Message-ID: <10569355.1075854455056.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 04:34:00 -0700 (PDT) From: david.delainey@enron.com To: rick.buy@enron.com Subject: Re: Basic Cc: david.gorte@enron.com, jeff.donahue@enron.com, richard.lydecker@enron.com, raymond.bowen@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: david.gorte@enron.com, jeff.donahue@enron.com, richard.lydecker@enron.com, raymond.bowen@enron.com X-From: David W Delainey X-To: Rick Buy X-cc: David Gorte, Jeff Donahue, Richard Lydecker, Raymond Bowen X-bcc: X-Folder: \David_Delainey_Dec2000\Notes Folders\Discussion threads X-Origin: Delainey-D X-FileName: ddelain.nsf Rick, I disagree - the DASH had an implication unsubstantiated that the current deal on the table is a bad one. I believe that RAC should provide a clear opinion or say directly that the analysis is deficient. It is too easy to state the obvious. Regards Delainey ---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 09/29/2000 11:17 AM --------------------------- From: Rick Buy on 09/29/2000 10:18 AM To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Donahue/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Lydecker/Corp/Enron@Enron, Raymond Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Basic In my opion this DASH did exactly what it was supposed to do - prompt a dialog on whether we are getting an adequate price for this asset. My understanding is that no model was built to value an alternative nor was there any effort to market the company. If we want to "take the money and run" (whhich in this case is probably the right decision) fine, but we should know what we are leaving behind, especially given the current commodity price environment. Rick