I think that these figures are used for to promote a business / political / managerial agenda. They are not *neutral* for reasons mentioned above. Many bigger companies are either not revealing the direct links between their products and revenue - or if they do those numbers tend to be 'skewed' for political reasons - as to promote a specific agenda - for example to suggest that something is a bigger success than it might be - or to suggest that something is not as big failure as it might be recognized internally. I have also seen figures which were intended to promote a positive picture within a company internally so the *skewing* is not limited to descriptions for external parties. There are many ways to *adjust* numbers - for example manipulation of categories is one popular approach - what is and what is not included under any one headline - could come as a great surprise to many observers. The content of these categories may very well vary from year to year e.t.c. So to compare numbers from the same company from different years and the same category - might be rather *adventurous* - to say the least. I believe that there tends to be a need for more in-depth analysis and research into the background to such numbers - and I think that many observers (and reporters e.t.c.) are likely not to follow up on these matters - which is why *spin* is so prevalent. Obviously not all confusion is intentional - some could be lack of awareness and prejudiced for no explicit purpose.