From: To: "Jeffrey Epstein" <[email protected]> Subject: Fw: China Outbound Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:17:40 +0000 Importance: Normal Original Message From: Joe Sealy ‹ > Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:08:58 To: Cc: Ketan Crispino Subject: Re: China Outbound ; Francis David We have amended our deal by deal proposal to create a performance driven commercial relationship between us. Regarding the fund economics, as you know we have very experienced professionals working with us on the terms we have offered you, setting up new divisions with us . This position may change over time. At this stage however we are not ready as an organisation to change this. So, if our proposal is unsatisfactory to you, we should not proceed. Safe travels. Joe Original Message From: "c > To: Joe Sealy Cc: Ketan Patel; Francis Crispino Sent: Sat Jul 17 15:32:25 2010 Subject: Re: China Outbound Joe Many thanks for your reply, I am now on a train from Beijing to Lhasa which will mean limited email access once we hit 3000m. Therefore as quick question: the long term fund economics are important and therefore will your position re the carry position remain (me + team 30% and GPC 70%)? This will in principle not work, so how do you propose this may be adjusted? It was my understanding that you require some binding commitment that when deal One is successfully executed, we move to the dedicated fund that I will manage? If so, the fund terms must be clarified now in principle so we are on the same page. All the best David Original Message From: Joe Sealy ‹ > Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 01:48:39 To: Cc: Ketan Patel ; Francis Crispino Subject: Re: China Outbound David Thanks for your note. There are two sets of issues you raise. The first, with respect to economics, we have focused on the deal by deal economics. Reflecting on our last discussion on how to create a performance driven commercial relationship, we would propose the following economics: