Enron Mail

From:susan.mara@enron.com
To:jeff.dasovich@enron.com, d..steffes@enron.com, karen.denne@enron.com
Subject:FW: AReM's first news story from statement: Bloomberg-- California
Cc:
Bcc:
Date:Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:51:51 -0700 (PDT)

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Mara, Susan </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=SMARA<
X-To: Dasovich, Jeff </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Jdasovic<, Steffes, James D. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Jsteffe<, Denne, Karen </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Kdenne<, 'hgovenar@govadv.com', 'sgovenar@govadv.com', 'bhansen@lhom.com'
X-cc:
X-bcc:
X-Folder: \Dasovich, Jeff (Non-Privileged)\Dasovich, Jeff\Deleted Items
X-Origin: DASOVICH-J
X-FileName: Dasovich, Jeff (Non-Privileged).pst



-----Original Message-----
From: Fairchild, Tracy [mailto:tracy.fairchild@edelman.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 2:46 PM
To: 'arem@electric.com'; 'nplotkin@rcsis.com'
Cc: Manuel, Erica; Allen, Stevan; 'douglass@energyattorney.com'; Denne,
Karen
Subject: AReM's first news story from statement: Bloomberg-- California
Plan to Suspend Power Choice Is Illegal


AReMers--

Dan Douglass and I just finished doing three interviews with the LA Times,
SF Chronicle and a a second interview with Bloomberg for publication later
today. They all went well, especially with the SF Chron because the
reporter, Bernadette Tansey, is knowledgeable and interested. The first
Bloomberg story is attached below. The Ontario Inland Daily Bulletin is
working on a story today as well. AP plans to write about this story next
week, closer to the hearing.

Also: reporters want to talk to customers who may be caught in this mess
because they signed after July 1. PLEASE FORWARD A FEW CONTACTS. THEY MUST
BE OUT THERE. THANKS.

A new twist to stress in any media interviews you may do: tell reporters
that the PUC does not regulate ESPs, their customer relationships or
contracts. This is mentioned in the legal memo but not the statement and it
helps to underscore the absurdity of the retroactive draft decision.