Module 2 Assignment: Sunk Cost

Read two articles assigned (A1 and A2). Answer all the questions below and submit your answer report to Module 2 Assignment in Dropboxby the deadline. The report should be typed, single spaced with a font size 12, in one MS Word file with the maximum of two pages long.

Introduction

The concept of sunk cost is frequently used, either correctly or incorrectly, in making many business and personal decisions.Read the two articles assigned and answer the questions below. Since you do not have detailed information about their costs and cost structure of these cases, you can make any cost assumptions as you need to support your arguments. Do not use any other references (e.g., articles, books, etc.) in writing the report.

?Waiting for Change?TIMEFebruary 4, 2013

?Lower Oil Prices Strike at Heart of Canada?s Oil Sands Production?NY TimesFebruary 2, 2015

2-1Waiting for Change

The article states, ?The penny represents 60% of the Mint?s coin volume and absorbs a proportional share of Mint fixed overhead costs. Without the penny, the costs for all other coins would increase significantly?

1.Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain in detail to support your answer.

2.Do you believe the production of the U.S. penny should be discontinued? Provide your argument considering not only the cost but also other factors, such as economy, business, politics, etc.

2-2Lower Oil Prices Strike at Heart of Canada?s Oil Sands Production

The article states, ?It really makes no economic sense to bring down production at this point because most of the costs are sunk.?

1.Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain in detail to support your answer.

Save Include when saving: HTML Full Text (when available) HTML link(s) to article(s) Standard Field Format Detailed Citation and Abstract Citation Format Customized Field Format For information on saving full text, see online help. For information on using Citation Formats, see online citation help Save WAITING FOR CHANGE. Title: Authors: SANBURN, JOSH Source: Time. 2/4/2013, Vol. 181 Issue 4, p3640. 4p. Document Type: Article S u b j e c t s : COINAGE United States AMERICAN coins JARDEN Zinc Products (Company) ZINC industry United States SPECIAL interest groups (Associations) NICKEL (Coin) Ab The article discusses the economic aspects of manufacturing U.S. one cent coins, which are worth less than the cost of production. Topics include Canada's decision to stop circulating one cent coins in 2013, the political influence of special interest groups largely funded by zinc manufacturer Jarden Zinc Products in Greeneville, Tennessee which supplies the penny blanks used to mint one cent coins in the U.S., and the possible issues in eliminating pennies from circulation, including greater reliance on the nickel. 1180 1977 0040781X 85504546 Middle Search Plus http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uakr on.edu:2048/eds/detail/detail?sid=91dcc18331a14f0491c8 5f0444bf5f89%40sessionmgr104&vid=0&hid=112&bdata=JnNp dGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#AN=85504546&db=mih PlumPrint Choose Language WAITING FOR CHANGE Contents 1. THE 1 COIN, LONG DERIDED AS OBSOLETE, HAS NEVER BEEN MORE THREATENEDYET AMERICA STILL WON'T LET THE PENNY DROP 2. PENNYWISE OR PENNYFOOLISH? 3. COMMON CENTS 4. NICKELED TO DEATH 5. THE MINT'S CONDITION 6. HOW CHANGE IS CHANGING 7. HOW WOULD THE U.S. GET RID OF THE PENNY? 8. STEP 1 9. STEP 2 10. STEP 3 11. STEP 4 Listen NATION THE 1 COIN, LONG DERIDED AS OBSOLETE, HAS NEVER BEEN MORE THREATENEDYET AMERICA STILL WON'T LET THE PENNY DROP THERE IS A 350,000SQ.FT. ZINC PLANT a few miles outside Greeneville, Tenn., with a distinctive claim, but you wouldn't know it if you happened to pass by. Only the company's website offers a clue about its unique role in the U.S. economy: "Jarden Zinc Products manufacturing facilities and technically trained, experienced employees are the first choice of many countries, including the United States." Since 1982, Jarden has been the U.S. government's exclusive supplier of penny blanks the metal discs that become 1 coins. The relationship has been good for the company, which, since 2000, has recorded more than $800 million in revenue from federal contracts, the majority of which are nobid, according to USAspending.gov. The currency Jarden helps produce, however, hasn't fared as well. The value of the penny has been dropping for decades. In 1913, the coin had almost 25 times the purchasing power it does today, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It reached something of a tipping point in 2006, the first year it took more than a penny to make a penny. It now costs 2 to produce a 1 coin. The skewed production costs combined with the increasing use of debit, credit and mobile payments have led many countries to stop issuing 1 coins altogether. Canada, which has a currency model similar to the U.S.'s, will become the latest to do so when it ends penny circulation on Feb. 4. In his 2013 budget, President Obama proposed exploring changes to the composition of the penny to save money. Given the penny's high production costs and declining utility, is the time finally right to get rid of it? That will depend, in part, on whether the Canadian experiment proves successful, the reach of a lobbying group and the value of the U.S.'s second cheapest coin. PENNYWISE OR PENNYFOOLISH? IN HIS FOURDECADE CAREER, Raymond Lombra has done significant research on the Federal Reserve and U.S. monetary policy. But the Penn State University economist's work on the penny seems to be the only thing people want to talk to him about. In 1990, Lombra presented a study before the Senate Banking Committee analyzing what would happen to prices without the penny, a scenario that would force consumers to round up or down to the nearest nickel. The study was commissioned by Americans for Common Cents (ACC), a propenny lobbying group funded largely by Jarden. Lombra's analysis of 10,000 retail transactions found that prices tended to be rounded up because many of them ended in a 9. Therefore, Lombra testified, the move would impose a "rounding tax" on consumers that could total as much as $1.5 billion (in 1990 dollars) over a fiveyear period. Other experts dispute Lombra's conclusions. A 2006 study of nearly 200,000 conveniencestore transactions by Wake Forest University economist Robert Whaples found that customers did not pay more when prices were rounded to the nearest nickel. In fact, Whaples contends that getting rid of the penny could save $730 million per year by eliminating the time customers and cashiers deal with the coin in cash transactions. At the time of Lombra's report, the penny was still making a profit for the government through seigniorage, a funny word for the difference between the value of currency and its production cost. In 1990, it cost about 0.6 to make each penny, which meant the U.S. earned 0.44: in seigniorage. That profit disappeared in 2006, and penny production has been costing the government ever since. This is partly due to higher metal costs. In 1982, zinc replaced more expensive copper as the primary metal in pennies. But zinc prices have risen over the years, all but negating the earlier cost savings. These are among the reasons it is so difficult to find an economist who argues for keeping the penny even Lombra, to whom Time was referred by the propenny camp. "If somebody said to me, Is there a point at which it would be rational to get rid of the penny?" Lombra says. "Well, of course! If the benefits of getting rid of the penny are in the neighborhood of what the costs are, that's sufficient." COMMON CENTS PENNIES ARE BIG BUSINESS IN GREENE COUNTY, TENNESSEE, where Jarden employs about 200 people. Though the company manufactures coin blanks for 30 other countries, U.S. pennies make up a substantial chunk of its business. It's Mark Weller's job to keep it that way. The executive director of ACC, Weller is the public face of the publicityaverse zinc industry's campaign to preserve the penny. Jarden has given $1.2 million to the lobbying group since 2006 and last year doubled its annual contribution to $280,000, a good value by corporatelobbying standards. Weller's argument for keeping the penny boils down to three points: without the penny we would become more reliant on the nickel, which has its own issues; charities, dependent on penny drives, wouldn't be able to raise as much money; and a poll released last year shows most Americans don't want to get rid of the penny. The poll, commissioned by ACC, found that about twothirds of Americans support keeping the penny, and not for nostalgic reasons. The respondents feared that eliminating the penny would lead to the sort of rounding tax Lombra detailed in his study. But dozens of countries over the years have gotten rid of their lowestdenomination coins without raising prices for consumers. Charities don't seem too concerned about the potential impact either. Weller cites the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society's Pennies for Patients campaign as an example of a cause that would be hurt by the absence of the penny, but the society says its drives bring in millions even without the 1 coin. The Salvation Army, another organization with lots of coin donations, is similarly unfazed. "If pennies were to be removed from circulation, the Salvation Army hopes the American public will continue to donate generously, to help people in need," says Major George Hood, the group's community relations and development secretary. But Weller does have one strong argument for keeping the penny, and that's the problem with the nickel. ONE PENNY COSTS TWO PENNIES TO MINT NICKELED TO DEATH UNLIKE THE U.S., CANADA IS doing something about its skewed pennyproduction costs. In March 2012, the Canadian government announced it would no longer distribute pennies, which cost 1.6 to make, and it estimates that it will save $4 million a year as a result. The government even made a point of saying it would work with charities that rely on pennies for fundraising activities. Without the 1 coin, Canada believes it will need to produce more nickels. "We don't know the number, but there will be an increase," says the Royal Canadian Mint's Christine Aquino, referring to how many 5 coins will be minted after the penny is eliminated. That happened in Australia, which gradually increased its nickel production after scrapping the penny in 1990. Each nickel costs the U.S. Mint 10 to make. If eliminating the penny led to a greater reliance on nickels, then wouldn't that be trading one bad value for another? Franois Velde, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, thinks so. He proposes getting rid of the penny and the nickel, forcing cash transactions to be rounded to the nearest dime. His plan does, however, call for preserving the denominations as price points for debit, credit and mobile payments. Those noncash transactions, after all, are a primary reason for the declining utility of the penny. THE MINT'S CONDITION ONE THING BOTH SIDES IN THE PENNY DEBATE CAN AGREE on is that the costs of minting U.S. coins dropped in 2012, the first time that has happened in several years. There was still no positive seigniorage on pennies or nickels, but the combined effect of a slight dip in metal prices and new efficiencies at U.S. Mint plants in Denver and Philadelphia eased production costs. It also focused attention on operations at the Mint. According to a study of 2011 figures by consulting firm Navigant that was conducted when a penny cost 2.4 to make, the Mint bought each penny blank for 1.1, meaning 1.3 per penny went to strictly fixed production costs at the Mint. If the penny were eliminated, the study says, those fixed labor and distribution costs would be shifted to the production of other coins, raising their minting costs. Had the nickel replaced the penny that year, the report suggests, it would have cost the Mint almost $11 million. "The penny represents 60% of the Mint's coin volume and absorbs a proportional share of Mint fixed overhead costs," Jarden president Tom Wennogle said via email. "Without the penny, the costs for all other coins would increase significantly." Mint spokesman Michael White disputes the report's findings, saying the costs to produce the penny don't relate to the production of other coins. "You're dealing with different metals, a different alloy. The cost to produce the penny isn't directed