While interesting, I think journalists should try to avoid doing comparisons that are meaningless.

I stumbled upon:

"...Of those, 3,886 have been around for more than 200 years. As a point of comparison, only one in every four U.S. companies founded in 1994 was still operating in 2004..."

What is the relevance there? To me it sounds as useful as saying "as a point of comparison, only two in every 6 companies founded in 1978 where still open in 1986". Why that range? how does a company opened up in 1994 and closed in 2004 have to do with the 200-year companies? Wouldn't it be more useful to say "as comparison, only 4 US companies are 200-year old or more"?

Did I miss something here?