:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "Z/F !!!!   wow.    Who would have thunk it.  Prompt gas at $6+ and Z/F as \nwide as last year.  Hard to think of a better scenario for it to flip.  \nRather, hard to think of any scenario for any z/f to be contango.   if it \ncouldn't do it this year....\nA lot of boys max withdrawing out of storage because that's what the curve \ntold them to do last bid week.  Obviously, more gas trying to come out than \nis being burned, so you have to incentivize an economic player, like an \nEnron, to inject.  Problem is if we stick it in the ground now, we're pulling \nit out in G.  When you had z/g at 35 back and cash getting priced off g, \ncash/z looks awfully weak, thus putting a lot of pressure on z/f.  Storage \neconomics will always dictate this market except maybe latter half of \nwinter.  Buyers of h/j at 70 certainly hope so anyways.  \nAgree with you that back half of the winter should be strong.  storage boys \nare withdrawing today and buying that.   bottom fishing in f/g yet or is it \ngoing to zero?\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 11/22/2000 06:50:46 AM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: re:mkts\n\n\n\nagree on jan/feb-i cudnt resist sold a little yest at 39-will prob end up \nbuying\nem back at +45 and piss away the rest of my month\n\nfyi-if you ever have a chance to speak on the phone feel free to call-my time \nis\nbusy but managed only by me not paper flow and eol. so i dont bother you with\ncalls just an occasional email to give you the time to respond when you have \nthe\ntime. im also susprised about dec/jan-mad a few bucks trading it both ways but\none cant help wonder given these loads-gass crazy out west-the so called \nimpact\nof husbanding by end users yet the frontn of the curve still cant backwardate \nat\nall-indeed makes all the sprds look very rich agaon.\n   also will be curious how these \"loan deals\" by pipes work ouut. man these\nguys cud really be getting themselves in trouble-another big reason dec cash\nhasnt been able to go over jan-but i think it will make them strong longs in \nthe\nback of the mkt?? ie are they taking the gas back in march, april?? shud keep\nthat part of the curve very strong agree?\n  be cool my man-talk later\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000085": {
    "message_id": "M-000085",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/35.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-12 04:53:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/12/2000 12:18:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 12 2000 12:25PM, Dec 13 2000  9:00AM, Dec 14 2000  \n8:59AM, 2231, Allocation - SOCAL NEEDLES\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000086": {
    "message_id": "M-000086",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/199.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-12 04:53:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/12/2000 12:18:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 12 2000 12:25PM, Dec 13 2000  9:00AM, Dec 14 2000  \n8:59AM, 2231, Allocation - SOCAL NEEDLES\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000087": {
    "message_id": "M-000087",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/37.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-12 04:53:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/12/2000 12:18:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 12 2000 12:25PM, Dec 13 2000  9:00AM, Dec 14 2000  \n8:59AM, 2231, Allocation - SOCAL NEEDLES\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000088": {
    "message_id": "M-000088",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/32.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-12 23:04:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/12/2000 6:48:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 12 2000  9:24PM, Dec 13 2000  9:00AM, Dec 14 2000  \n8:59AM, 2236, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000089": {
    "message_id": "M-000089",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/34.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-12 23:04:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/12/2000 6:48:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 12 2000  9:24PM, Dec 13 2000  9:00AM, Dec 14 2000  \n8:59AM, 2236, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000090": {
    "message_id": "M-000090",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/202.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-12 23:04:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/12/2000 6:48:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 12 2000  9:24PM, Dec 13 2000  9:00AM, Dec 14 2000  \n8:59AM, 2236, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000091": {
    "message_id": "M-000091",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/28.",
    "subject": "Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 02:17:00-08:00",
    "from": "sarah.novosel@enron.com",
    "to": "james.steffes@enron.com, joe.hartsoe@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, richard.sanders@enron.com, stephanie.miller@enron.com, christi.nicolay@enron.com, mary.hain@enron.com, pkaufma@enron.com, pallen@enron.com",
    "body": "Please review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n"
  },
  "M-000092": {
    "message_id": "M-000092",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/30.",
    "subject": "Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 02:17:00-08:00",
    "from": "sarah.novosel@enron.com",
    "to": "james.steffes@enron.com, joe.hartsoe@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, richard.sanders@enron.com, stephanie.miller@enron.com, christi.nicolay@enron.com, mary.hain@enron.com, pkaufma@enron.com, pallen@enron.com",
    "body": "Please review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n"
  },
  "M-000093": {
    "message_id": "M-000093",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/206.",
    "subject": "Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 02:17:00-08:00",
    "from": "sarah.novosel@enron.com",
    "to": "james.steffes@enron.com, joe.hartsoe@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, richard.sanders@enron.com, stephanie.miller@enron.com, christi.nicolay@enron.com, mary.hain@enron.com, pkaufma@enron.com, pallen@enron.com",
    "body": "Please review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n"
  },
  "M-000094": {
    "message_id": "M-000094",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/29.",
    "subject": "Re: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 02:28:00-08:00",
    "from": "sarah.novosel@enron.com",
    "to": "christi.nicolay@enron.com, james.steffes@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, joe.hartsoe@enron.com, mary.hain@enron.com, pallen@enron.com, pkaufma@enron.com, richard.sanders@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, stephanie.miller@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com",
    "body": "Everyone:  \n\nI forgot to mention, these are due today.  Comments back as soon as possible \nare appreciated.\n\nSarah\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\tSarah Novosel\n\t12/13/2000 11:17 AM\n\t\t \n\t\t To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, \nJeff Dasovich/NA/Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron, \nRichard B Sanders/HOU/ECT, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron, Christi L \nNicolay/HOU/ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT, pkaufma@enron.com, pallen@enron.com\n\t\t cc: \n\t\t Subject: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps\n\nPlease review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000095": {
    "message_id": "M-000095",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/27.",
    "subject": "Re: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 02:28:00-08:00",
    "from": "sarah.novosel@enron.com",
    "to": "christi.nicolay@enron.com, james.steffes@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, joe.hartsoe@enron.com, mary.hain@enron.com, pallen@enron.com, pkaufma@enron.com, richard.sanders@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, stephanie.miller@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com",
    "body": "Everyone:  \n\nI forgot to mention, these are due today.  Comments back as soon as possible \nare appreciated.\n\nSarah\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\tSarah Novosel\n\t12/13/2000 11:17 AM\n\t\t \n\t\t To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, \nJeff Dasovich/NA/Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron, \nRichard B Sanders/HOU/ECT, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron, Christi L \nNicolay/HOU/ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT, pkaufma@enron.com, pallen@enron.com\n\t\t cc: \n\t\t Subject: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps\n\nPlease review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000096": {
    "message_id": "M-000096",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/27.",
    "subject": "Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 03:28:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "scott.tholan@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 12/13/2000 \n11:28 AM ---------------------------\nFrom: Sarah Novosel@ENRON on 12/13/2000 10:17 AM CST\nTo: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J \nMara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard \nShapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard B \nSanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L \nNicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, pkaufma@enron.com, \npallen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps\n\nPlease review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000097": {
    "message_id": "M-000097",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/2.",
    "subject": "Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 03:28:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "scott.tholan@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 12/13/2000 \n11:28 AM ---------------------------\nFrom: Sarah Novosel@ENRON on 12/13/2000 10:17 AM CST\nTo: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J \nMara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard \nShapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard B \nSanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L \nNicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, pkaufma@enron.com, \npallen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps\n\nPlease review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000098": {
    "message_id": "M-000098",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/208.",
    "subject": "Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 03:28:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "scott.tholan@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 12/13/2000 \n11:28 AM ---------------------------\nFrom: Sarah Novosel@ENRON on 12/13/2000 10:17 AM CST\nTo: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J \nMara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard \nShapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard B \nSanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L \nNicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, pkaufma@enron.com, \npallen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps\n\nPlease review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000099": {
    "message_id": "M-000099",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/49.",
    "subject": "Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 03:28:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "scott.tholan@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 12/13/2000 \n11:28 AM ---------------------------\nFrom: Sarah Novosel@ENRON on 12/13/2000 10:17 AM CST\nTo: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J \nMara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard \nShapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard B \nSanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L \nNicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, pkaufma@enron.com, \npallen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps\n\nPlease review the attached draft Enron comments in response to the San Diego \nrequest for natural gas price caps.  The comments reflect Becky Cantrell's \ncomments (which are reflected in red line).  Please respond to me as soon as \npossible with your comments, and please pass it on to anyone else who needs \nto see it.\n\nThanks\n\nSarah\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000100": {
    "message_id": "M-000100",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/25.",
    "subject": "Re: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 05:26:00-08:00",
    "from": "stephanie.miller@enron.com",
    "to": "jeff.dasovich@enron.com",
    "body": "Any merit to mentioning that there has been an initial \"supply\" response in \nterms of pipeline infrastructure - open seasons/expansion efforts on behalf \nof Kern River, Transwestern and PGT (not yet announced)? \n\n\nFrom: Jeff Dasovich on 12/13/2000 12:04 PM\nSent by: Jeff Dasovich\nTo: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON\ncc: Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Joe \nHartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, pallen@enron.com, \npkaufma@enron.com, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard \nShapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J \nKean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON \n\nSubject: Re: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps  \n\nRecognizing the time constraints you face, I've tried to 1) clear up a few \ninaccuracies and 2) massage some of the sharper language without taking a \nchainsaw to the otherwise good job.  \n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000101": {
    "message_id": "M-000101",
    "thread_id": "T-0011",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/26.",
    "subject": "Re: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps",
    "date": "2000-12-13 05:26:00-08:00",
    "from": "stephanie.miller@enron.com",
    "to": "jeff.dasovich@enron.com",
    "body": "Any merit to mentioning that there has been an initial \"supply\" response in \nterms of pipeline infrastructure - open seasons/expansion efforts on behalf \nof Kern River, Transwestern and PGT (not yet announced)? \n\n\nFrom: Jeff Dasovich on 12/13/2000 12:04 PM\nSent by: Jeff Dasovich\nTo: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON\ncc: Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Joe \nHartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, pallen@enron.com, \npkaufma@enron.com, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard \nShapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J \nKean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON \n\nSubject: Re: Enron Response to San Diego Request for Gas Price Caps  \n\nRecognizing the time constraints you face, I've tried to 1) clear up a few \ninaccuracies and 2) massage some of the sharper language without taking a \nchainsaw to the otherwise good job.  \n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000102": {
    "message_id": "M-000102",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/209.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 06:06:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 1:30:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  1:48PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2237, Allocation - SOCAL NEEDLES\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000103": {
    "message_id": "M-000103",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/24.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 06:06:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 1:30:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  1:48PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2237, Allocation - SOCAL NEEDLES\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000104": {
    "message_id": "M-000104",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/25.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 06:06:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 1:30:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  1:48PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2237, Allocation - SOCAL NEEDLES\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000105": {
    "message_id": "M-000105",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/23.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 06:35:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 2:00:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Phone List, Dec 13 2000  2:12PM, Dec 13 2000  2:12PM, Until further notice, \n2238, TW-On Call Listing 12/16 - 12/17\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000106": {
    "message_id": "M-000106",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/211.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 06:35:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 2:00:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Phone List, Dec 13 2000  2:12PM, Dec 13 2000  2:12PM, Until further notice, \n2238, TW-On Call Listing 12/16 - 12/17\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000107": {
    "message_id": "M-000107",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/22.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 06:35:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 2:00:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Phone List, Dec 13 2000  2:12PM, Dec 13 2000  2:12PM, Until further notice, \n2238, TW-On Call Listing 12/16 - 12/17\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000108": {
    "message_id": "M-000108",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/220.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 08:04:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 3:30:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  4:03PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2241, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000109": {
    "message_id": "M-000109",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/14.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 08:04:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 3:30:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  4:03PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2241, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000110": {
    "message_id": "M-000110",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/14.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 08:04:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 3:30:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  4:03PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2241, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000111": {
    "message_id": "M-000111",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/226.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 08:34:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 4:00:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  4:03PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2241, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000112": {
    "message_id": "M-000112",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/notes_inbox/8.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 08:34:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 4:00:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  4:03PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2241, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000113": {
    "message_id": "M-000113",
    "thread_id": "T-0004",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/8.",
    "subject": "New Notice from Transwestern Pipeline Co.",
    "date": "2000-12-13 08:34:00-08:00",
    "from": "critical.notice@enron.com",
    "to": "ywang@enron.com, patti.sullivan@enron.com, phillip.k.allen@enron.com, jane.m.tholt@enron.com, mike.grigsby@enron.com",
    "body": "Transwestern Pipeline Co. posted new notice(s) since our last check at \n12/13/2000 4:00:01 PM, the newest notice looks like:\n\n Capacity Constraint, Dec 13 2000  4:03PM, Dec 14 2000  9:00AM, Dec 15 2000  \n8:59AM, 2241, Allocation - San Juan Lateral\n\nPlease click the following to go to the web site for detail.\n\nhttp://ios.ets.enron.com/infoPostings/shared/et_noncritical_notice.asp?company\n=60"
  },
  "M-000114": {
    "message_id": "M-000114",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/979.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-01-24 00:07:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "83"
  },
  "M-000115": {
    "message_id": "M-000115",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/740.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-01-24 00:07:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "83"
  },
  "M-000116": {
    "message_id": "M-000116",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/550.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-01-25 04:45:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "nick.politis@enron.com",
    "body": "Nick,\n\nThere is a specific program that we are using to recruit, train, and mentor \nnew traders on the gas and power desks.    The trading track program is being \ncoordinated by Ted Bland.  I have forwarded him your resume.  Give him a call \nand he will fill you in on the details of the program.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000117": {
    "message_id": "M-000117",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/571.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-01-25 04:45:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "nick.politis@enron.com",
    "body": "Nick,\n\nThere is a specific program that we are using to recruit, train, and mentor \nnew traders on the gas and power desks.    The trading track program is being \ncoordinated by Ted Bland.  I have forwarded him your resume.  Give him a call \nand he will fill you in on the details of the program.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000118": {
    "message_id": "M-000118",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/503.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-01-25 04:45:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "nick.politis@enron.com",
    "body": "Nick,\n\nThere is a specific program that we are using to recruit, train, and mentor \nnew traders on the gas and power desks.    The trading track program is being \ncoordinated by Ted Bland.  I have forwarded him your resume.  Give him a call \nand he will fill you in on the details of the program.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000119": {
    "message_id": "M-000119",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/409.",
    "subject": "NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-01-26 01:55:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Griff,\n  \nCan you accomodate Dexter as we have in the past.  This has been very helpful \nin establishing a fair index at Socal Border.\n\nPhillip\n\nPlease cc me on the email with a guest password.  The sooner the better as \nbidweek is underway.\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 01/26/2001 \n09:49 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 01/26/2001 07:28:29 AM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: NGI access to eol\n\n\nPhillip,\n\nI was wondering if I could trouble you again for another guest id for eol.\nIn previous months, it has helped us here at NGI when we go to set indexes.\n\nI appreciate your help on this.\n\nDexter\n\n"
  },
  "M-000120": {
    "message_id": "M-000120",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/500.",
    "subject": "NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-01-26 01:55:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Griff,\n  \nCan you accomodate Dexter as we have in the past.  This has been very helpful \nin establishing a fair index at Socal Border.\n\nPhillip\n\nPlease cc me on the email with a guest password.  The sooner the better as \nbidweek is underway.\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 01/26/2001 \n09:49 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 01/26/2001 07:28:29 AM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: NGI access to eol\n\n\nPhillip,\n\nI was wondering if I could trouble you again for another guest id for eol.\nIn previous months, it has helped us here at NGI when we go to set indexes.\n\nI appreciate your help on this.\n\nDexter\n\n"
  },
  "M-000121": {
    "message_id": "M-000121",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/547.",
    "subject": "NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-01-26 01:55:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Griff,\n  \nCan you accomodate Dexter as we have in the past.  This has been very helpful \nin establishing a fair index at Socal Border.\n\nPhillip\n\nPlease cc me on the email with a guest password.  The sooner the better as \nbidweek is underway.\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 01/26/2001 \n09:49 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 01/26/2001 07:28:29 AM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: NGI access to eol\n\n\nPhillip,\n\nI was wondering if I could trouble you again for another guest id for eol.\nIn previous months, it has helped us here at NGI when we go to set indexes.\n\nI appreciate your help on this.\n\nDexter\n\n"
  },
  "M-000122": {
    "message_id": "M-000122",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/568.",
    "subject": "NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-01-26 01:55:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Griff,\n  \nCan you accomodate Dexter as we have in the past.  This has been very helpful \nin establishing a fair index at Socal Border.\n\nPhillip\n\nPlease cc me on the email with a guest password.  The sooner the better as \nbidweek is underway.\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 01/26/2001 \n09:49 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 01/26/2001 07:28:29 AM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: NGI access to eol\n\n\nPhillip,\n\nI was wondering if I could trouble you again for another guest id for eol.\nIn previous months, it has helped us here at NGI when we go to set indexes.\n\nI appreciate your help on this.\n\nDexter\n\n"
  },
  "M-000123": {
    "message_id": "M-000123",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/567.",
    "subject": "Re: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-01-26 01:57:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "dexter@intelligencepress.com",
    "body": "Dexter,\n\nYou should receive a guest id shortly.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000124": {
    "message_id": "M-000124",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/499.",
    "subject": "Re: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-01-26 01:57:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "dexter@intelligencepress.com",
    "body": "Dexter,\n\nYou should receive a guest id shortly.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000125": {
    "message_id": "M-000125",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/546.",
    "subject": "Re: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-01-26 01:57:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "dexter@intelligencepress.com",
    "body": "Dexter,\n\nYou should receive a guest id shortly.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000126": {
    "message_id": "M-000126",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/720.",
    "subject": "Natural update",
    "date": "2001-02-04 13:15:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 02/04/2001 09:12 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 02/04/2001 09:03:25 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\n?\n - ng2001-0204.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000127": {
    "message_id": "M-000127",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/959.",
    "subject": "Natural update",
    "date": "2001-02-04 13:15:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 02/04/2001 09:12 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 02/04/2001 09:03:25 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\n?\n - ng2001-0204.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000128": {
    "message_id": "M-000128",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/688.",
    "subject": "Natural update",
    "date": "2001-02-11 23:29:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 02/12/2001 07:29 \nAM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 02/11/2001 08:00:51 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\nFYI\n - ng2001-0211.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000129": {
    "message_id": "M-000129",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/927.",
    "subject": "Natural update",
    "date": "2001-02-11 23:29:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 02/12/2001 07:29 \nAM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 02/11/2001 08:00:51 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\nFYI\n - ng2001-0211.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000130": {
    "message_id": "M-000130",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/894.",
    "subject": "Natural update",
