|
|
Enron Mail |
Chris, as per our discussion, I just want to confirm that we have the ability
to break the contract with the EPC provider at any time. Further, I want to confirm that our costs will be minimal and that this whole process (ie putting a number on a term sheet) has been based on trying to maximize the short run value of the project. In other works, we have no intention of lifting their offer. Finally, we are not ordering HRSG's or steam turbines. These guys add no value and they are killing me! Regards Delainey ---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 07:14 PM --------------------------- David W Delainey 09/26/2000 07:12 PM To: Dick Westfahl/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Larry L Izzo/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Las Vegas CoGen Guys, I have explained the strategy/tactics that have lead to this position in some detail. In my opinion the company is not at risk and potentially ENA could create significant value from a project that we have very little invested. I understand the construction risk on the bid as much as anyone and we have no intention of lifting their offer. As far as EECC involvement, as I had mentioned, Coleman was a part of all these discussions. I will argue that Mike and the ENA deal team made the right call necessary to maximize return in the short run for Enron without investing significant dollars or taking significant risks. Obviously, I was unsuccessful in explaining such a sophisticated strategy. Regards Delainey ---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 07:01 PM --------------------------- Dick Westfahl@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/26/2000 09:30 AM To: Dave Delainey cc: Larry L Izzo/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: Las Vegas CoGen Dave: See attached memo. Thanks, Dick
|