fwd : mark - to - market return - path :
received : from rly - ygol . mx . aol . com ( rly - ygol . mail . aol . com [ 172 . 18 . 147 . 1 ] ) by
air - ygo 5 . mail . aol . com ( v 67 _ bl . 21 ) with esmtp ; fri , 28 jan 2000 18 : 00 : 52 - 0500
received : from mailman . enron . com ( mailman . enron . com [ 192 . 152 . 140 . 66 ] ) by
rly - ygol . mx . aol . com ( v 67 _ bl . 21 ) with esmtp ; fri , 28 jan 2000 18 : 00 : 36 - 0500
received : from dservl . ect . enron . com ( dservl . ect . enron . com [ 172 . 16 . 1 . 37 ] ) by
mailman . enron . com ( 8 . 8 . 8 / 8 . 8 . 8 / corp - 1 . 03 ) with esmtp id xaal 9726 for
; fri , 28 jan 2000 23 : 00 : 07 gmt
received : from notes . ect . enron . com ( notes . ect . enron . com [ 172 . 16 . 4 . 33 ] ) by
dservl . ect . enron . com ( 8 . 8 . 8 / 8 . 8 . 8 ) with smtp id raa 24406 for
; fri , 28 jan 2000 17 : 00 : 32 - 0600 ( cst )
received : by notes . ect . enron . com ( lotus smtp mta v 4 . 6 . 5 ( 863 . 2 5 - 20 - 1999 ) )
id 86256874 . 007 e 6242 ; fri , 28 jan 2000 17 : 00 : 26 - 0600
x - lotus - fromdomain : ect
from : " vince j kaminski "
to : vkaminski @ aol . com
message - id :
date : fri , 28 jan 2000 17 : 00 : 29 - 0600
subject : re : mark - to - market
mime - version : 1 . 0
content - type : text / plain ; charset = us - ascii
content - disposition : inline
content - transfer - encoding : 7 bit
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by vince j kaminski / hou / ect on 01 / 28 / 2000
05 : 00
pm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
from : wade cline @ enron _ development on 01 / 28 / 2000 07 : 17 am ze 5 b
to : pinnamaneni krishnarao / hou / ect @ ect
cc : sandeep kohli / enron _ development @ enron _ development , vince j
kaminski / hou / ect @ ect
subject : re : mark - to - market ( document link : vince j kaminski )
sandeep ,
can dpc sell to mseb and have eipl buy an equivalent amount of power from mseb
at another spot on their grid , and then eipl sell to the 3 rd party state ?
pinnamaneni krishnarao @ ect
01 / 27 / 2000 04 : 00 pm
to : sandeep kohli / enron _ development @ enron _ development
cc : vince j kaminski / hou / ect @ ect , wade
subject : re : mark - to - market ( document link : wade cline )
sandeep :
i met with bob today and discussed the deal structure we put together . on
the mark - to - market issue , bob and his colleague wess told me that as long as
payments are tied to one particular plant , we cannot m - t - m them . they had same
problem with plants here in the us ( like the peaking plants ) and they had to
separate the plant from power sales to be able to m - t - m the assocated
cashflows .
what they did is : they sold power from the plant to an outside party and
bought
it back from them at completely different ( multiple ) locations . the buyback is
not tied to any specific plant and is marked to maket . even if enron can
somehow
mark - to - market a deal with dpc , it can do so for only 50 % of the cashflows
because only 50 % of dpc is owned by outsiders . and a simple loan to an
affiliate cannot also be marked to market .
bob was suggesting that if eipl buys options from dpc and from some other
plants and in turn sells power to ap or karnataka then we could have a case
for
m - t - m . politically dpc selling power to eipl may not be the best solution , to
put it rather mildly !
our alternatives , as i see them , are
1 . do the deal as we structured it . the only difference is that enron doesn ' t
mark it to market and income is earned only in 2002 - 03 .
2 . do the deal as we structured it . eipl / enron then sells the contract to
another party at a profit . the problem , of course , is finding this party and
forking part of the profit to them .