    "date": "2001-02-25 10:30:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 02/25/2001 06:28 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 02/25/2001 06:26:01 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\nLatest natural update\n - ng022601.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000131": {
    "message_id": "M-000131",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/656.",
    "subject": "Natural update",
    "date": "2001-02-25 10:30:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 02/25/2001 06:28 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 02/25/2001 06:26:01 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Natural update\n\n\n\nLatest natural update\n - ng022601.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000132": {
    "message_id": "M-000132",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/644.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-27 11:23:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "Good to hear from you.\nAfter a great F, had an okay G.  Held a lot of term length on the risk/reward \nplay.  Figured if we got no weather, all the customer and generator buying \nwould be my stop.  It was.  Amazing that for the drop in price in H, the \nstrips have really gone nowhere.  just a big chop fest.  \ni here your arguments, but think they are way exagerated.  Agree with 1.5-2 \nbcf/d more supply. Call it 2 with LNG.  Imports from Canada should be \nnegligible.  Now let's assume price for the summer is $4.  No switching, full \nliquids extraction, methanol and fertilizer running.  Electric generation \ndemand, considering problems in west and very low hydro, around 1.5 bcf/d \ngreater this year with normal weather.  Means you have to price 2 bcf/d out \nof market.  Don't think $4 does that.  What level did we start really losing \ndemand last year?  It was higher than 4.   concerned about recession in \nindustrial sector thats occuring right now.\nThink gas is fairly valued here.  Dont think we're going to 7.  But I think \nfear of market considering what happened this past year will keep forward \ncurve very well supported through spring.  we're already into storage \neconomics so the front goes where the forward curve wants to go.  \n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/26/2001 04:48:06 PM\nTo: jarnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: mkts\n\n\n\nits been a while-hope all is well. not a great few weeks for me in ngas-not\nawful just nothing really working for me and as you know got in front of\nmarch/apr a cupla times, no disasters.\n   well im bearish-i hate to be so after a 4 buck drop but as i said a month \nago\nto you-and now pira coming around. 5.00 gas is a disaster for the natgas \ndemand.\nnow production up strongly y on y...you guys agree on the production side?\n  i know youve been bullish the summer-think im stll in the minority-but here\nyou go, we have y on y supplly up 2/bcf+ demnad loss 3.5bcf/d, 5.5 bcf/day y \non\ny swing . then i submit as we started to see due huge rate increases R/C \ndemandd\nenergy conservation will be even more dramatic this summer which will effect\nutilty demand/power demand ulitmately.  if pira rite we lost 1.56 in jan for\nthis factor i say it cud be bigger this summer as ute loads increase, power \npxes\nrise and consumers become poorer. there will be more demand flexibilty in the\nsummer part in the midcon and north as AC is more of a luxury item than heat. \ni\nsay 5-6% lower use in residentail/utilty power consumption due rationing is\nanother .7/1bcf/d loss.\n  put all this together we wud build an addional 1284 apr thru oct on top of\nlast years 1715  build basis last year temps and todays prices. takes us to \n3.6\ntcf or so. what am i missing my man-summer has to go to 4 bucks or lower to\nrestore demand??? thots.\n\nas far as that other thing, the p&c its still alive, shud know more soon and \nill\nkeep you posted.\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000133": {
    "message_id": "M-000133",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/882.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-27 11:23:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "Good to hear from you.\nAfter a great F, had an okay G.  Held a lot of term length on the risk/reward \nplay.  Figured if we got no weather, all the customer and generator buying \nwould be my stop.  It was.  Amazing that for the drop in price in H, the \nstrips have really gone nowhere.  just a big chop fest.  \ni here your arguments, but think they are way exagerated.  Agree with 1.5-2 \nbcf/d more supply. Call it 2 with LNG.  Imports from Canada should be \nnegligible.  Now let's assume price for the summer is $4.  No switching, full \nliquids extraction, methanol and fertilizer running.  Electric generation \ndemand, considering problems in west and very low hydro, around 1.5 bcf/d \ngreater this year with normal weather.  Means you have to price 2 bcf/d out \nof market.  Don't think $4 does that.  What level did we start really losing \ndemand last year?  It was higher than 4.   concerned about recession in \nindustrial sector thats occuring right now.\nThink gas is fairly valued here.  Dont think we're going to 7.  But I think \nfear of market considering what happened this past year will keep forward \ncurve very well supported through spring.  we're already into storage \neconomics so the front goes where the forward curve wants to go.  \n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/26/2001 04:48:06 PM\nTo: jarnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: mkts\n\n\n\nits been a while-hope all is well. not a great few weeks for me in ngas-not\nawful just nothing really working for me and as you know got in front of\nmarch/apr a cupla times, no disasters.\n   well im bearish-i hate to be so after a 4 buck drop but as i said a month \nago\nto you-and now pira coming around. 5.00 gas is a disaster for the natgas \ndemand.\nnow production up strongly y on y...you guys agree on the production side?\n  i know youve been bullish the summer-think im stll in the minority-but here\nyou go, we have y on y supplly up 2/bcf+ demnad loss 3.5bcf/d, 5.5 bcf/day y \non\ny swing . then i submit as we started to see due huge rate increases R/C \ndemandd\nenergy conservation will be even more dramatic this summer which will effect\nutilty demand/power demand ulitmately.  if pira rite we lost 1.56 in jan for\nthis factor i say it cud be bigger this summer as ute loads increase, power \npxes\nrise and consumers become poorer. there will be more demand flexibilty in the\nsummer part in the midcon and north as AC is more of a luxury item than heat. \ni\nsay 5-6% lower use in residentail/utilty power consumption due rationing is\nanother .7/1bcf/d loss.\n  put all this together we wud build an addional 1284 apr thru oct on top of\nlast years 1715  build basis last year temps and todays prices. takes us to \n3.6\ntcf or so. what am i missing my man-summer has to go to 4 bucks or lower to\nrestore demand??? thots.\n\nas far as that other thing, the p&c its still alive, shud know more soon and \nill\nkeep you posted.\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000134": {
    "message_id": "M-000134",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/642.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-27 14:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "but that's my point.  the demand destruction roared its ugly head beginning \nof Jan.  The price level was $9.  Of course there is a lag.  Let's make up a \nlag time...say one month.   On Dec 1 cash was trading $6.70.  Probably a \nsimilar lag on the way down.  Cash is $5.20 today.  How much lost demand will \nthere be in a month if we're still $5.2?   million dollar question if you can \nanswer that.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/27/2001 08:12:32 PM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: mkts\n\n\n\noff the cuff i wud say tho same goes for 5.00 gas-currently 6-7 bcf/day swing \ny\non y too much, to buy this level you need to take the view that industrial\namerica and residential and end users will be able to get back on their feet \nand\nrecocover a lion share of the 4-4.5 bcf/d demand destruction(this assumes as\ncurrent. very little if any dist fuel switching. i think the answer is no-not\nunless the economy was jump starter quickly-2nd q is gone,so maybe th 4q.\n remember the demand destruction and industrial shit really just started only \n6\nweeks ago-me thinks it will take longer than that to get back into full swing.\nwe all trade the y on y gap...all things remaining equal(ie term px for the\nsummer), starting april we'll have a surplus the other way by july barring a\ngreenhouse in the ohio valley\n    good to hear your view pt as always-even if it is wrong!!! ha\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJohn.Arnold@enron.com on 02/27/2001 08:23:22 PM\n\nTo:   Steve LaFontaine/GlobalCo@GlobalCo\ncc:\nFax to:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\n\n\nGood to hear from you.\nAfter a great F, had an okay G.  Held a lot of term length on the\nrisk/reward play.  Figured if we got no weather, all the customer and\ngenerator buying would be my stop.  It was.  Amazing that for the drop in\nprice in H, the strips have really gone nowhere.  just a big chop fest.\ni here your arguments, but think they are way exagerated.  Agree with 1.5-2\nbcf/d more supply. Call it 2 with LNG.  Imports from Canada should be\nnegligible.  Now let's assume price for the summer is $4.  No switching,\nfull liquids extraction, methanol and fertilizer running.  Electric\ngeneration demand, considering problems in west and very low hydro, around\n1.5 bcf/d greater this year with normal weather.  Means you have to price 2\nbcf/d out of market.  Don't think $4 does that.  What level did we start\nreally losing demand last year?  It was higher than 4.   concerned about\nrecession in industrial sector thats occuring right now.\nThink gas is fairly valued here.  Dont think we're going to 7.  But I think\nfear of market considering what happened this past year will keep forward\ncurve very well supported through spring.  we're already into storage\neconomics so the front goes where the forward curve wants to go.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/26/2001 04:48:06 PM\n\nTo:   jarnold@enron.com\ncc:\nSubject:  mkts\n\n\n\nits been a while-hope all is well. not a great few weeks for me in ngas-not\nawful just nothing really working for me and as you know got in front of\nmarch/apr a cupla times, no disasters.\n   well im bearish-i hate to be so after a 4 buck drop but as i said a\nmonth ago\nto you-and now pira coming around. 5.00 gas is a disaster for the natgas\ndemand.\nnow production up strongly y on y...you guys agree on the production side?\n  i know youve been bullish the summer-think im stll in the minority-but\nhere\nyou go, we have y on y supplly up 2/bcf+ demnad loss 3.5bcf/d, 5.5 bcf/day\ny on\ny swing . then i submit as we started to see due huge rate increases R/C\ndemandd\nenergy conservation will be even more dramatic this summer which will\neffect\nutilty demand/power demand ulitmately.  if pira rite we lost 1.56 in jan\nfor\nthis factor i say it cud be bigger this summer as ute loads increase, power\npxes\nrise and consumers become poorer. there will be more demand flexibilty in\nthe\nsummer part in the midcon and north as AC is more of a luxury item than\nheat. i\nsay 5-6% lower use in residentail/utilty power consumption due rationing is\nanother .7/1bcf/d loss.\n  put all this together we wud build an addional 1284 apr thru oct on top\nof\nlast years 1715  build basis last year temps and todays prices. takes us to\n3.6\ntcf or so. what am i missing my man-summer has to go to 4 bucks or lower to\nrestore demand??? thots.\n\nas far as that other thing, the p&c its still alive, shud know more soon\nand ill\nkeep you posted.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000135": {
    "message_id": "M-000135",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/880.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-27 14:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "but that's my point.  the demand destruction roared its ugly head beginning \nof Jan.  The price level was $9.  Of course there is a lag.  Let's make up a \nlag time...say one month.   On Dec 1 cash was trading $6.70.  Probably a \nsimilar lag on the way down.  Cash is $5.20 today.  How much lost demand will \nthere be in a month if we're still $5.2?   million dollar question if you can \nanswer that.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/27/2001 08:12:32 PM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: mkts\n\n\n\noff the cuff i wud say tho same goes for 5.00 gas-currently 6-7 bcf/day swing \ny\non y too much, to buy this level you need to take the view that industrial\namerica and residential and end users will be able to get back on their feet \nand\nrecocover a lion share of the 4-4.5 bcf/d demand destruction(this assumes as\ncurrent. very little if any dist fuel switching. i think the answer is no-not\nunless the economy was jump starter quickly-2nd q is gone,so maybe th 4q.\n remember the demand destruction and industrial shit really just started only \n6\nweeks ago-me thinks it will take longer than that to get back into full swing.\nwe all trade the y on y gap...all things remaining equal(ie term px for the\nsummer), starting april we'll have a surplus the other way by july barring a\ngreenhouse in the ohio valley\n    good to hear your view pt as always-even if it is wrong!!! ha\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJohn.Arnold@enron.com on 02/27/2001 08:23:22 PM\n\nTo:   Steve LaFontaine/GlobalCo@GlobalCo\ncc:\nFax to:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\n\n\nGood to hear from you.\nAfter a great F, had an okay G.  Held a lot of term length on the\nrisk/reward play.  Figured if we got no weather, all the customer and\ngenerator buying would be my stop.  It was.  Amazing that for the drop in\nprice in H, the strips have really gone nowhere.  just a big chop fest.\ni here your arguments, but think they are way exagerated.  Agree with 1.5-2\nbcf/d more supply. Call it 2 with LNG.  Imports from Canada should be\nnegligible.  Now let's assume price for the summer is $4.  No switching,\nfull liquids extraction, methanol and fertilizer running.  Electric\ngeneration demand, considering problems in west and very low hydro, around\n1.5 bcf/d greater this year with normal weather.  Means you have to price 2\nbcf/d out of market.  Don't think $4 does that.  What level did we start\nreally losing demand last year?  It was higher than 4.   concerned about\nrecession in industrial sector thats occuring right now.\nThink gas is fairly valued here.  Dont think we're going to 7.  But I think\nfear of market considering what happened this past year will keep forward\ncurve very well supported through spring.  we're already into storage\neconomics so the front goes where the forward curve wants to go.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/26/2001 04:48:06 PM\n\nTo:   jarnold@enron.com\ncc:\nSubject:  mkts\n\n\n\nits been a while-hope all is well. not a great few weeks for me in ngas-not\nawful just nothing really working for me and as you know got in front of\nmarch/apr a cupla times, no disasters.\n   well im bearish-i hate to be so after a 4 buck drop but as i said a\nmonth ago\nto you-and now pira coming around. 5.00 gas is a disaster for the natgas\ndemand.\nnow production up strongly y on y...you guys agree on the production side?\n  i know youve been bullish the summer-think im stll in the minority-but\nhere\nyou go, we have y on y supplly up 2/bcf+ demnad loss 3.5bcf/d, 5.5 bcf/day\ny on\ny swing . then i submit as we started to see due huge rate increases R/C\ndemandd\nenergy conservation will be even more dramatic this summer which will\neffect\nutilty demand/power demand ulitmately.  if pira rite we lost 1.56 in jan\nfor\nthis factor i say it cud be bigger this summer as ute loads increase, power\npxes\nrise and consumers become poorer. there will be more demand flexibilty in\nthe\nsummer part in the midcon and north as AC is more of a luxury item than\nheat. i\nsay 5-6% lower use in residentail/utilty power consumption due rationing is\nanother .7/1bcf/d loss.\n  put all this together we wud build an addional 1284 apr thru oct on top\nof\nlast years 1715  build basis last year temps and todays prices. takes us to\n3.6\ntcf or so. what am i missing my man-summer has to go to 4 bucks or lower to\nrestore demand??? thots.\n\nas far as that other thing, the p&c its still alive, shud know more soon\nand ill\nkeep you posted.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000136": {
