Whom to believe: B2C or ForbesIndia or Firstpost on Sorry Forbes India And Firstpost, Cocoberry Has Yet Not Cracked Social Media

I was reading a post on B2C, Business2Community which reads "Sorry Forbes India And Firstpost, Cocoberry Has Yet Not Cracked Social Media". Quoting the post:

But a recent article that was posted initially at Forbes India by Shravan Bhat and later was posted in Firstpost (with a small change in the title) claimed that the frozen yoghurt chain Cocoberry, with just 25 outlets across India, has cracked social media and earned more than 2.1 million fans on Facebook. The article also claimed that Cocoberry is the biggest frozen yogurt brand on Facebook and placing them in the top 30 food brands (and in the top 5 ice cream/dessert brands) on Facebook worldwide. The article however, forgot to provide a link about the 30 food brands and other tall claims which sounded quite exciting initially and deserved a like or a retweet. But alas if you go into more details the article does not stop at tall claims; it has come out with weird metrics that in no way prove Cocoberry has cracked social media.

We did our research (Thanks to Omkar for his contributions) on the matter as we understand it better and we have two bold reasons to prove the claims made at Firstpost and Forbes India about Cocoberry, have been made without any research and understanding about social media (number of fans and regular posting are no more the only metrics to decide the success of a brand on social media.)

 To check the claims made by Shravan Bhat on Forbes India and on Firstpost, my clicky finger clicked on the links provided in otherwords the hyperlinks on Forbes India and Firstpost. And then I got "Something's gone awry!".

 Now, I'm left with Firstpost;

What do I do? A claim which has no evidence. Both the links are gone! 404! Period.

Its like watching a slugfest with no only one person and the opponent missing.

Google has it all! Here comes the google cache to our rescue. I don't know how long the cache will stay. But here is the bitly link of the google cache.
Forbes India post: http://bit.ly/ForbesIndia_link
Firstpost : http://bit.ly/11k0xes

 Now having both the evidence. The post claiming that the claim of a post is naive and without any thorough research. It makes me thinking.

First of all, the claims caught my attention because the links were removed. It may be that the earlier claims admit that they are wrong or they are forced to remove it. Second, the claim against the earlier claim appears to be interesting.

Now, Prashant Naidu who made the counter claim uses the tool Unmetric to back his claim. [so much of claim. claim . claim] where Unmetric happens to be the advertiser at his blog LighthouseInsights. This point has nothing to do with anything. I am just saying.

Facebook Fans per outlet: Well this sounds new. Why don't we have things like Fans per family. Fans per house etc. matching the virtual Facebook to real life. Comparing pages where most of their fans are from either outside India or even if India, sometimes pangkha online are not real world pangkha.