3 . same deal , except revenue securitization is done through an outside party
in
india ( not eipl ) .
bob said he will think about the issues some more this week . let me know when
you will be here next week so we can meet with bob together . i will be going
to
boston for tuesday and / or wednesday ( feb . 1 - 2 ) . i can book an appt . with bob
for
us .
sandeep kohli @ enron _ development
01 / 23 / 2000 09 : 45 pm
to : robert butts , pinnamaneni krishnarao @ ect
cc : vince kaminski , wade cline / enron _ development @ enron _ development , ananda
mukerji , jaiprakash desai / enron _ development @ enron _ development
subject : mark - to - market
bob ,
i wanted to continue the analysis on mark - to - market that i had spoken to you
about on the phone .
i thought that it was getting very difficult explaining the whole transaction
by
phone , so i am having krishnarao who is in vince ' s group explain the
transaction
to you .
krishna has been helping us structure the deal here in india , and he has just
returned to houston from india after working with the team here .
he will seek an appointment with you to explain the transaction . i would like
you to please spend some time with him , and then based on the discussion
please
send us a note detailing how sucha a transaction would be marked to market .
please cosider the fact that currently there are no such transactions from the
indian side . this is a very important transaction for us , and we may need to
repeat this in coming months , hence setting up the system to account for these
maybe well worth it . also , what i am concerned about is that there will be an
enron india ( eipl ) account in india based on indian gaap , and upon
consolidation
there will be a us gaap accounting in the us . it is here that we would like
to
have mark - to - market accounting . eipl is structured through mauritius , and
then
caymen islands .
another key question to consider is that when we m - t - m the transaction in the
us
there will be a tax accruing in the year of m - t - m ( say 2000 ) . however , in
india , as a result of the accrual accounting , there will not be any income
showing till the year 2002 or 2003 . we will need to know how that would get
treated , and whether there is a way to get credit for the tax payable in the
us .
i am also confused about whether us tax would be levied , since none of the
income is being brought back into the us ( remains overseas - subpart - f and
other
concerns ) .
finally , we have been working hard in structuring a fixed price contract and
getting a fixed for floating swap in the us ( this is still not allowed to
indian
corporates ) . i need you to think about this too , and see if some type of
accounting will solve this issue . krishna knows what i am talking about , and
will brief you on the same .
krishna - please walk bob through the three structures we had worked here .
look forward to your help and comments . this is going to be an exciting
project
for us all .
regards ,
sandeep .
fwd : mark - to - market
return - path :
received : from rly - ygol . mx . aol . com ( rly - ygol . mail . aol . com [ 172 . 18 . 147 . 1 ] ) by
air - ygo 5 . mail . aol . com ( v 67 _ bl . 21 ) with esmtp ; fri , 28 jan 2000 18 : 00 : 52 - 0500
received : from mailman . enron . com ( mailman . enron . com [ 192 . 152 . 140 . 66 ] ) by
rly - ygol . mx . aol . com ( v 67 _ bl . 21 ) with esmtp ; fri , 28 jan 2000 18 : 00 : 36 - 0500
received : from dservl . ect . enron . com ( dservl . ect . enron . com [ 172 . 16 . 1 . 37 ] ) by
mailman . enron . com ( 8 . 8 . 8 / 8 . 8 . 8 / corp - 1 . 03 ) with esmtp id xaal 9726 for
; fri , 28 jan 2000 23 : 00 : 07 gmt
received : from notes . ect . enron . com ( notes . ect . enron . com [ 172 . 16 . 4 . 33 ] ) by
dservl . ect . enron . com ( 8 . 8 . 8 / 8 . 8 . 8 ) with smtp id raa 24406 for
; fri , 28 jan 2000 17 : 00 : 32 - 0600 ( cst )
received : by notes . ect . enron . com ( lotus smtp mta v 4 . 6 . 5 ( 863 . 2 5 - 20 - 1999 ) )
id 86256874 . 007 e 6242 ; fri , 28 jan 2000 17 : 00 : 26 - 0600
x - lotus - fromdomain : ect
from : " vince j kaminski "
to : vkaminski @ aol . com
message - id :
date : fri , 28 jan 2000 17 : 00 : 29 - 0600
subject : re : mark - to - market
mime - version : 1 . 0
content - type : text / plain ; charset = us - ascii
content - disposition : inline
content - transfer - encoding : 7 bit
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by vince j kaminski / hou / ect on 01 / 28 / 2000
05 : 00
pm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
from : wade cline @ enron _ development on 01 / 28 / 2000 07 : 17 am ze 5 b
to : pinnamaneni krishnarao / hou / ect @ ect
cc : sandeep kohli / enron _ development @ enron _ development , vince j
kaminski / hou / ect @ ect
subject : re : mark - to - market ( document link : vince j kaminski )
sandeep ,
can dpc sell to mseb and have eipl buy an equivalent amount of power from mseb
at another spot on their grid , and then eipl sell to the 3 rd party state ?