    "message_id": "M-000136",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/878.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-02-27 23:20:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "94\n\n\n\n\nmichael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com on 02/28/2001 07:13:22 AM\nTo: michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      -74\nLast Week      -81\n\nThanks,\nMichael Byrne\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000137": {
    "message_id": "M-000137",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/640.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-02-27 23:20:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "94\n\n\n\n\nmichael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com on 02/28/2001 07:13:22 AM\nTo: michael.byrne@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      -74\nLast Week      -81\n\nThanks,\nMichael Byrne\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000138": {
    "message_id": "M-000138",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/639.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-28 00:23:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "industrial demand the scary thing.  no question there are some steel mills \nand auto factories and plastics plants that were on last november that arent \ncoming up now and its not due to gas prices.  the economy sucks and it will \naffect ind demand.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/28/2001 08:03:43 AM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: mkts\n\n\n\nat least a myn dollars-need to talk to pira on that. excellant point. need to \ndo\nsome margin analyses . having said all that look at corporate earnings from \nlast\nyear to this year regardless of natgas costs as a feed industrials will be\nrunning slower and consumers just now feeling the pinch as rate increases have\nonly just recently gotten approved and passed to the likes of us and people \nless\nfortunate than us.\n\n\n\n\n\nJohn.Arnold@enron.com on 02/27/2001 11:05:40 PM\n\nTo:   Steve LaFontaine/GlobalCo@GlobalCo\ncc:\nFax to:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\n\n\nbut that's my point.  the demand destruction roared its ugly head beginning\nof Jan.  The price level was $9.  Of course there is a lag.  Let's make up\na lag time...say one month.   On Dec 1 cash was trading $6.70.  Probably a\nsimilar lag on the way down.  Cash is $5.20 today.  How much lost demand\nwill there be in a month if we're still $5.2?   million dollar question if\nyou can answer that.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/27/2001 08:12:32 PM\n\nTo:   John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\noff the cuff i wud say tho same goes for 5.00 gas-currently 6-7 bcf/day\nswing y\non y too much, to buy this level you need to take the view that industrial\namerica and residential and end users will be able to get back on their\nfeet and\nrecocover a lion share of the 4-4.5 bcf/d demand destruction(this assumes\nas\ncurrent. very little if any dist fuel switching. i think the answer is\nno-not\nunless the economy was jump starter quickly-2nd q is gone,so maybe th 4q.\n remember the demand destruction and industrial shit really just started\nonly 6\nweeks ago-me thinks it will take longer than that to get back into full\nswing.\nwe all trade the y on y gap...all things remaining equal(ie term px for the\nsummer), starting april we'll have a surplus the other way by july barring\na\ngreenhouse in the ohio valley\n    good to hear your view pt as always-even if it is wrong!!! ha\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJohn.Arnold@enron.com on 02/27/2001 08:23:22 PM\n\nTo:   Steve LaFontaine/GlobalCo@GlobalCo\ncc:\nFax to:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\n\n\nGood to hear from you.\nAfter a great F, had an okay G.  Held a lot of term length on the\nrisk/reward play.  Figured if we got no weather, all the customer and\ngenerator buying would be my stop.  It was.  Amazing that for the drop in\nprice in H, the strips have really gone nowhere.  just a big chop fest.\ni here your arguments, but think they are way exagerated.  Agree with 1.5-2\nbcf/d more supply. Call it 2 with LNG.  Imports from Canada should be\nnegligible.  Now let's assume price for the summer is $4.  No switching,\nfull liquids extraction, methanol and fertilizer running.  Electric\ngeneration demand, considering problems in west and very low hydro, around\n1.5 bcf/d greater this year with normal weather.  Means you have to price 2\nbcf/d out of market.  Don't think $4 does that.  What level did we start\nreally losing demand last year?  It was higher than 4.   concerned about\nrecession in industrial sector thats occuring right now.\nThink gas is fairly valued here.  Dont think we're going to 7.  But I think\nfear of market considering what happened this past year will keep forward\ncurve very well supported through spring.  we're already into storage\neconomics so the front goes where the forward curve wants to go.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/26/2001 04:48:06 PM\n\nTo:   jarnold@enron.com\ncc:\nSubject:  mkts\n\n\n\nits been a while-hope all is well. not a great few weeks for me in ngas-not\nawful just nothing really working for me and as you know got in front of\nmarch/apr a cupla times, no disasters.\n   well im bearish-i hate to be so after a 4 buck drop but as i said a\nmonth ago\nto you-and now pira coming around. 5.00 gas is a disaster for the natgas\ndemand.\nnow production up strongly y on y...you guys agree on the production side?\n  i know youve been bullish the summer-think im stll in the minority-but\nhere\nyou go, we have y on y supplly up 2/bcf+ demnad loss 3.5bcf/d, 5.5 bcf/day\ny on\ny swing . then i submit as we started to see due huge rate increases R/C\ndemandd\nenergy conservation will be even more dramatic this summer which will\neffect\nutilty demand/power demand ulitmately.  if pira rite we lost 1.56 in jan\nfor\nthis factor i say it cud be bigger this summer as ute loads increase, power\npxes\nrise and consumers become poorer. there will be more demand flexibilty in\nthe\nsummer part in the midcon and north as AC is more of a luxury item than\nheat. i\nsay 5-6% lower use in residentail/utilty power consumption due rationing is\nanother .7/1bcf/d loss.\n  put all this together we wud build an addional 1284 apr thru oct on top\nof\nlast years 1715  build basis last year temps and todays prices. takes us to\n3.6\ntcf or so. what am i missing my man-summer has to go to 4 bucks or lower to\nrestore demand??? thots.\n\nas far as that other thing, the p&c its still alive, shud know more soon\nand ill\nkeep you posted.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000139": {
    "message_id": "M-000139",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/877.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-28 00:23:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "industrial demand the scary thing.  no question there are some steel mills \nand auto factories and plastics plants that were on last november that arent \ncoming up now and its not due to gas prices.  the economy sucks and it will \naffect ind demand.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/28/2001 08:03:43 AM\nTo: John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: mkts\n\n\n\nat least a myn dollars-need to talk to pira on that. excellant point. need to \ndo\nsome margin analyses . having said all that look at corporate earnings from \nlast\nyear to this year regardless of natgas costs as a feed industrials will be\nrunning slower and consumers just now feeling the pinch as rate increases have\nonly just recently gotten approved and passed to the likes of us and people \nless\nfortunate than us.\n\n\n\n\n\nJohn.Arnold@enron.com on 02/27/2001 11:05:40 PM\n\nTo:   Steve LaFontaine/GlobalCo@GlobalCo\ncc:\nFax to:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\n\n\nbut that's my point.  the demand destruction roared its ugly head beginning\nof Jan.  The price level was $9.  Of course there is a lag.  Let's make up\na lag time...say one month.   On Dec 1 cash was trading $6.70.  Probably a\nsimilar lag on the way down.  Cash is $5.20 today.  How much lost demand\nwill there be in a month if we're still $5.2?   million dollar question if\nyou can answer that.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/27/2001 08:12:32 PM\n\nTo:   John.Arnold@enron.com\ncc:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\noff the cuff i wud say tho same goes for 5.00 gas-currently 6-7 bcf/day\nswing y\non y too much, to buy this level you need to take the view that industrial\namerica and residential and end users will be able to get back on their\nfeet and\nrecocover a lion share of the 4-4.5 bcf/d demand destruction(this assumes\nas\ncurrent. very little if any dist fuel switching. i think the answer is\nno-not\nunless the economy was jump starter quickly-2nd q is gone,so maybe th 4q.\n remember the demand destruction and industrial shit really just started\nonly 6\nweeks ago-me thinks it will take longer than that to get back into full\nswing.\nwe all trade the y on y gap...all things remaining equal(ie term px for the\nsummer), starting april we'll have a surplus the other way by july barring\na\ngreenhouse in the ohio valley\n    good to hear your view pt as always-even if it is wrong!!! ha\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJohn.Arnold@enron.com on 02/27/2001 08:23:22 PM\n\nTo:   Steve LaFontaine/GlobalCo@GlobalCo\ncc:\nFax to:\nSubject:  Re: mkts\n\n\n\n\n\nGood to hear from you.\nAfter a great F, had an okay G.  Held a lot of term length on the\nrisk/reward play.  Figured if we got no weather, all the customer and\ngenerator buying would be my stop.  It was.  Amazing that for the drop in\nprice in H, the strips have really gone nowhere.  just a big chop fest.\ni here your arguments, but think they are way exagerated.  Agree with 1.5-2\nbcf/d more supply. Call it 2 with LNG.  Imports from Canada should be\nnegligible.  Now let's assume price for the summer is $4.  No switching,\nfull liquids extraction, methanol and fertilizer running.  Electric\ngeneration demand, considering problems in west and very low hydro, around\n1.5 bcf/d greater this year with normal weather.  Means you have to price 2\nbcf/d out of market.  Don't think $4 does that.  What level did we start\nreally losing demand last year?  It was higher than 4.   concerned about\nrecession in industrial sector thats occuring right now.\nThink gas is fairly valued here.  Dont think we're going to 7.  But I think\nfear of market considering what happened this past year will keep forward\ncurve very well supported through spring.  we're already into storage\neconomics so the front goes where the forward curve wants to go.\n\n\n\n\nslafontaine@globalp.com on 02/26/2001 04:48:06 PM\n\nTo:   jarnold@enron.com\ncc:\nSubject:  mkts\n\n\n\nits been a while-hope all is well. not a great few weeks for me in ngas-not\nawful just nothing really working for me and as you know got in front of\nmarch/apr a cupla times, no disasters.\n   well im bearish-i hate to be so after a 4 buck drop but as i said a\nmonth ago\nto you-and now pira coming around. 5.00 gas is a disaster for the natgas\ndemand.\nnow production up strongly y on y...you guys agree on the production side?\n  i know youve been bullish the summer-think im stll in the minority-but\nhere\nyou go, we have y on y supplly up 2/bcf+ demnad loss 3.5bcf/d, 5.5 bcf/day\ny on\ny swing . then i submit as we started to see due huge rate increases R/C\ndemandd\nenergy conservation will be even more dramatic this summer which will\neffect\nutilty demand/power demand ulitmately.  if pira rite we lost 1.56 in jan\nfor\nthis factor i say it cud be bigger this summer as ute loads increase, power\npxes\nrise and consumers become poorer. there will be more demand flexibilty in\nthe\nsummer part in the midcon and north as AC is more of a luxury item than\nheat. i\nsay 5-6% lower use in residentail/utilty power consumption due rationing is\nanother .7/1bcf/d loss.\n  put all this together we wud build an addional 1284 apr thru oct on top\nof\nlast years 1715  build basis last year temps and todays prices. takes us to\n3.6\ntcf or so. what am i missing my man-summer has to go to 4 bucks or lower to\nrestore demand??? thots.\n\nas far as that other thing, the p&c its still alive, shud know more soon\nand ill\nkeep you posted.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000140": {
    "message_id": "M-000140",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/875.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-28 03:15:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "freak show. cash started -7 then to -15 then -7 ended -15."
  },
  "M-000141": {
    "message_id": "M-000141",
    "thread_id": "T-0009",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/637.",
    "subject": "Re: mkts",
    "date": "2001-02-28 03:15:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "slafontaine@globalp.com",
    "body": "freak show. cash started -7 then to -15 then -7 ended -15."
