Message-ID: <32778883.1075843971257.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: mike.mcconnell@enron.com
To: jeffrey.shankman@enron.com
Subject: Re:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Mike McConnell
X-To: Jeffrey A Shankman
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Mark_McConnell_June2001\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: MCCONNELL-M
X-FileName: mmcconn.nsf

Yes, I thought it went well also.  We can find a way to get a long term 
commitment from EOTT, thus changing their organization, without taking on the 
price risk.  

On the hiring, I think that is a good idea.  If it is put in a way that due 
to the extensive growth that we expect to have, you want to be in the hiring 
loop, I don't see how people can object.  It is not a trust situation but an 
additional reference point.  We are here to help.
mike



   
	
	
	From:  Jeffrey A Shankman                           08/28/2000 02:41 PM
	

To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: 

I think that meeting with Stan was good.  I'll push Nowlan, Schroeder, etc.

On another note, I want to send out an email to the business unit heads about 
hiring.  Obviously crucial to our business growth is more talent, I'm just 
worried we could be bringing in people on the trading side that do not 
upgrade our group.  After we feel more comfortable, and I feel good our 
assessment of talent, I'd loosen the reigns substantially.  This is driven by 
the crude and products group primarily.  Any thoughts?  

Jeff