pinnamaneni krishnarao @ ect
01 / 27 / 2000 04 : 00 pm
to : sandeep kohli / enron _ development @ enron _ development
cc : vince j kaminski / hou / ect @ ect , wade
subject : re : mark - to - market ( document link : wade cline )
sandeep :
i met with bob today and discussed the deal structure we put together . on
the mark - to - market issue , bob and his colleague wess told me that as long as
payments are tied to one particular plant , we cannot m - t - m them . they had same
problem with plants here in the us ( like the peaking plants ) and they had to
separate the plant from power sales to be able to m - t - m the assocated
cashflows .
what they did is : they sold power from the plant to an outside party and
bought
it back from them at completely different ( multiple ) locations . the buyback is
not tied to any specific plant and is marked to maket . even if enron can
somehow
mark - to - market a deal with dpc , it can do so for only 50 % of the cashflows
because only 50 % of dpc is owned by outsiders . and a simple loan to an
affiliate cannot also be marked to market .
bob was suggesting that if eipl buys options from dpc and from some other
plants and in turn sells power to ap or karnataka then we could have a case
for
m - t - m . politically dpc selling power to eipl may not be the best solution , to
put it rather mildly !
our alternatives , as i see them , are
1 . do the deal as we structured it . the only difference is that enron doesn ' t
mark it to market and income is earned only in 2002 - 03 .
2 . do the deal as we structured it . eipl / enron then sells the contract to
another party at a profit . the problem , of course , is finding this party and
forking part of the profit to them .
3 . same deal , except revenue securitization is done through an outside party
in
india ( not eipl ) .
bob said he will think about the issues some more this week . let me know when
you will be here next week so we can meet with bob together . i will be going
to
boston for tuesday and / or wednesday ( feb . 1 - 2 ) . i can book an appt . with bob
for
us .
sandeep kohli @ enron _ development
01 / 23 / 2000 09 : 45 pm
to : robert butts , pinnamaneni krishnarao @ ect
cc : vince kaminski , wade cline / enron _ development @ enron _ development , ananda
mukerji , jaiprakash desai / enron _ development @ enron _ development
subject : mark - to - market
bob ,
i wanted to continue the analysis on mark - to - market that i had spoken to you
about on the phone .
i thought that it was getting very difficult explaining the whole transaction
by
phone , so i am having krishnarao who is in vince ' s group explain the
transaction
to you .
krishna has been helping us structure the deal here in india , and he has just
returned to houston from india after working with the team here .
he will seek an appointment with you to explain the transaction . i would like
you to please spend some time with him , and then based on the discussion
please
send us a note detailing how sucha a transaction would be marked to market .
please cosider the fact that currently there are no such transactions from the
indian side . this is a very important transaction for us , and we may need to
repeat this in coming months , hence setting up the system to account for these
maybe well worth it . also , what i am concerned about is that there will be an
enron india ( eipl ) account in india based on indian gaap , and upon
consolidation
there will be a us gaap accounting in the us . it is here that we would like
to
have mark - to - market accounting . eipl is structured through mauritius , and
then
caymen islands .
another key question to consider is that when we m - t - m the transaction in the
us
there will be a tax accruing in the year of m - t - m ( say 2000 ) . however , in
india , as a result of the accrual accounting , there will not be any income
showing till the year 2002 or 2003 . we will need to know how that would get
treated , and whether there is a way to get credit for the tax payable in the
us .
i am also confused about whether us tax would be levied , since none of the
income is being brought back into the us ( remains overseas - subpart - f and
other
concerns ) .
finally , we have been working hard in structuring a fixed price contract and
getting a fixed for floating swap in the us ( this is still not allowed to
indian
corporates ) . i need you to think about this too , and see if some type of
accounting will solve this issue . krishna knows what i am talking about , and
will brief you on the same .
krishna - please walk bob through the three structures we had worked here .
look forward to your help and comments . this is going to be an exciting
project
for us all .
regards ,
sandeep .