Message-ID: <31939246.1075852815998.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:15:55 -0700 (PDT) From: jeff.donahue@enron.com To: kenneth.lay@enron.com, greg.whalley@enron.com Subject: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Donahue, Jeff X-To: Lay, Kenneth , Whalley, Greg X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \KLAY (Non-Privileged)\Inbox X-Origin: Lay-K X-FileName: KLAY (Non-Privileged).pst Ken and Greg: Prior to your potential meeting on Wednesday, I just wanted to get my two cents in with respect to Heath Schiesser and the Xlerator. I vote in favor of supporting the Xlerator based on a few rationales: First and foremost, Heath is a quality player - with a unique set of skills that would contribute to Enron's human capital; The discipline that the Xlerator would bring to new businesses, in and of itself, probably justifies its existence: for example, I believe that the investment in AMPS approaches $20 million - much of which is at risk due to inadequate discipline; and The Xlerator appears to be a low cost R&D option of relatively limited size while compared to Enron - that may very well incubate businesses which create meaningful value for Enron. At the same time, I acknowledge the costs, both financial and resources, and risks but feel the above benefits are greater. Although support from the Management Committee would be nice, I believe that support from you two would provide the foundation upon which Heath and the Xlerator can be successful. Jeff Donahue