  },
  "M-000142": {
    "message_id": "M-000142",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/611.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-03-07 02:01:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "67\n\n\n\n\ngeorge.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com on 03/07/2001 09:39:04 AM\nTo: george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      -37\nLast Week      -101\n\nThanks,\nGeorge Ellis\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures, Inc.\n\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000143": {
    "message_id": "M-000143",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/849.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-03-07 02:01:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "67\n\n\n\n\ngeorge.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com on 03/07/2001 09:39:04 AM\nTo: george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      -37\nLast Week      -101\n\nThanks,\nGeorge Ellis\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures, Inc.\n\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000144": {
    "message_id": "M-000144",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/600.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-03-14 01:40:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "71\n\n\n\n\ngeorge.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com on 03/14/2001 08:18:25 AM\nTo: george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      -31\nLast Week      -73\n\nThank You,\nGeorge Ellis\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures, Inc.\n\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000145": {
    "message_id": "M-000145",
    "thread_id": "T-0008",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/838.",
    "subject": "Re: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey",
    "date": "2001-03-14 01:40:00-08:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com",
    "body": "71\n\n\n\n\ngeorge.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com on 03/14/2001 08:18:25 AM\nTo: george.ellis@americas.bnpparibas.com\ncc:  \nSubject: BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly AGA Survey\n\n\n\n\n\nGood Morning,\n\nJust a reminder to get your AGA estimates in by Noon EST (11:00 CST) TODAY.\n\nLast Year      -31\nLast Week      -73\n\nThank You,\nGeorge Ellis\nBNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures, Inc.\n\n\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\nCe message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le \"message\") sont etablis \na l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. Si vous \nrecevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir \nimmediatement l'expediteur.\n\nToute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute \ndiffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf \nautorisation expresse.\n\nL'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS \n(et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, \ndans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie.\n \n------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\nThis message and any attachments (the \"message\") are intended solely for the \naddressees and are confidential. If you receive this message in error, please \ndelete it and immediately notify the sender.\n\nAny use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, \neither whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval.\n\nThe internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS \n(and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message \nif modified.\n______________________________________________________________________________\n_______________________________________________________\n\n"
  },
  "M-000146": {
    "message_id": "M-000146",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/444.",
    "subject": "Re: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-03-26 09:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Grif,\n\nPlease provide a temporary id\n\nPhillip\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/26/2001 \n05:04 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 03/26/2001 02:22:41 PM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: NGI access to eol\n\n\nHi Phillip,\n\nIt's that time of month again, if you could be so kind.\n\nThanks,\n\nDexter\n\n*****************************\nDexter Steis\nExecutive Publisher\nIntelligence Press, Inc.\n22648 Glenn Drive Suite 305\nSterling, VA 20164\ntel: (703) 318-8848\nfax: (703) 318-0597\nhttp://intelligencepress.com\nhttp://www.gasmart.com\n******************************\n\n\nAt 09:57 AM 1/26/01 -0600, you wrote:\n\n>Dexter,\n>\n>You should receive a guest id shortly.\n>\n>Phillip\n\n"
  },
  "M-000147": {
    "message_id": "M-000147",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/494.",
    "subject": "Re: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-03-26 09:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Grif,\n\nPlease provide a temporary id\n\nPhillip\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/26/2001 \n05:04 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 03/26/2001 02:22:41 PM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: NGI access to eol\n\n\nHi Phillip,\n\nIt's that time of month again, if you could be so kind.\n\nThanks,\n\nDexter\n\n*****************************\nDexter Steis\nExecutive Publisher\nIntelligence Press, Inc.\n22648 Glenn Drive Suite 305\nSterling, VA 20164\ntel: (703) 318-8848\nfax: (703) 318-0597\nhttp://intelligencepress.com\nhttp://www.gasmart.com\n******************************\n\n\nAt 09:57 AM 1/26/01 -0600, you wrote:\n\n>Dexter,\n>\n>You should receive a guest id shortly.\n>\n>Phillip\n\n"
  },
  "M-000148": {
    "message_id": "M-000148",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/380.",
    "subject": "Re: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-03-26 09:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Grif,\n\nPlease provide a temporary id\n\nPhillip\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/26/2001 \n05:04 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 03/26/2001 02:22:41 PM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: NGI access to eol\n\n\nHi Phillip,\n\nIt's that time of month again, if you could be so kind.\n\nThanks,\n\nDexter\n\n*****************************\nDexter Steis\nExecutive Publisher\nIntelligence Press, Inc.\n22648 Glenn Drive Suite 305\nSterling, VA 20164\ntel: (703) 318-8848\nfax: (703) 318-0597\nhttp://intelligencepress.com\nhttp://www.gasmart.com\n******************************\n\n\nAt 09:57 AM 1/26/01 -0600, you wrote:\n\n>Dexter,\n>\n>You should receive a guest id shortly.\n>\n>Phillip\n\n"
  },
  "M-000149": {
    "message_id": "M-000149",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/427.",
    "subject": "Re: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-03-26 09:05:00-08:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "mary.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Grif,\n\nPlease provide a temporary id\n\nPhillip\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 03/26/2001 \n05:04 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com> on 03/26/2001 02:22:41 PM\nTo: Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: NGI access to eol\n\n\nHi Phillip,\n\nIt's that time of month again, if you could be so kind.\n\nThanks,\n\nDexter\n\n*****************************\nDexter Steis\nExecutive Publisher\nIntelligence Press, Inc.\n22648 Glenn Drive Suite 305\nSterling, VA 20164\ntel: (703) 318-8848\nfax: (703) 318-0597\nhttp://intelligencepress.com\nhttp://www.gasmart.com\n******************************\n\n\nAt 09:57 AM 1/26/01 -0600, you wrote:\n\n>Dexter,\n>\n>You should receive a guest id shortly.\n>\n>Phillip\n\n"
  },
  "M-000150": {
    "message_id": "M-000150",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/387.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-18 07:21:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "chad.landry@enron.com",
    "body": "Chad,\n\nCall Ted Bland about the trading track program.  All the desks are trying to \nuse this program to train analysts to be traders.  Your experience should \nhelp you in the process and make the risk rotation unnecessary. Unless you \nare dying to do another rotation is risk.\n\nPhillip "
  },
  "M-000151": {
    "message_id": "M-000151",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/404.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-18 07:21:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "chad.landry@enron.com",
    "body": "Chad,\n\nCall Ted Bland about the trading track program.  All the desks are trying to \nuse this program to train analysts to be traders.  Your experience should \nhelp you in the process and make the risk rotation unnecessary. Unless you \nare dying to do another rotation is risk.\n\nPhillip "
  },
  "M-000152": {
    "message_id": "M-000152",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/340.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-18 07:21:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "chad.landry@enron.com",
    "body": "Chad,\n\nCall Ted Bland about the trading track program.  All the desks are trying to \nuse this program to train analysts to be traders.  Your experience should \nhelp you in the process and make the risk rotation unnecessary. Unless you \nare dying to do another rotation is risk.\n\nPhillip "
  },
  "M-000153": {
    "message_id": "M-000153",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/42.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-18 17:21:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "chad.landry@enron.com",
    "body": "Chad,\n\nCall Ted Bland about the trading track program.  All the desks are trying to use this program to train analysts to be traders.  Your experience should help you in the process and make the risk rotation unnecessary. Unless you are dying to do another rotation is risk.\n\nPhillip "
  },
  "M-000154": {
    "message_id": "M-000154",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/77.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-18 17:21:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "chad.landry@enron.com",
    "body": "Chad,\n\nCall Ted Bland about the trading track program.  All the desks are trying to use this program to train analysts to be traders.  Your experience should help you in the process and make the risk rotation unnecessary. Unless you are dying to do another rotation is risk.\n\nPhillip "
  },
  "M-000155": {
    "message_id": "M-000155",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/334.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-23 03:40:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "matthew.lenhart@enron.com",
    "body": "Have him send his resume to Karen Buckley in HR.  There is a new round of \ntrading track interviews in May.\n"
  },
  "M-000156": {
    "message_id": "M-000156",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/381.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-23 03:40:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "matthew.lenhart@enron.com",
    "body": "Have him send his resume to Karen Buckley in HR.  There is a new round of \ntrading track interviews in May.\n"
  },
  "M-000157": {
    "message_id": "M-000157",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/397.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-23 03:40:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "matthew.lenhart@enron.com",
    "body": "Have him send his resume to Karen Buckley in HR.  There is a new round of \ntrading track interviews in May.\n"
  },
  "M-000158": {
    "message_id": "M-000158",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/36.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-23 13:40:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "matthew.lenhart@enron.com",
    "body": "Have him send his resume to Karen Buckley in HR.  There is a new round of trading track interviews in May.\n"
  },
  "M-000159": {
    "message_id": "M-000159",
    "thread_id": "T-0010",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/71.",
    "subject": "Re: Resume",
    "date": "2001-04-23 13:40:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "matthew.lenhart@enron.com",
    "body": "Have him send his resume to Karen Buckley in HR.  There is a new round of trading track interviews in May.\n"
  },
  "M-000160": {
    "message_id": "M-000160",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/325.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 06:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ray.alvarez@enron.com",
    "body": "Are there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  \nIs there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed \nprice gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?"
  },
  "M-000161": {
    "message_id": "M-000161",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/372.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 06:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ray.alvarez@enron.com",
    "body": "Are there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  \nIs there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed \nprice gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?"
  },
  "M-000162": {
    "message_id": "M-000162",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/388.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 06:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ray.alvarez@enron.com",
    "body": "Are there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  \nIs there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed \nprice gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?"
  },
  "M-000163": {
    "message_id": "M-000163",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/324.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 06:52:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "john.lavorato@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 \n01:51 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nRay Alvarez@ENRON\n04/25/2001 11:48 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nPhil,  I suspect that discussions/negotiations are taking place behind closed \ndoors \"in smoke filled rooms\", if not directly between Commissioners then \namong FERC staffers.  Never say never, but I think it is highly unlikely that \nthe final order will contain a fixed price cap.  I base this belief in large \npart on what I heard at a luncheon I attended yesterday afternoon at which \nthe keynote speaker was FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.  Although the Chairman \nbegan his presentation by expressly stating that he would not comment or \nanswer questions on pending proceedings before the Commission, Hebert had \nsome enlightening comments which relate to price caps:\n\nPrice caps are almost never the right answer\nPrice Caps will have the effect of prolonging shortages\nCompetitive choices for consumers is the right answer\nAny solution, however short term, that does not increase supply or reduce \ndemand, is not acceptable\nEight out of eleven western Governors oppose price caps, in that they would \nexport California's problems to the West\n\nThis is the latest intelligence I have on the matter, and it's a pretty \nstrong anti- price cap position.  Of course, Hebert is just one Commissioner \nout of 3 currently on the Commission, but he controls the meeting agenda and \nif the draft order is not to his liking, the item could be bumped off the \nagenda.  Hope this info helps.  Ray\n\n\n\n\nPhillip K Allen@ECT\n04/25/2001 02:28 PM\nTo: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON\ncc:  \n\nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nAre there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  \nIs there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed \nprice gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000164": {
    "message_id": "M-000164",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/371.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 06:52:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "john.lavorato@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 \n01:51 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nRay Alvarez@ENRON\n04/25/2001 11:48 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nPhil,  I suspect that discussions/negotiations are taking place behind closed \ndoors \"in smoke filled rooms\", if not directly between Commissioners then \namong FERC staffers.  Never say never, but I think it is highly unlikely that \nthe final order will contain a fixed price cap.  I base this belief in large \npart on what I heard at a luncheon I attended yesterday afternoon at which \nthe keynote speaker was FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.  Although the Chairman \nbegan his presentation by expressly stating that he would not comment or \nanswer questions on pending proceedings before the Commission, Hebert had \nsome enlightening comments which relate to price caps:\n\nPrice caps are almost never the right answer\nPrice Caps will have the effect of prolonging shortages\nCompetitive choices for consumers is the right answer\nAny solution, however short term, that does not increase supply or reduce \ndemand, is not acceptable\nEight out of eleven western Governors oppose price caps, in that they would \nexport California's problems to the West\n\nThis is the latest intelligence I have on the matter, and it's a pretty \nstrong anti- price cap position.  Of course, Hebert is just one Commissioner \nout of 3 currently on the Commission, but he controls the meeting agenda and \nif the draft order is not to his liking, the item could be bumped off the \nagenda.  Hope this info helps.  Ray\n\n\n\n\nPhillip K Allen@ECT\n04/25/2001 02:28 PM\nTo: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON\ncc:  \n\nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nAre there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  \nIs there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed \nprice gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000165": {
    "message_id": "M-000165",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/387.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 06:52:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "john.lavorato@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 \n01:51 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nRay Alvarez@ENRON\n04/25/2001 11:48 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nPhil,  I suspect that discussions/negotiations are taking place behind closed \ndoors \"in smoke filled rooms\", if not directly between Commissioners then \namong FERC staffers.  Never say never, but I think it is highly unlikely that \nthe final order will contain a fixed price cap.  I base this belief in large \npart on what I heard at a luncheon I attended yesterday afternoon at which \nthe keynote speaker was FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.  Although the Chairman \nbegan his presentation by expressly stating that he would not comment or \nanswer questions on pending proceedings before the Commission, Hebert had \nsome enlightening comments which relate to price caps:\n\nPrice caps are almost never the right answer\nPrice Caps will have the effect of prolonging shortages\nCompetitive choices for consumers is the right answer\nAny solution, however short term, that does not increase supply or reduce \ndemand, is not acceptable\nEight out of eleven western Governors oppose price caps, in that they would \nexport California's problems to the West\n\nThis is the latest intelligence I have on the matter, and it's a pretty \nstrong anti- price cap position.  Of course, Hebert is just one Commissioner \nout of 3 currently on the Commission, but he controls the meeting agenda and \nif the draft order is not to his liking, the item could be bumped off the \nagenda.  Hope this info helps.  Ray\n\n\n\n\nPhillip K Allen@ECT\n04/25/2001 02:28 PM\nTo: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON\ncc:  \n\nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nAre there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  \nIs there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed \nprice gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000166": {
    "message_id": "M-000166",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/529.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 06:52:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "john.lavorato@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 \n01:51 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nRay Alvarez@ENRON\n04/25/2001 11:48 AM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:  \nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nPhil,  I suspect that discussions/negotiations are taking place behind closed \ndoors \"in smoke filled rooms\", if not directly between Commissioners then \namong FERC staffers.  Never say never, but I think it is highly unlikely that \nthe final order will contain a fixed price cap.  I base this belief in large \npart on what I heard at a luncheon I attended yesterday afternoon at which \nthe keynote speaker was FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.  Although the Chairman \nbegan his presentation by expressly stating that he would not comment or \nanswer questions on pending proceedings before the Commission, Hebert had \nsome enlightening comments which relate to price caps:\n\nPrice caps are almost never the right answer\nPrice Caps will have the effect of prolonging shortages\nCompetitive choices for consumers is the right answer\nAny solution, however short term, that does not increase supply or reduce \ndemand, is not acceptable\nEight out of eleven western Governors oppose price caps, in that they would \nexport California's problems to the West\n\nThis is the latest intelligence I have on the matter, and it's a pretty \nstrong anti- price cap position.  Of course, Hebert is just one Commissioner \nout of 3 currently on the Commission, but he controls the meeting agenda and \nif the draft order is not to his liking, the item could be bumped off the \nagenda.  Hope this info helps.  Ray\n\n\n\n\nPhillip K Allen@ECT\n04/25/2001 02:28 PM\nTo: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON\ncc:  \n\nSubject: Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed  \n\nAre there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  \nIs there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed \nprice gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000167": {
    "message_id": "M-000167",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/27.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 16:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ray.alvarez@enron.com",
    "body": "Are there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  Is there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed price gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?"