toward the nickel," he says. As Obama urged in his budget proposal, the Mint could explore using cheaper metals. Steel, which was used instead of copper during World War II, is less expensive than zinc and is used by other countries for coinage. But with twothirds of all instore purchases now made with debit or credit cards, it will only get harder for penny advocates to defend their coin no matter what it's made of. "I think we're closer today than we were then," says Lombra, the Penn State economist, comparing the current prospect of eliminating the penny with 23 years ago, when he first testified in front of Congress. "Clearly it's something becoming less important over time. There are lots of reasons why it has survived, including historical and maybe cultural. But it's also pretty clear at some point that the economics are going to overtake it and Congress, with a lag, will probably recognize it." That perspective may not be exactly why ACC turned to Lombra back in 1990, but it's a sign of just how bad things have gotten for the penny. IT COSTS THE U.S. MINT 10 TO MAKE EACH NICKEL HOW CHANGE IS CHANGING Canada minted its final PENNY on May 4, 2012, and will withdraw the coin from circulation on Feb. 4. The penny's elimination will save about $4 million a year Each U.S. NICKEL costs about 10 to produce. Without the penny, it's possible that increased demand would force the U.S. Mint to boost nickel production Minting a TRILLIONDOLLAR COIN would give the U.S. Treasury enough seigniorage to avoid issuing new debt. But the Treasury and the Fed have rejected the proposal ILLUSTRATION BY TIME HOW WOULD THE U.S. GET RID OF THE PENNY? STEP 1 After approval from Congress, the U.S. Mint would slow penny production and eventually halt all minting of the coin and its distribution to Federal Reserve Banks STEP 2 The federal government would begin advising businesses and consumers on how to conduct cash transactions without pennies, which would likely include rounding up or down to the nearest nickel on the final bill of sale. Businesses would still use the penny as a price point for creditand debitcard purchases. The coin would remain legal tender meaning you could still use any pennies you had. STEP 3 After giving businesses time to train employees on conducting transactions without the coin, the government would begin taking pennies out of circulation by collecting them from financial institutions. Individuals could redeem pennies at banks. STEP 4 Pennies would likely be melted down and sold for their zinc and copper, which could yield millions of dollars for federal coffers. Photographs by Moyra Davey ~~~~~~~~ By JOSH SANBURN Time Inc., 2013. All rights reserved. No part of this material may be duplicated or redisseminated without permission. Detailed Record HTML Full Text Related Information Tools Print Email Save Cite Export Permalink Share Listen Translate The link https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/03/busines s/energy-environment/lower-oil-prices-strikeat-heart-of-oil-sands-production.html?_r=1 SECTIONSHOMESEARCH SKIP TO CONTENTSKIP TO NAVIGATIONVIEW MOBILE VERSION ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT |Lower Oil Prices Strike at Heart of Canada's Oil Sands Production Share Tweet Email More Subscribe Save LOG INSETTINGS 1. 1. How Retiring Nuclear Power Plants May Undercut U.S. Climate Goals 2. Scientists Praise Energy Innovation Office Trump Wants to Shut Down 3. On Nuclear Waste, Finland Shows U.S. How It Can Be Done 4. 5. A Stagnant General Electric Will Replace the C.E.O. Who Transformed It 6. Settlements for Company Sins Can No Longer Aid Other Projects, Sessions Says 7. Drivers Head Into Summer With a Gift at the Gas Pump 8. Exxon Mobil Calls Emissions Inquiry a 'Political Witch Hunt' 9. Digging the Graveyard of Oil's Past 10. In Trump Country, Renewable Energy Is Thriving 11. Canada's Strategy on Climate Change: Work With American States 12. The U.S. Won't Actually Leave the Paris Climate Deal Anytime Soon 13. Donald J. Vidrine, Supervisor on Ill-Fated Deepwater Horizon Rig, Dies at 69 14. 5 Arab Nations Move to Isolate Qatar, Putting the U.S. in a Bind 15. After Initial Jolt Over Qatar Tensions, Energy Markets Settle 16. SPECIAL REPORT: ENERGY FOR TOMORROW Mixed Fortunes for Nuclear Power 17. THE GETAWAY Greening Your Summer Vacation 18. Can China Take the Lead on Climate Change? That Could Be Difficult 19. Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron Unite Behind Paris Accord 2. Loading... ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT Advertisement ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT Lower Oil Prices Strike at Heart of Canada's Oil Sands Production By IAN AUSTENFEB. 2, 2015 Continue reading the main storyShare This Page Share Tweet Email More Save Video Oil Prices' 'Spectrum of Pain' As the price of crude oil fluctuates, why some countries are faring much better than others. By Quynhanh Do on Publish DateJanuary 27, 2015. Photo by Carlos Garcia Rawlins/Reuters.Watch in Times Video Embed Share Tweet OTTAWA For as long as 400-ton dump trucks have been rumbling around the open pit mines of Canada's oil sands, crews from Kal Tire have been on hand to replace and repair their $70,000, 13-foot diameter tires. But the relationship, going back over a decade, didn't spare the company when oil prices began plummeting. Dan Allan, the senior vice president of Kal's mining tire unit, said that customers immediately began looking for price concessions. Others asked Kal to withdraw personnel from some sites or swiftly canceled plans to add more maintenance crews. \"We're sort of caught at the sharp end of the spear,\" said Mr. Allan, who is now looking to relocate some employees. \"It's really difficult.\" Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Continue reading the main story Canada's oil sands and the 167 billion barrels of reserves prompted an unprecedented expansion over the last decade. But the roughly $155 billion spending spree left the industry with unusually high production costs. Now, oil sands operators are scrambling to limit the damage, as crude prices hover near seven-year lows. Suncor, the largest oil sands operator, announced plans to eliminate about 1,000 contract jobs. Shell Canada said it would cut its oil sands work force by about 10 percent. Cenovus Energy said that it would reduce investment spending by 27 percent, and set aside plans for two oil sands project expansions. A camp for workers in Northern Alberta, the heart of the oil sands, was permanently closed and another was temporarily shut. Several proposed oil sands projects and expansions are under review or have been deferred. Photo An oil sands operation near Fort McMurray, Alberta, last September. Production costs are high in the oil sands, and low oil prices are a threat to profitability. CreditTodd Korol/Reuters The cuts, though, won't necessarily translate into lower production. Oil sands production is expected to increase by 25 percent, to 4.8 million barrels a day, according to January estimates by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, partly because of new projects moving into production. The enormous projects are just too difficult to switch off, and the companies must keep pumping crude to cover the sizable debt on their multibillion-dollar investments. They also don't want to cede market share to producers in other countries. Imperial Oil, which is controlled by Exxon Mobil, said on Monday that fourth-quarter earnings dropped by 36 percent. Even so, the company plans to start production at two new oil sands projects this year. \"It really makes no economic sense to bring down production at this point because most of the costs are sunk,\" said Stewart Glickman, an energy equity analyst with S&P Capital IQ Equity. While production may keep humming along, the big question is whether oil sands producers can break even at current prices. An oil sands project takes five to 10 years to design and build, and they have a life span of 25 to 50 years. Fort Hills, a project now under construction in a partnership led by Suncor, has a budget of 13.5 billion Canadian dollars (about $10.7 billion). Once such projects are up and running, the expenses are significant, given the process needed to get the oil-laden bitumen from the ground. It must either be dug up or blasted from under the ground using steam. Two energy-hungry steps are then needed to separate the bitumen from the sand and to turn it into usable oil known as synthetic crude. A frequently cited study prepared for the United States State Department's review of the Keystone XL pipeline estimated that many oil sands projects become unprofitable at prices of $65 to $75 a barrel. Prices are now below $50. RELATED COVERAGE OF OIL AND ITS ECONOMIC IMPACT But the State Department review, which was released in January 2014, doesn't necessarily account for the changing environment. Andrew Leach, an economist and professor of energy policy at the University of Alberta, said that the American figure inflated the break-even point by including a 12 percent profit margin for oil producers. The drop in the Canadian dollar has also provided an added cushion for domestic oil companies that are paid for their products in the now more valuable American currency. When those factors are combined, Mr. Leach said, \"you're looking at a reduction of the growth rate at current prices, a stall.\" He estimates that the production cost for synthetic crude from the major open pit mine projects is $31 to $39 a barrel, at current exchange rates. He added, though, that a few projects with production problems had much higher costs. Newsletter Sign Up Continue reading the main story DealBook DealBook delivers the news driving the markets and the conversation. Delivered weekday mornings and afternoons. Sign Up You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services. SEE SAMPLE PRIVACY POLICY OPT OUT OR CONTACT US ANYTIME The industry thinking, he said, is, \"I'm willing to burn through cash on this project because in the long term it will be worth it.\" As a result, most oil sands operators are reviewing future projects rather than considering production cuts or stopping projects already under construction. They are also looking to cut costs as swiftly as possible. \"Nobody in the oil industry feels very secure,\" said Ken Smith, president of the Unifor union local that represents about 3,600 Suncor employees who operate the giant dump trucks and excavators. \"We're kind of at the mercy of these big players like the Saudis and Russia.