|
|
Enron Mail |
Major budget focus for today beginning in a few minutes is to have our act =
together for the Delainey/Dietrich EES review tomorrow - Anthony Dayao, Bet= h Apollo and Kerry Roper will join me for a walk through. =20 =20 Finalizing EIM budget will likely not get done today. Can give you the det= ails on why later today. Will become obvious.=20 =20 Just meet with Shankman and McConnell. Not ready to finalize EGM budget ye= t. They say that their commercial guys are waiting for Jeff Johnson to get= with them on details of IT development projects. I think that Jeff has be= en out for a few days, but I did see him on the 3rd floor when I was down t= here with Shankman and McConnell. I will leave him a voice mail message to= get an update on outstanding issues from his point of view. Jeff and Mike= want to have their stuff finalized by Friday. I will convey that timeline= to Jeff Johnson.=20 =20 After EES budget prep meeting this afternoon, next tall order of business i= s expanding our receivables monetization beyond EA to other commodities. H= igh priorty and very short time fuse on this one, for reasons that should b= e obvious. I will have all of the Operations leads and settlements leads t= ogether this afternoon, along with Ramesh Rao and others in IT who may be r= equired to help us extract necessary info. =20 =20 Nice way of telling you, Greg, that I understand your desire for a page of = footnotes with budget explanations for Whalley, and that in my opinion that= falls at the end of the list behind some of these other things today. I w= ill work with Kerry on this. I can tell you, however, that updates on budg= ets are not top on anyone's lists today, including Whalley's. We will hono= r your commitment to get him updated information, and will provide as much = detail as possible. Best approach given the state of business today may be= to provide him with the high level overview (that one page of expense and = capital), state where we are in the review process with each business unit,= and highlight reductions in expense and capital to date. We can continue= to provide updates to Whalley as the EES, EIM, EGM and EBS (yes, I need to= coordinate with Mark P. when he is back on some changes here - confidentia= l at this point). Don't know how useful detailed footnotes will be for Wha= lley before we truly finalize the various business unit budgets. --Sally= =20 -----Original Message----- From: Piper, Greg=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 12:12 PM To: Beck, Sally; Pickering, Mark; Roper, Kerry Subject: budget questions Some things that jump out at me on the Whalley packet page labelled Global = Support Dollars - 2002 Plan vs. 2001 Forecast Variance dated 10/23/01 =20 Under EGM, increase of 5,573 in operations expense and increase of 16,159 i= n IT development expense. Doesnt that sound like a big jump? =20 What made EIMs infrastructure go up 2,334? =20 How is energy operations for EES down 9,092? =20 What did EES spend capital on in 2001 to make the capital IT infrastructure= variance be down 19,726? =20 What is going on at Corp. with a positive IT infrastructure variance of 13,= 924? =20 On the front page or Whalley summary page, why did depreciation go from 62,= 028 to 30,124 to 57,843. I know some of what you said Kerry but we need to= make sure that Enron knew the 2001 depreciation number in the 2001 plan an= d that 62,028 did get depreciated accurately and that it just so happened t= o turn out that only 30,124 got done on our books. =20 You get the point. I think this is what Whalley will do too with the entir= e packet on all pages. I know the numbers are right, they just beg alot of= questions so make sure we have an updated, very accurate cheat sheet with = all the explanations so when he gets the packet today, he can follow it! =20 I assume everything ties that should. =20 Thanks. =20 GP =20 =20 =20
|