  },
  "M-000168": {
    "message_id": "M-000168",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/62.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 16:28:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "ray.alvarez@enron.com",
    "body": "Are there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  Is there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed price gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?"
  },
  "M-000169": {
    "message_id": "M-000169",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/26.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 16:52:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "john.lavorato@enron.com",
    "body": "\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 01:51 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nRay Alvarez@ENRON\n04/25/2001 11:48 AM\nTo:\tPhillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:\t \nSubject:\tRe: This morning's Commission meeting delayed   \n\nPhil,  I suspect that discussions/negotiations are taking place behind closed doors \"in smoke filled rooms\", if not directly between Commissioners then among FERC staffers.  Never say never, but I think it is highly unlikely that the final order will contain a fixed price cap.  I base this belief in large part on what I heard at a luncheon I attended yesterday afternoon at which the keynote speaker was FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.  Although the Chairman began his presentation by expressly stating that he would not comment or answer questions on pending proceedings before the Commission, Hebert had some enlightening comments which relate to price caps:\n\nPrice caps are almost never the right answer\nPrice Caps will have the effect of prolonging shortages\nCompetitive choices for consumers is the right answer\nAny solution, however short term, that does not increase supply or reduce demand, is not acceptable\nEight out of eleven western Governors oppose price caps, in that they would export California's problems to the West\n\nThis is the latest intelligence I have on the matter, and it's a pretty strong anti- price cap position.  Of course, Hebert is just one Commissioner out of 3 currently on the Commission, but he controls the meeting agenda and if the draft order is not to his liking, the item could be bumped off the agenda.  Hope this info helps.  Ray\n\n\n\n\nPhillip K Allen@ECT\n04/25/2001 02:28 PM\nTo:\tRay Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON\ncc:\t \n\nSubject:\tRe: This morning's Commission meeting delayed   \n\nAre there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  Is there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed price gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<Embedded StdOleLink>\n<Embedded StdOleLink>"
  },
  "M-000170": {
    "message_id": "M-000170",
    "thread_id": "T-0013",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/61.",
    "subject": "Re: This morning's Commission meeting delayed",
    "date": "2001-04-25 16:52:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "john.lavorato@enron.com",
    "body": "\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 01:51 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nRay Alvarez@ENRON\n04/25/2001 11:48 AM\nTo:\tPhillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:\t \nSubject:\tRe: This morning's Commission meeting delayed   \n\nPhil,  I suspect that discussions/negotiations are taking place behind closed doors \"in smoke filled rooms\", if not directly between Commissioners then among FERC staffers.  Never say never, but I think it is highly unlikely that the final order will contain a fixed price cap.  I base this belief in large part on what I heard at a luncheon I attended yesterday afternoon at which the keynote speaker was FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.  Although the Chairman began his presentation by expressly stating that he would not comment or answer questions on pending proceedings before the Commission, Hebert had some enlightening comments which relate to price caps:\n\nPrice caps are almost never the right answer\nPrice Caps will have the effect of prolonging shortages\nCompetitive choices for consumers is the right answer\nAny solution, however short term, that does not increase supply or reduce demand, is not acceptable\nEight out of eleven western Governors oppose price caps, in that they would export California's problems to the West\n\nThis is the latest intelligence I have on the matter, and it's a pretty strong anti- price cap position.  Of course, Hebert is just one Commissioner out of 3 currently on the Commission, but he controls the meeting agenda and if the draft order is not to his liking, the item could be bumped off the agenda.  Hope this info helps.  Ray\n\n\n\n\nPhillip K Allen@ECT\n04/25/2001 02:28 PM\nTo:\tRay Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON\ncc:\t \n\nSubject:\tRe: This morning's Commission meeting delayed   \n\nAre there behind closed doors discussions being held prior to the meeting?  Is there the potential for a surprise announcement of some sort of fixed price gas or power cap once the open meeting finally happens?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<Embedded StdOleLink>\n<Embedded StdOleLink>"
  },
  "M-000171": {
    "message_id": "M-000171",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/698.",
    "subject": "natural update",
    "date": "2001-04-30 02:31:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 09:30 \nAM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 04/29/2001 06:50:29 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: natural update\n\n\n\nLatest comments FYI\n - ng042901.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000172": {
    "message_id": "M-000172",
    "thread_id": "T-0007",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/465.",
    "subject": "natural update",
    "date": "2001-04-30 02:31:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "mike.maggi@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by John Arnold/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 09:30 \nAM ---------------------------\n\n\n\"Mark Sagel\" <msagel@home.com> on 04/29/2001 06:50:29 PM\nTo: \"John Arnold\" <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: natural update\n\n\n\nLatest comments FYI\n - ng042901.doc\n"
  },
  "M-000173": {
    "message_id": "M-000173",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/380.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 03:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n10:36 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000174": {
    "message_id": "M-000174",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/364.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 03:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n10:36 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000175": {
    "message_id": "M-000175",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/531.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 03:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n10:36 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000176": {
    "message_id": "M-000176",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/317.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 03:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n10:36 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000177": {
    "message_id": "M-000177",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/316.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 04:22:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n11:21 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000178": {
    "message_id": "M-000178",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/379.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 04:22:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n11:21 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000179": {
    "message_id": "M-000179",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/discussion_threads/532.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 04:22:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n11:21 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000180": {
    "message_id": "M-000180",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/363.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 04:22:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 \n11:21 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a \ntable you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you \noblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n\n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 \nPM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject: Request from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all \nof the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the \nyear.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next \nweek's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get \nthese three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000181": {
    "message_id": "M-000181",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/sent/315.",
    "subject": "Re: Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 09:04:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "alan.comnes@enron.com",
    "body": "Alan, \n\nYou should have received updated numbers from Keith Holst.  Call me if you \ndid not receive them.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000182": {
    "message_id": "M-000182",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/all_documents/378.",
    "subject": "Re: Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 09:04:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "alan.comnes@enron.com",
    "body": "Alan, \n\nYou should have received updated numbers from Keith Holst.  Call me if you \ndid not receive them.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000183": {
    "message_id": "M-000183",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/362.",
    "subject": "Re: Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 09:04:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "alan.comnes@enron.com",
    "body": "Alan, \n\nYou should have received updated numbers from Keith Holst.  Call me if you \ndid not receive them.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000184": {
    "message_id": "M-000184",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/19.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 13:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 10:36 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo:\tPhillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:\tJoe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a table you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you oblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n \n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo:\tAlan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc:\tPaul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all of the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the year.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next week's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get these three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000185": {
    "message_id": "M-000185",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/54.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 13:37:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 10:36 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo:\tPhillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:\tJoe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a table you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you oblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n \n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo:\tAlan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc:\tPaul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all of the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the year.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next week's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get these three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000186": {
    "message_id": "M-000186",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/18.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 14:22:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 11:21 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo:\tPhillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:\tJoe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a table you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you oblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n \n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo:\tAlan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc:\tPaul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all of the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the year.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next week's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get these three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000187": {
    "message_id": "M-000187",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/53.",
    "subject": "Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 14:22:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "keith.holst@enron.com",
    "body": "\n---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 04/30/2001 11:21 AM ---------------------------\n\n\nAlan Comnes\n04/27/2001 01:38 PM\nTo:\tPhillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT\ncc:\tJoe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON \nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nPhillip,\n\nI got this request.  On the gas side, I think Kean/Lay need an update to a table you prepared for me a few months ago, which I've attached..  Can you oblige?  Thanks,\n\nAlan Comnes\n\n \n\n---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 04/27/2001 01:42 PM ---------------------------\n\n\nJanel Guerrero@ENRON\n04/27/2001 12:44 PM\nTo:\tAlan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron\ncc:\tPaul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron \n\nSubject:\tRequest from Steve Kean\n\nAlan,\n\nSteve has asked that you update the power point below so that it reflects all of the \"stupid regulatory/legislative decisions\" since the beginning of the year.  Ken wants to have this updated chart in his briefing book for next week's \"Ken Lay Tour\" to CA.  \n\nHe also wants a forward price curve for both gas and power in CA.  Can we get these three documents by Monday afternoon?  \n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000188": {
    "message_id": "M-000188",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/52.",
    "subject": "Re: Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 19:04:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "alan.comnes@enron.com",
    "body": "Alan, \n\nYou should have received updated numbers from Keith Holst.  Call me if you did not receive them.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000189": {
    "message_id": "M-000189",
    "thread_id": "T-0014",
    "file": "allen-p/_sent_mail/17.",
    "subject": "Re: Request from Steve Kean",
    "date": "2001-04-30 19:04:00-07:00",
    "from": "phillip.allen@enron.com",
    "to": "alan.comnes@enron.com",
    "body": "Alan, \n\nYou should have received updated numbers from Keith Holst.  Call me if you did not receive them.\n\nPhillip"
  },
  "M-000190": {
    "message_id": "M-000190",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/632.",
    "subject": "Re: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:30:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "no crap, what's your bid?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 12:48:23 AM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Extra credit\n\n\nbreak even on info ass-symetry is 100%, any project above that level is\nprofitable to Pooks&Co.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 1:04 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: try this one...\n\n\n\nFor extra credit....\nIf the company is worth 150% more under management A rather than 50% more,\ndoes your answer change?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/11/2001 05:13:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: try this one...\n\n\nwill you do all of my homework?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Friday, May 11, 2001 8:41 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: try this one...\n\n\n\ni'll pay a grand total of 0\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/10/2001 05:15:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  try this one...\n\n\n Please read the following problem very carefully, and write in a number at\nthe end.  You should be ready to defend your answer.  Only a number is\nallowed, not an algebraic equation.\n\nAcquiring a Company\n\n     In the following exercise you will represent Company A (the acquirer),\nwhich is currently considering acquiring Company T (the target) by means of\na tender offer.  You plan to tender in cash for 100% of Company T's shares\nbut are unsure how high a price to offer.  The main complication is this:\nthe value of Company T depends directly on the outcome of a major oil\nexploration project it is currently undertaking.  Indeed, the very\nviability\nof Company T depends on the exploration outcome.  If the project fails, the\ncompany under current management will be worth nothing--$0/share.  But if\nthe project succeeds, the value of the company under current management\ncould be as high as $100/share.  All share values between $0 and $100 are\nconsidered equally likely.  By all estimates, the company will be worth\nconsiderably more in the hands of Company A than under current management.\nIn fact, whatever the ultimate value under current management, the company\nwill be worth fifty percent more under the management of A than under\nCompany T.  If the project fails, the company is worth $0/share under\neither\nmanagement.  If the exploration project generates a $50/share value under\ncurrent management, the value under Company A is $75/share.  Similarly, a\n$100/share value under Company T implies a $150/share value under Company\nA,\nand so on.\n\n     The board of directors of Company A has asked you to determine the\nprice\nthey should offer for Company T's shares.  This offer must be made now,\nbefore the outcome of the drilling project is known.  From all indications,\nCompany T would be happy to be acquired by Company A, provided it is at a\nprofitable price.  Moreover, Company T wishes to avoid, at all cost, the\npotential of a takeover bid by any other firm.  You expect Company T to\ndelay a decision on your bid until the results of the project are in, then\naccept or reject your offer before the news of the drilling results reaches\nthe press.\n\n     Thus, you (Company A) will not know the results of the exploration\nproject\nwhen submitting your price offer, but Company T will know the results when\ndeciding whether or not to accept your offer.  In addition, Company T will\naccept any offer by Company A that is greater than the (per share) value of\nthe company under current management.  Thus, if you offer $50/share, for\ninstance, Company T will accept if the value of the company to Company T is\nanything less than $50.\n\n     As the representative of Company A, you are deliberating over price\noffers\nin the range of $0/share (this is tantamount to making no offer at all) to\n$150/share.  What price offer per share would you tender for Company T's\nstock?\n\n     $______ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000191": {
