Message-ID: <32539087.1075840775254.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:07:11 -0800 (PST) From: bob.peebler@halliburton.com To: sloanconsulting@aol.com, everett.s.gibbs@us.andersen.com, vkamins@enron.com, mfkeeth@shellus.com, gerald.w.mcelvy@exxonmobil.com, dph@swbell.net, donna.p.mcginnis@dynegy.com, bob.peebler@halliburton.com, tina.sivinski@eds.com, bruce.sukaly@cinergy.com, tntipton@marathonoil.com, bawilliamson@duke-energy.com, bwillia6@us.ibm.com Subject: RE: Proposed Fee Structure Cc: warga@uh.edu, bobcasey@uh.edu, pkumar@uh.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: warga@uh.edu, bobcasey@uh.edu, pkumar@uh.edu X-From: Bob Peebler @ENRON X-To: 'SloanConsulting@aol.com', everett.s.gibbs@us.andersen.com, vkamins@enron.com, mfkeeth@shellus.com, gerald.w.mcelvy@exxonmobil.com, dph@swbell.net, donna.p.mcginnis@dynegy.com, Bob Peebler , tina.sivinski@eds.com, bruce.sukaly@cinergy.com, TNTipton@marathonoil.com, bawilliamson@duke-energy.com, bwillia6@us.ibm.com X-cc: warga@uh.edu, bobcasey@uh.edu, pkumar@uh.edu X-bcc: X-Folder: \vkamins\Deleted Items X-Origin: KAMINSKI-V X-FileName: vincent kaminski 1-30-02.pst I find the proposal OK. I think it's premature to get into the support of conferences and would therefore propose not to include them in the value proposition at this time. Although I liked the idea of the levels being tied to energy, I don't like the titles. I would like to see some additional options. I will also put some thinking into alternatives. Bob -----Original Message----- From: SloanConsulting@aol.com [mailto:SloanConsulting@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 9:24 AM To: everett.s.gibbs@us.andersen.com; vkamins@enron.com; mfkeeth@shellus.com; gerald.w.mcelvy@exxonmobil.com; dph@swbell.net; donna.p.mcginnis@dynegy.com; Bob.Peebler@halliburton.com; tina.sivinski@eds.com; bruce.sukaly@cinergy.com; TNTipton@marathonoil.com; bawilliamson@duke-energy.com; bwillia6@us.ibm.com Cc: warga@uh.edu; bobcasey@uh.edu; pkumar@uh.edu Subject: Proposed Fee Structure Included is a draft of a proposed fee structure arrangement for the "partnership membership" in GEMI. Rather than focusing on discounts and credits for the certificate fees, we thought the simpler concept would be to have a certain number of slots provided at no charge for the different membership levels. We have tried to allow maximum participation in the seminars and forums but providing a pro-rationing mechanism if needed. On conferences, we have suggested discounts which grow in size depending on the membership level. It would be helpful if you could respond by Dec. 15th if you like the proposal or have any suggestions.Thanks for taking the time to review. Lane