Jo?o

Congratulations for you enlightening participation at todays' meeting with 
generators to rebuff Annex V arguments.

For the first time in two years I have seen the "underdogs" distributors 
beating the powerful generators.  The performance reminded me the Brazil 4 x 
Italy 1, June 21, 1970 final world cup soccer match. Let's not give up.






Luiz Maurer
05/24/2001 07:02 PM
To: Joao Carlos Albuquerque/SA/Enron@Enron
cc: Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, David M Rosenberg/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred 
Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron, Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, Sergio 
Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Britaldo Soares/SA/Enron@Enron, Brett R 
Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron, Remi Collonges/SA/Enron@Enron 

Subject: Re: CAP no MAE  

Joao

I know we are all in the same boat. We share the same ideas as well. The only 
difference is perhaps the approach.

I am kind of skeptical of negotiating with those guys. COEX has been a two 
year failure in terms of consensus building. Where has consensus led us? 
Nowhere. After some point, it is worthless discussing with those guys. (I 
know that you have been standing and fighting) 

You are  probably right when  you say I am being radical . Given my 
skepticism, I think there are only two ways: (i) going straight to Pedro 
Parente (ii) or, a big splash in the media. (because we have a coherent 
story, there are always many reporters willing to listen to us; I think we 
should not be afraid of putting a stick on the ground, as necessary)

I know that Mario Arce got upset with me and I did not mean it. However, he 
has to know that if he comes up with some "pre-cooked" crazy ideas (Kill 
Annex V,  caps on spot) he will have to face the "discipline" of the media.  
He (or any other) has to know that we will do whatever is necessary to get 
our ideas across. It is a war. No time for consensus building or for being 
the nice guy. They are writing new laws as we speak. There is a strong sense 
of urgency. It is a make it or break it situation.

This is my modest view only.

LM





Joao Carlos Albuquerque
05/23/2001 09:05 PM
To: Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, David M Rosenberg/SA/Enron@Enron, Luiz 
Maurer/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron
cc: Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, Sergio Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred 
Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron, Britaldo Soares/SA/Enron@Enron, Brett R 
Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron, Remi Collonges/SA/Enron@Enron 

Subject: Re: CAP no MAE  

David and Luiz,

Please don't be radical and don't  put words when you do not know  what is 
going on.
Some important players and people are supporting a very low cap: some 320 
reais or even less (320 is in one of the Generators proposal).  
I was the one fighting in all meetings  I had, last and this week, standing 
up in front of everybody, supporting NO CAP AT ALL.
What I tried to share with you was a second line of defence Plan B  type.
So don't think you are the only paladins of the market. We are fighting hard 
for ENRON's positions, in the real word, and working very hard, believe me.

thanks,

Jo?o Carlos



Joe Kishkill
05/22/2001 08:39 AM
To: Orlando Gonzalez, Joao Carlos Albuquerque/SA/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: Re: CAP no MAE

Got the info late, but...

I also can not see how we can even consider supporting price caps.  If they 
come, they come.  Politica are a reality.  But we should not support them or 
even hint at encouraging them.  If we are thinking about doing so, please let 
me know because I strongly object.

Thanks,

Kish
---------------------- Forwarded by Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron on 05/22/2001 08:36 
AM ---------------------------


David M Rosenberg
05/21/2001 10:40 AM
To: Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: Re: CAP no MAE

FYI.   I just noticed that you weren't in this chain.
---------------------- Forwarded by David M Rosenberg/SA/Enron on 21/05/2001 
10:44 ---------------------------


David M Rosenberg
21/05/2001 10:20
To: Luiz Maurer/SA/Enron@Enron
cc: Joao Carlos Albuquerque/SA/Enron@Enron, Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, 
Sergio Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron, Britaldo 
Soares/SA/Enron@Enron, Brett R Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron, Remi 
Collonges/SA/Enron@Enron 
Subject: Re: CAP no MAE  

Luiz,

Thanks again for maintaining a voice of sanity.  

In my not so humble opinion, it is commercial suicide for us to even give the 
appearance of supporting price caps.  I can't think of any other situation 
anywhere in the world where Enron has supported price caps in a market.  To 
the contrary, we are almost always public in our opposition to such 
market-killing sophistry.

Consensus is a noble objective, but sometimes it is just better to let people 
know your true opinion.

--DMR




Luiz Maurer
20/05/2001 23:16
To: Joao Carlos Albuquerque/SA/Enron@Enron
cc: Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, Sergio Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred 
Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron, Britaldo Soares/SA/Enron@Enron, Brett R 
Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron, Remi Collonges/SA/Enron@Enron, David M 
Rosenberg/SA/Enron@Enron 
Subject: Re: CAP no MAE  

I strongly disagree

"If it is impossible to reach an agreement within ABRADEE",, then we should 
be loud an clear in expressing our own view, to all levels of government 
including a position paper to  Pedro Parente asap.  Caps at this point in 
time may jeopardize the rationing plan per se. We had a victory in anchoring 
the penalties to the MAE price. Why surrender it now? 

Why do we have to abide by ABRADEE's desires? 

This is not a religious issue only.  There are a few US$ million left on the 
table.

How many US$ million are on the table for Enron?

 - Ballpark, possibly  US$20f or Elektro's long position  (60 in EBITDA * 
(680-460)/680)
 - A lot, lot more for Eletrobolt (perhaps to the point of killing the 
project, as Joao Albuquerque stated)

Are we being consistent? About a week ago, we submitted our views to ANEEL, 
on Public Hearing 02/2001, advocating for an increase in the cost of defict 
to US$ 2350/MWh. The trading group (Remi, David) were adamant about this 
position submitted by Regulatory Affairs (I think they are right) 

Are we acting to the best interest of our shareholders? 



LM




Joao Carlos Albuquerque
05/20/2001 11:40 AM
To: jmazon@elektro.com.br, Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, Sergio 
Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Luiz Maurer/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron
cc: Britaldo Soares/SA/Enron@Enron, Brett R Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron 

Subject: CAP no MAE

Algumas empresas de distribui??o short em 02 e 03 est?o defendendo fortememte 
CAP no MAE,  bem abaixo do custo do d,ficit ( cerca de R$ 680). ( CERJ, 
Cataguases, LIght est? em cima do muro, etc...)

Se for inevit?vel, nossa posi??o deve ser:

 - N?O PODE SER INFERIOR AO PRE_O PRATICADO NO PRE-RACIONAMENTO ( R$ 460,00 )
 - N?O PODE SER INFERIOR ? MAIOR TARIFA COBRADA DOS CONSUMIDORES  ( TROS 
VEZES A TARIFA RESIDENCIAL  ATUAL - 200% SOBRE A MESMA, PARA CONSUMOS ACIMA 
DE 500 KWh POR MOS) . 

Mazzon, calcule a ordem de grandeza deste valor. _ importante termos isto em 
mente quando formos falar com as autoridades amanh? e, em especial com Mauro 
Arce.

Lembrar, ainda, que um CAP baixo, sem FLOOR, pode matar ELETROBOLT, uma vez 
que as receitas que esta auferiria em 2002 n?o compensariam o decr,scimo das 
mesmas de 2003 em diante, quando, com a redu??o de mercado devido ao 
racionamento e o aumento de entrada de novas fontes de gera??o, tamb,m 
incentivada pelo racionamento, poder? derrubar fortemente os pre?os do MAE. 
N?o devemos nos esquecer que o per?odo de amortiza??o de ELETROBOLT , de 
cinco anos.

Jo?o Carlos