Subject: Re: Retail power RFQs on DealBench
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 02:59:00 -0800 (PST)

Thanks for the the flexibility,  I believe this will be of great help.  My 
Co# is 0985 and RC # is 105081

To: Samuel Harrell/HOU/EES@EES, Brad J Snyder/HOU/EES@EES, John 
Wack/HOU/EES@EES, Ross Mesquita/NA/Enron@ENRON, Suresh 
Raghavan/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:  
Subject: Re: Retail power RFQs on DealBench  

Regarding the lotting strategy, we do intend to be very flexible. Our general 
recommendation is that the number of lots should be around 10 but if there 
are situations where it makes sense to have more than 10 lots, we would not 
have a problem with it.
From a pricing perspective, as long as bids*lots is less than 150, we would 
treat it in a similar way.

Hope that works for you. Look forward to your confirmation (and the RC#)

Harry

   

	From:  Samuel Harrell @ EES                           01/31/2001 09:56 AM

To: Harry Arora/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: John Wack/HOU/EES@EES, Brad J Snyder/HOU/EES@EES, Ross 
Mesquita/NA/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Re: Retail power RFQs on DealBench  

Harry-

Before we go ahead with this, let's revise the first bullet to reflect a more 
realistic variation of how our soliciations might play out over the first and 
second quarter of  2001. 

As I see it (refer to the attachment for more information), we might conduct, 
at best, five sealed-bids over the next three months. However, for each of 
the bids there may be more than 10 lots in each bid. Looking at the attached 
Notice of Solicitation as an example, we have 7 separate blocks for suppliers 
to bid having up-to 3 bid scenarios for each block for a total of 21 lots for 
this phase. The way I see it, future soliciations will follow a similar 
model. 

Having said this, an alternative to the current language would be to have 5-6 
sealed bid opportunities with a 20-25 lot limit for each bid. Does this work 
for you or does this complicate the process for your group? 

Please advise....

Sam
5-6785

To: John Wack/HOU/EES@EES, Brad J Snyder/HOU/EES@EES, Samuel 
Harrell/HOU/EES@EES, Ross Mesquita/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:  
Subject: Retail power RFQs on DealBench

John

We very much enjoyed meeting with you yesterday and discussing opportunities 
for EES and DealBench to work together.  As we discussed, this email will 
serve as the framework for our pilot arrangement.  As soon as we receive an 
email confirmation from you, your team will be able to add deals to the 
DealBench platform.

3-month access as a standard user (15 sealed-bid deals with up to 10 lots for 
each deal) .  Months utilitzed do not need to be consecutive, but if a deal 
is up on DealBench in any day during a calendar month, that month will be 
inlcuded as part of the three month period.

EES will pay DealBench a fee of $22,500, with $7,500 due immediately, $7,500 
due February 28th, and $7,500 due March 31st.  We would like to debit your RC 
directly to avoid billing overheads. 
 
EES will solely control and be responsible for all business transactions that 
it conducts on the DealBench platform.  As such, DealBench assumes no 
liability for any EES business transactions conducted on DealBench.

We believe you will realize significant value from DealBench and look forward 
to working with you.  As you know, I am going to be happy when we do a Live 
Auction for you and save you some significant money.  Please confirm, with 
your RC number that you are IN with this arrangement. We also would want to 
explore further the larger opportunity - I will try to allocate some-one to 
work on that one with you next week.

Regards,

Harry Arora