exmar purchase decision fyi forwarded rick buy hou ect 05 22 2000 01 34 pm john sherriff 05 22 2000 01 21 pm rick buy hou ect ect joe gold lon ect ect david haug enron _ development enron _ development doug rotenberg enron _ development enron _ development rick bergsieker enron _ development enron _ development vince j kaminski hou ect ect cc subject exmar purchase decision got phone jeff skilling make pitch exmar deal said generally understands logic deal simply wants risk management discipine applied analzing position reiteration rick buy said meeting today would simply ask vince team take quick look tommorow valuing ships stand alone positions guess volatility based historical price movements would much easier rainbow option approach would allow us roughly look value options two ships words could look two ship long positions implied volatilities also estimate daily vars ships mark market although agree david likely able mark ships treated leases john john forwarded john sherriff lon ect 22 05 2000 19 05 joe gold 22 05 2000 18 58 john sherriff lon ect ect cc subject exmar purchase decision john spending minutes shipping experts coal oil groups slightly different angle exmar lng vessel decision would ideally like spend time analyse purchase power gas positions unfortunately luxury sometimes absence true analytics rudimentary measures provide best decision tools would make decision 1 shipping expert confirms 140 million 135 000 ton ship represents good price relative new build costs last three years quotes trending past number recently also confirms current trough result default several far east buyers new lng orders ship building cruise liners reduced capacity experience historic analysis suggested pricing cycle lng ships lasts significant period new efficiency measures reduce new build prices allow lower trough extreme amount versus 140 million cost vessel pierre normally likes roll time charters however difficult illiquid shipping market like lng would purchase ship lng shipping book manage estimates ship could sold distressed sale 110 million could potentially time chartered long term basis value 200 million 2 development teams spain italy turkey trying solve big question gas country key developing merchant plant securing gas flexibility least securing negotiating leverage monopoly gas supplier questionable whether decision immediate impact arcos plant time line realities lng supply market may require commit gas natural source 3 5 year gas secured shear threat able bring spot term lng markets improve negotiating leverage allow us create flexibility going forward however potential plant opportunities spain elsewhere med region may capacity utilise vessels think flexibility worth least 25 million 3 would summarise upside 60 25 85 million downside 30 25 5 million would leave rest joe