Recently the Deseret News published an article by Joe Costanzo concerning the Utah Foundation's erroneous golf report. Costanzo reported that Mike Christensen, of the Utah Foundation, did not feel that the erroneous figures furnished to the foundation would alter their conclusion. This brings a couple of questions to my mind:
1. Why would the Utah Foundation stand behind a report based upon false data?2. Why would Mike Christensen feel that a $2,677,000 cash loss in the last 18 months (July 1992 to December 1993) would suggest a "bright future"?
Calvin C. Whitehead
Salt Lake City