Subject: Talgo Thoughts
From: "Eric Schwerin" <[email-masked]>
To: "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 14:35:44 -0400

I am less worried about Nora and Antonio's reaction than I am worried about
your credibility within Amtrak.  That's why we have to come up with a reason
for this that is honest and is a very similar message to the one we are
telling Talgo and anyone at Amtrak that may ask.  I don't dislike Lorenzo's
approach, but I still think we need to tell Talgo that we we have a more
attractive offer (not sure if we specify it is CAF - although Talgo will
find out soon enough) that is only focused on the current Amtrak tender but
also gives us the opportunity to work on light rail tenders down the road.
 We can ask if we'd be allowed to do both.  If they say no, we'll say we
need to take CAF and it is purely an economic decision.  Then within Amtrak
you can say, Talgo took so long to decide if they wanted to hire us that by
the time they did we had a more attractive offer on the table that allows us
to work in a variety of different facets of the rail car manufacture sector.

Again, we could still work with Talgo down the road.  As long as CAF and
Talgo are not bidding on the same projects they both will have the same 100%
content issues.  And I am not 100% sure that Talgo is really going to be
that upset if we don't work for them.  They are cash strapped and I do agree
with Lorenzo that if they really wanted us they would have stepped up to the
plate more quickly.  Also, I think it is important to emphasize to Nora and
Antonio that a lot of what they proposed we do in the contract we can't do -
they are asking us to lobby.  We had never had that discussion with them.

Let me know what you think.  We probably have to have this conversation with
them this week.  Ideally, I'd like to do it before we sign CAF although that
is not going to be easy logistically I know.

-- 
Eric D. Schwerin
Rosemont Seneca Partners
(202) 333-1880
[email-masked]