---------------------- Forwarded by David Forster/LON/ECT on 02/18/2000 04:55 
PM ---------------------------
   
	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
	
	From:  Brandon Luna                           02/18/2000 02:51 PM
	

To: David Forster/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Ellen Fowler/HOU/ECT@ECT, John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas S 
Friedman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT, Bob Shults/HOU/ECT@ECT, 
Drew Ries/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen R Horn/HOU/ECT@ECT, James A 
Ajello/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg F Piper/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jay Fitzgerald/Corp/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: ChemConnect w/ Attachment

We are aware of the potential market perception issues of EnronOnline and 
this investment, and I believe we have addressed these concerns.  John 
Nowlan, Jim Ajello, and I revised the language in the agreement.  The 
document now states that Enron North America acknowledges ChemConnect as a 
leading internet-based third party exchange for purchases and sales of 
chemicals and plastics raw materials.  I  want to emphasize that this 
agreement in no way limits Enron's ability to trade on any other exchange 
(EOL , or a third party exchange).  In addition Enron is under no obligation 
to buy or sell any products on the ChemConnect exchange.   The purpose of the 
agreement is to say Enron and ChemConnect will work together in the future to 
discuss future business opportunities.
The only real obligation Enron is making in this agreement is to work with 
ChemConnect to explore future business opportunities.  In return, Enron will 
be able to participate in their "e-Commerce Roundtable" with major chemical 
companies.  

Also,  market perception issues can be managed in the press release, which 
will be approved by public relations and investor relations.  The Strategic 
Alliance Agreement is not public , and it specifically states Enron has the 
right to approve any announcement ChemConnect makes using Enron's name or 
logo.  We are not proposing Enron make any announcement endorsing ChemConnect 
as our preferred exchange.  (We have made it clear with ChemConnect that we 
will continue to use EOL, and/or any other exchange.)  In summary, we will be 
able to control the publicity issues by controlling any announcements with 
Enron's name. 

The full agreement is attached for your review.  I hope this addresses your 
concerns.  

 Regards,
Ellen Fowler









David Forster
02/17/2000 06:44 PM
To: Brandon Luna/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ellen Fowler/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas S Friedman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise 
Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT, Bob Shults/HOU/ECT@ECT, Drew Ries/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen R 
Horn/HOU/ECT@ECT 
Subject: Fw: ChemConnect

I am concerned about elements in this deal which appear to conflict with the 
development strategy of EnronOnline.

Please do not proceed until such time as we have resolved any potential areas 
of conflict.

Thank you

Dave 





---------------------- Forwarded by David Forster/LON/ECT on 02/18/2000 12:32 
AM ---------------------------

---------------------- Forwarded by Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT on 16/02/2000 
15:42 ---------------------------
   
	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
	
	From:  "Douglas Friedman" <DFRIEDMAN@houston.rr.com>                          
 15/02/2000 23:08
	

To: <brandon.luna@enron.com>, <ellen.fowler@enron.com>
cc: <john.nowlan@enron.com>, <louise.kitchen@enron.com> 

Subject: Fw: ChemConnect


Brandon, Ellen:


I find the current wording about ChemConnect being our Preferred Third Party
Exchange still unexceptable.  It also is simply not true, since the market
for all NGL's (read as: "chemical and plastics raw materials") is already
standardized on Chalkboard.  I realize this is only the second draft (with a
third one pending) and has been watered down some - but not enough in my
opinion.  Section 4 gives us the right to somewhat control releases and
publications.  But, I am afraid all the market will ultimately hear is that
they are our "Preferred Exchange" - reference their release today about
BASF.  Ultimately they'll totally confuse the market about our direct
efforts with EnronOnline.

I still very much like the idea of using them as a portal to drive traffic
to EnronOnline.  Additionally, as previously mentioned, the right of first
refusal to be "the market maker" if they ever do go forward on their
exchange ideas has great value.

Will read the other sections on the plane this evening and comment further.

By copy, John & Louise, what are your thoughts?

Doug



----- Original Message -----
From: Brandon Luna <Brandon.Luna@enron.com>
To: <dfriedman@houston.rr.com>
Cc: Ellen Fowler <Ellen.Fowler@enron.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 2:59 PM
Subject: ChemConnect


>
>
> Doug
>
> Attached is the agreement;  we specifically want your comments/approval on
the
> Sections 1 - 3.  The potential changes are in Sections 9.1 and 9.3 (typos
and
> other).
>
> Please let us know your thoughts.
>
> Brandon   713 853-0531
> Ellen          713 853-5741
> Drew      713 345-6075
> ---------------------- Forwarded by Brandon Luna/HOU/ECT on 02/15/2000
02:55 PM
> ---------------------------
>

>