Without dealing with the specific points made in the piece, I would argue that there is gap in understanding the premise of the piece.
The article starts with numbers but it is not a analysis of quantitative measures i.e. is it not a statistical analysis.
The article is an "outside-looking-in" qualitative argument with an attempt to support those quantitative arguments with quantitative values (this is called competitive intelligence in some circles).
In other words, it should be read as an "opinion piece" with some numbers in it: the numbers are not the point, the (subjective ) opinions are the point.
I get it that numbers can be used to make a point either way (i.e. the author could use "confusion about numbers" as way to make a point while there really isn't any confusion ) but the points I would take away from the argument about numbers are:
- the fundamental premise behind putting the numbers in the piece is to make the point that they are not the same numbers that:
i) the org has put out in the past
and
ii) other similar businesses have used and continue to use
To quote the author:
"When a company starts playing weird games with how it reports user activity, something is going very, very wrong. In general, when a company starts trying to obfuscate the true numbers about its revenue, growth, or profit, it’s a bad sign."