\" Mr. Smith said he believed that none of Suncor's 1,000 layoffs would involve his members. Sneh Seetal, a spokeswoman for Suncor, said the company had yet to determine the specifics, but noted that it would involve a mix of contract positions and employees spread across the company's domestic operations, which include refining and gasoline retailing. Companies in supporting roles such as suppliers for safety boots and cleaning services are feeling the most immediate squeeze. Photo A Suncor oil sands mining operation near Fort McMurray, Alberta. Such enormous projects are difficult to switch off. CreditTodd Korol/Reuters The Fort McMurray branch of Finning International, a Caterpillar dealer that sold many of the $5 million to $6 million heavy-haul dump trucks, recently laid off about 60 workers. At the end of December, Civeo, which is based in Houston, said it was mothballing an oil sands work housing complex with 2,005 rooms and was permanently closing another with 510. Trevor Haynes, the president and chief executive of the Black Diamond Group, another supplier of work housing based in Calgary, Alberta, said he was not yet being pressured to cut rates by oil companies and did not expect to have to close any of the housing in the oil sands. But that does not mean that he is sanguine. \"It comes down to one word, which is 'uncertainty,' \" Mr. Haynes said. \"Those of us who have been around awhile have seen these periods before, so it feels familiar, if vaguely disconcerting.\" His main concern is that new construction projects may be indefinitely postponed. If so, he plans to fill the void by supplying housing to proposed liquefied natural gas plants in British Columbia as well as that province's recently announced plan to build a major hydroelectric dam. Not everyone is upset or worried about the slowdown in the oil sands. Melissa Blake, the mayor of the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo, which includes Fort McMurray and most of the major oil sands sites, said she welcomed it. After trying to keep up with a population increase of more than 125 percent since 2000, Ms. Blake said, Fort McMurray needs a break. \"The past few years have been just been catching up with the growth we've had,\" the mayor said. \"There's a bit of an advantage from having a less robust industry.\" A break, Ms. Blake, said should allow the community's infrastructure to finally catch up with its growth. Ms. Blake said she had seen no obvious signs of a slowdown around town, like emptier stores and restaurants. But that, she said, is probably because most of the 79,000 full-time residents of Fort McMurray are in less vulnerable jobs. That's probably not the case, she acknowledged, for about 39,000 people who fly in to work on oil sands projects but make their homes elsewhere, often on the other side of Canada. But Ms. Blake acknowledged that if the slump in prices proved to be sustained, few would escape its effects. \"There's going to have to be a real battening down of the hatches,\" she said. A version of this article appears in print on February 3, 2015, on Page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: A Sinking Feeling. Order Reprints| Today's Paper| Subscribe Continue reading the main story FROM OUR ADVERTISERS TRENDING 1. Steve Scalise Among 4 Shot at Baseball Field; Suspect Is Dead 2. Virginia Shooting Suspect Was Distraught Over Trump's Election, Brother Says 3. Otto Warmbier Got an Extra Dose of Brutality From North Korea. The Mystery Is Why. 4. Trump Stews, Staff Steps In, and Mueller Is Safe for Now 5. Katy Perry Woke Up. She Wants to Tell You All About It. 6. Op-Ed Contributor: London Fire Shows Why Britons Don't Trust the System 7. Fox News Drops 'Fair and Balanced' Motto 8. Contributing Op-Ed Writer: I Thought I Understood America. Then Came Trump. 9. Op-Ed Columnist: The Mortification of Jeff Sessions 10. Fire at Grenfell Tower in London Kills at Least 12 View More Trending Stories What's Next Loading... Go to Home Page SITE INDEXTHE NEW YORK TIMES Site Index Navigation NEWS World U.S. Politics N.Y. Business Tech Science Health Sports Education Obituaries Today's Paper Corrections OPINION Today's Opinion Op-Ed Columnists Editorials Contributing Writers Op-Ed Contributors Opinionator Letters Sunday Review Taking Note Room for Debate Public Editor Video: Opinion ARTS Today's Arts Art & Design Books Dance Movies Music N.Y.C. Events Guide Television Theater Video: Arts LIVING Automobiles Crossword Food Education Fashion & Style Health Jobs Magazine N.Y.C. Events Guide Real Estate T Magazine Travel Weddings & Celebrations LISTINGS & MORE Classifieds Tools & Services Times Topics Public Editor N.Y.C. Events Guide Blogs Multimedia Photography Video NYT Store Times Journeys Subscribe Manage My Account SUBSCRIBE Home Delivery Digital Subscriptions Crossword Email Newsletters Alerts Gift Subscriptions Corporate Subscriptions Education Rate Mobile Applications Replica Edition Site Information Navigation 2017 The New York Times Company Home Search Accessibility concerns? Email us at accessibility@nytimes.com. We would love to hear from you. Contact Us Work With Us Advertise Your Ad Choices Privacy Terms of Service Terms of Sale Site Information Navigation Site Map Help Site Feedback Subscriptions Go to the next story 9 ARTICLES REMAINING The Times Sale. 50% off for one year. SUBSCRIBE NOW Subscriber login Without investigative reporting, we might never know the truth. The Times Sale. Get 50% off for one year. 9 articles remaining this month Discover all that The Times has to offer SEE MY OPTIONS Already a subscriber? Login