    "message_id": "M-000191",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/413.",
    "subject": "Re: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:30:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "no crap, what's your bid?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 12:48:23 AM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: Extra credit\n\n\nbreak even on info ass-symetry is 100%, any project above that level is\nprofitable to Pooks&Co.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 1:04 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: try this one...\n\n\n\nFor extra credit....\nIf the company is worth 150% more under management A rather than 50% more,\ndoes your answer change?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/11/2001 05:13:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: try this one...\n\n\nwill you do all of my homework?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Friday, May 11, 2001 8:41 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: try this one...\n\n\n\ni'll pay a grand total of 0\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/10/2001 05:15:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  try this one...\n\n\n Please read the following problem very carefully, and write in a number at\nthe end.  You should be ready to defend your answer.  Only a number is\nallowed, not an algebraic equation.\n\nAcquiring a Company\n\n     In the following exercise you will represent Company A (the acquirer),\nwhich is currently considering acquiring Company T (the target) by means of\na tender offer.  You plan to tender in cash for 100% of Company T's shares\nbut are unsure how high a price to offer.  The main complication is this:\nthe value of Company T depends directly on the outcome of a major oil\nexploration project it is currently undertaking.  Indeed, the very\nviability\nof Company T depends on the exploration outcome.  If the project fails, the\ncompany under current management will be worth nothing--$0/share.  But if\nthe project succeeds, the value of the company under current management\ncould be as high as $100/share.  All share values between $0 and $100 are\nconsidered equally likely.  By all estimates, the company will be worth\nconsiderably more in the hands of Company A than under current management.\nIn fact, whatever the ultimate value under current management, the company\nwill be worth fifty percent more under the management of A than under\nCompany T.  If the project fails, the company is worth $0/share under\neither\nmanagement.  If the exploration project generates a $50/share value under\ncurrent management, the value under Company A is $75/share.  Similarly, a\n$100/share value under Company T implies a $150/share value under Company\nA,\nand so on.\n\n     The board of directors of Company A has asked you to determine the\nprice\nthey should offer for Company T's shares.  This offer must be made now,\nbefore the outcome of the drilling project is known.  From all indications,\nCompany T would be happy to be acquired by Company A, provided it is at a\nprofitable price.  Moreover, Company T wishes to avoid, at all cost, the\npotential of a takeover bid by any other firm.  You expect Company T to\ndelay a decision on your bid until the results of the project are in, then\naccept or reject your offer before the news of the drilling results reaches\nthe press.\n\n     Thus, you (Company A) will not know the results of the exploration\nproject\nwhen submitting your price offer, but Company T will know the results when\ndeciding whether or not to accept your offer.  In addition, Company T will\naccept any offer by Company A that is greater than the (per share) value of\nthe company under current management.  Thus, if you offer $50/share, for\ninstance, Company T will accept if the value of the company to Company T is\nanything less than $50.\n\n     As the representative of Company A, you are deliberating over price\noffers\nin the range of $0/share (this is tantamount to making no offer at all) to\n$150/share.  What price offer per share would you tender for Company T's\nstock?\n\n     $______ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000192": {
    "message_id": "M-000192",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/412.",
    "subject": "Re: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:36:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "rules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you \n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with \nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your \nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's you \nbid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?  what \nyou charge me play against you?)"
  },
  "M-000193": {
    "message_id": "M-000193",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/631.",
    "subject": "Re: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:36:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "rules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you \n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with \nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your \nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's you \nbid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?  what \nyou charge me play against you?)"
  },
  "M-000194": {
    "message_id": "M-000194",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/411.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:53:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "and your offer?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:58:28 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n1.99999999999999999999999999999999999\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:37 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nrules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you\n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with\nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your\nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's\nyou bid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?\nwhat you charge me play against you?)\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000195": {
    "message_id": "M-000195",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/630.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:53:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "and your offer?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:58:28 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n1.99999999999999999999999999999999999\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:37 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nrules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you\n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with\nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your\nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's\nyou bid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?\nwhat you charge me play against you?)\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000196": {
    "message_id": "M-000196",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/629.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:54:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "fill in\n$ _____ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:39:23 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\nwhat's my bid for what??\nps\ndon't no crap me.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:30 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nno crap, what's your bid?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 12:48:23 AM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  Extra credit\n\n\nbreak even on info ass-symetry is 100%, any project above that level is\nprofitable to Pooks&Co.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 1:04 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: try this one...\n\n\n\nFor extra credit....\nIf the company is worth 150% more under management A rather than 50% more,\ndoes your answer change?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/11/2001 05:13:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: try this one...\n\n\nwill you do all of my homework?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Friday, May 11, 2001 8:41 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: try this one...\n\n\n\ni'll pay a grand total of 0\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/10/2001 05:15:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  try this one...\n\n\n Please read the following problem very carefully, and write in a number at\nthe end.  You should be ready to defend your answer.  Only a number is\nallowed, not an algebraic equation.\n\nAcquiring a Company\n\n     In the following exercise you will represent Company A (the acquirer),\nwhich is currently considering acquiring Company T (the target) by means of\na tender offer.  You plan to tender in cash for 100% of Company T's shares\nbut are unsure how high a price to offer.  The main complication is this:\nthe value of Company T depends directly on the outcome of a major oil\nexploration project it is currently undertaking.  Indeed, the very\nviability\nof Company T depends on the exploration outcome.  If the project fails, the\ncompany under current management will be worth nothing--$0/share.  But if\nthe project succeeds, the value of the company under current management\ncould be as high as $100/share.  All share values between $0 and $100 are\nconsidered equally likely.  By all estimates, the company will be worth\nconsiderably more in the hands of Company A than under current management.\nIn fact, whatever the ultimate value under current management, the company\nwill be worth fifty percent more under the management of A than under\nCompany T.  If the project fails, the company is worth $0/share under\neither\nmanagement.  If the exploration project generates a $50/share value under\ncurrent management, the value under Company A is $75/share.  Similarly, a\n$100/share value under Company T implies a $150/share value under Company\nA,\nand so on.\n\n     The board of directors of Company A has asked you to determine the\nprice\nthey should offer for Company T's shares.  This offer must be made now,\nbefore the outcome of the drilling project is known.  From all indications,\nCompany T would be happy to be acquired by Company A, provided it is at a\nprofitable price.  Moreover, Company T wishes to avoid, at all cost, the\npotential of a takeover bid by any other firm.  You expect Company T to\ndelay a decision on your bid until the results of the project are in, then\naccept or reject your offer before the news of the drilling results reaches\nthe press.\n\n     Thus, you (Company A) will not know the results of the exploration\nproject\nwhen submitting your price offer, but Company T will know the results when\ndeciding whether or not to accept your offer.  In addition, Company T will\naccept any offer by Company A that is greater than the (per share) value of\nthe company under current management.  Thus, if you offer $50/share, for\ninstance, Company T will accept if the value of the company to Company T is\nanything less than $50.\n\n     As the representative of Company A, you are deliberating over price\noffers\nin the range of $0/share (this is tantamount to making no offer at all) to\n$150/share.  What price offer per share would you tender for Company T's\nstock?\n\n     $______ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000197": {
    "message_id": "M-000197",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/628.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:54:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "have you taken any finance courses yet? what's good?"
  },
  "M-000198": {
    "message_id": "M-000198",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/627.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:54:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "me thinks you missed a 9\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:58:28 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n1.99999999999999999999999999999999999\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:37 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nrules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you\n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with\nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your\nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's\nyou bid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?\nwhat you charge me play against you?)\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000199": {
    "message_id": "M-000199",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/410.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:54:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "fill in\n$ _____ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:39:23 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\nwhat's my bid for what??\nps\ndon't no crap me.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:30 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nno crap, what's your bid?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 12:48:23 AM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  Extra credit\n\n\nbreak even on info ass-symetry is 100%, any project above that level is\nprofitable to Pooks&Co.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 1:04 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: try this one...\n\n\n\nFor extra credit....\nIf the company is worth 150% more under management A rather than 50% more,\ndoes your answer change?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/11/2001 05:13:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: try this one...\n\n\nwill you do all of my homework?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Friday, May 11, 2001 8:41 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: try this one...\n\n\n\ni'll pay a grand total of 0\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/10/2001 05:15:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  try this one...\n\n\n Please read the following problem very carefully, and write in a number at\nthe end.  You should be ready to defend your answer.  Only a number is\nallowed, not an algebraic equation.\n\nAcquiring a Company\n\n     In the following exercise you will represent Company A (the acquirer),\nwhich is currently considering acquiring Company T (the target) by means of\na tender offer.  You plan to tender in cash for 100% of Company T's shares\nbut are unsure how high a price to offer.  The main complication is this:\nthe value of Company T depends directly on the outcome of a major oil\nexploration project it is currently undertaking.  Indeed, the very\nviability\nof Company T depends on the exploration outcome.  If the project fails, the\ncompany under current management will be worth nothing--$0/share.  But if\nthe project succeeds, the value of the company under current management\ncould be as high as $100/share.  All share values between $0 and $100 are\nconsidered equally likely.  By all estimates, the company will be worth\nconsiderably more in the hands of Company A than under current management.\nIn fact, whatever the ultimate value under current management, the company\nwill be worth fifty percent more under the management of A than under\nCompany T.  If the project fails, the company is worth $0/share under\neither\nmanagement.  If the exploration project generates a $50/share value under\ncurrent management, the value under Company A is $75/share.  Similarly, a\n$100/share value under Company T implies a $150/share value under Company\nA,\nand so on.\n\n     The board of directors of Company A has asked you to determine the\nprice\nthey should offer for Company T's shares.  This offer must be made now,\nbefore the outcome of the drilling project is known.  From all indications,\nCompany T would be happy to be acquired by Company A, provided it is at a\nprofitable price.  Moreover, Company T wishes to avoid, at all cost, the\npotential of a takeover bid by any other firm.  You expect Company T to\ndelay a decision on your bid until the results of the project are in, then\naccept or reject your offer before the news of the drilling results reaches\nthe press.\n\n     Thus, you (Company A) will not know the results of the exploration\nproject\nwhen submitting your price offer, but Company T will know the results when\ndeciding whether or not to accept your offer.  In addition, Company T will\naccept any offer by Company A that is greater than the (per share) value of\nthe company under current management.  Thus, if you offer $50/share, for\ninstance, Company T will accept if the value of the company to Company T is\nanything less than $50.\n\n     As the representative of Company A, you are deliberating over price\noffers\nin the range of $0/share (this is tantamount to making no offer at all) to\n$150/share.  What price offer per share would you tender for Company T's\nstock?\n\n     $______ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000200": {
    "message_id": "M-000200",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/409.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:54:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "have you taken any finance courses yet? what's good?"
  },
  "M-000201": {
    "message_id": "M-000201",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/408.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:54:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "me thinks you missed a 9\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:58:28 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n1.99999999999999999999999999999999999\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:37 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nrules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you\n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with\nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your\nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's\nyou bid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?\nwhat you charge me play against you?)\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000202": {
    "message_id": "M-000202",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/625.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:57:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "yes\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 03:03:17 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\nis constellation energy a goldman company?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:55 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n\nme thinks you missed a 9\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:58:28 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: Extra credit\n\n\n1.99999999999999999999999999999999999\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:37 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nrules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you\n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with\nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your\nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's\nyou bid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?\nwhat you charge me play against you?)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000203": {
    "message_id": "M-000203",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/406.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 08:57:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "yes\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 03:03:17 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\nis constellation energy a goldman company?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:55 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n\nme thinks you missed a 9\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:58:28 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: Extra credit\n\n\n1.99999999999999999999999999999999999\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:37 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nrules to a game:\nYou flip a coin. If you get tails you win 0.  if you get heads, i give you\n$1.  Keep flipping until you get a tails, at which point you walk away with\nthe money.  however, each heads you get after the first you double your\nmoney.  So if you flip heads 3 times and then tails, you get $4.  What's\nyou bid/offer on playing this game?  (would you pay $.5 to play? $1? $2?\nwhat you charge me play against you?)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000204": {
    "message_id": "M-000204",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/all_documents/621.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 09:16:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "i think it's 100\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 03:01:23 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\nfill in\n$ ____2_ per/share\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:54 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n\nfill in\n$ _____ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:39:23 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: Extra credit\n\n\nwhat's my bid for what??\nps\ndon't no crap me.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:30 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nno crap, what's your bid?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 12:48:23 AM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  Extra credit\n\n\nbreak even on info ass-symetry is 100%, any project above that level is\nprofitable to Pooks&Co.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 1:04 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: try this one...\n\n\n\nFor extra credit....\nIf the company is worth 150% more under management A rather than 50% more,\ndoes your answer change?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/11/2001 05:13:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: try this one...\n\n\nwill you do all of my homework?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Friday, May 11, 2001 8:41 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: try this one...\n\n\n\ni'll pay a grand total of 0\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/10/2001 05:15:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  try this one...\n\n\n Please read the following problem very carefully, and write in a number at\nthe end.  You should be ready to defend your answer.  Only a number is\nallowed, not an algebraic equation.\n\nAcquiring a Company\n\n     In the following exercise you will represent Company A (the acquirer),\nwhich is currently considering acquiring Company T (the target) by means of\na tender offer.  You plan to tender in cash for 100% of Company T's shares\nbut are unsure how high a price to offer.  The main complication is this:\nthe value of Company T depends directly on the outcome of a major oil\nexploration project it is currently undertaking.  Indeed, the very\nviability\nof Company T depends on the exploration outcome.  If the project fails, the\ncompany under current management will be worth nothing--$0/share.  But if\nthe project succeeds, the value of the company under current management\ncould be as high as $100/share.  All share values between $0 and $100 are\nconsidered equally likely.  By all estimates, the company will be worth\nconsiderably more in the hands of Company A than under current management.\nIn fact, whatever the ultimate value under current management, the company\nwill be worth fifty percent more under the management of A than under\nCompany T.  If the project fails, the company is worth $0/share under\neither\nmanagement.  If the exploration project generates a $50/share value under\ncurrent management, the value under Company A is $75/share.  Similarly, a\n$100/share value under Company T implies a $150/share value under Company\nA,\nand so on.\n\n     The board of directors of Company A has asked you to determine the\nprice\nthey should offer for Company T's shares.  This offer must be made now,\nbefore the outcome of the drilling project is known.  From all indications,\nCompany T would be happy to be acquired by Company A, provided it is at a\nprofitable price.  Moreover, Company T wishes to avoid, at all cost, the\npotential of a takeover bid by any other firm.  You expect Company T to\ndelay a decision on your bid until the results of the project are in, then\naccept or reject your offer before the news of the drilling results reaches\nthe press.\n\n     Thus, you (Company A) will not know the results of the exploration\nproject\nwhen submitting your price offer, but Company T will know the results when\ndeciding whether or not to accept your offer.  In addition, Company T will\naccept any offer by Company A that is greater than the (per share) value of\nthe company under current management.  Thus, if you offer $50/share, for\ninstance, Company T will accept if the value of the company to Company T is\nanything less than $50.\n\n     As the representative of Company A, you are deliberating over price\noffers\nin the range of $0/share (this is tantamount to making no offer at all) to\n$150/share.  What price offer per share would you tender for Company T's\nstock?\n\n     $______ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000205": {
    "message_id": "M-000205",
    "thread_id": "T-0015",
    "file": "arnold-j/_sent_mail/402.",
    "subject": "RE: Extra credit",
    "date": "2001-05-13 09:16:00-07:00",
    "from": "john.arnold@enron.com",
    "to": "epao@mba2002.hbs.edu",
    "body": "i think it's 100\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 03:01:23 PM\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\nTo: <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:  \nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\nfill in\n$ ____2_ per/share\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:54 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: Extra credit\n\n\n\nfill in\n$ _____ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 02:39:23 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: Extra credit\n\n\nwhat's my bid for what??\nps\ndon't no crap me.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 4:30 PM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: Extra credit\n\n\n\nno crap, what's your bid?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/13/2001 12:48:23 AM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  Extra credit\n\n\nbreak even on info ass-symetry is 100%, any project above that level is\nprofitable to Pooks&Co.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 1:04 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: RE: try this one...\n\n\n\nFor extra credit....\nIf the company is worth 150% more under management A rather than 50% more,\ndoes your answer change?\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/11/2001 05:13:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <John.Arnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  RE: try this one...\n\n\nwill you do all of my homework?\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: John.Arnold@enron.com [mailto:John.Arnold@enron.com]\nSent: Friday, May 11, 2001 8:41 AM\nTo: epao@mba2002.hbs.edu\nSubject: Re: try this one...\n\n\n\ni'll pay a grand total of 0\n\n\n\n\n\"Eva Pao\" <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu> on 05/10/2001 05:15:59 PM\n\nPlease respond to <epao@mba2002.hbs.edu>\n\nTo:   <jarnold@enron.com>\ncc:\nSubject:  try this one...\n\n\n Please read the following problem very carefully, and write in a number at\nthe end.  You should be ready to defend your answer.  Only a number is\nallowed, not an algebraic equation.\n\nAcquiring a Company\n\n     In the following exercise you will represent Company A (the acquirer),\nwhich is currently considering acquiring Company T (the target) by means of\na tender offer.  You plan to tender in cash for 100% of Company T's shares\nbut are unsure how high a price to offer.  The main complication is this:\nthe value of Company T depends directly on the outcome of a major oil\nexploration project it is currently undertaking.  Indeed, the very\nviability\nof Company T depends on the exploration outcome.  If the project fails, the\ncompany under current management will be worth nothing--$0/share.  But if\nthe project succeeds, the value of the company under current management\ncould be as high as $100/share.  All share values between $0 and $100 are\nconsidered equally likely.  By all estimates, the company will be worth\nconsiderably more in the hands of Company A than under current management.\nIn fact, whatever the ultimate value under current management, the company\nwill be worth fifty percent more under the management of A than under\nCompany T.  If the project fails, the company is worth $0/share under\neither\nmanagement.  If the exploration project generates a $50/share value under\ncurrent management, the value under Company A is $75/share.  Similarly, a\n$100/share value under Company T implies a $150/share value under Company\nA,\nand so on.\n\n     The board of directors of Company A has asked you to determine the\nprice\nthey should offer for Company T's shares.  This offer must be made now,\nbefore the outcome of the drilling project is known.  From all indications,\nCompany T would be happy to be acquired by Company A, provided it is at a\nprofitable price.  Moreover, Company T wishes to avoid, at all cost, the\npotential of a takeover bid by any other firm.  You expect Company T to\ndelay a decision on your bid until the results of the project are in, then\naccept or reject your offer before the news of the drilling results reaches\nthe press.\n\n     Thus, you (Company A) will not know the results of the exploration\nproject\nwhen submitting your price offer, but Company T will know the results when\ndeciding whether or not to accept your offer.  In addition, Company T will\naccept any offer by Company A that is greater than the (per share) value of\nthe company under current management.  Thus, if you offer $50/share, for\ninstance, Company T will accept if the value of the company to Company T is\nanything less than $50.\n\n     As the representative of Company A, you are deliberating over price\noffers\nin the range of $0/share (this is tantamount to making no offer at all) to\n$150/share.  What price offer per share would you tender for Company T's\nstock?\n\n     $______ per/share\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
  },
  "M-000206": {
    "message_id": "M-000206",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/176.",
    "subject": "FW: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-07-26 07:43:41-07:00",
    "from": "k..allen@enron.com",
    "to": "griff.gray@enron.com",
    "body": "Griff,\n\nCan you please accommodate this request?\n\nPhillip\n\n -----Original Message-----\nFrom: \tDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com <mailto:dexter@intelligencepress.com>>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-Dexter+20Steis+20+3Cdexter+40intelligencepress+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] <mailto:[mailto:IMCEANOTES-Dexter+20Steis+20+3Cdexter+40intelligencepress+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]> \nSent:\tWednesday, July 25, 2001 4:24 PM\nTo:\tAllen, Phillip K.\nSubject:\tRe: NGI access to eol\n\nPhillip,\n\nIf its not to much trouble, could you have my guest username and password\nreinstated.\n\nThanks,\nDexter\n\nJOR46762\nWELCOME!"
  },
  "M-000207": {
    "message_id": "M-000207",
    "thread_id": "T-0012",
    "file": "allen-p/sent_items/177.",
    "subject": "RE: NGI access to eol",
    "date": "2001-07-26 11:56:27-07:00",
    "from": "k..allen@enron.com",
    "to": "dexter@intelligencepress.com",
    "body": "Dexter,\n\nHopefully Griff Gray has sent you the information on your id and password by now.  It should be good through January.  Please email or call if any problems.\n\nPhillip\n\n -----Original Message-----\nFrom: \tDexter Steis <dexter@intelligencepress.com>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-Dexter+20Steis+20+3Cdexter+40intelligencepress+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] \nSent:\tWednesday, July 25, 2001 6:24 PM\nTo:\tAllen, Phillip K.\nSubject:\tRe: NGI access to eol\n\nPhillip,\n\nIf its not to much trouble, could you have my guest username and password\nreinstated.\n\nThanks,\nDexter\n\nJOR46762\nWELCOME!"
  }
}