That's such a failed methodology.
It's a pity I don't have the time, the energy or the english language aknowledgement to prove it. But I think it suffices to mention that you somehow already know it when you say "Yes, this is only a quantitative measurement...".
Not only is quantitative: its only one of the there hundreds of quantitative indicators on which we could rely on, not to mention qualitative. You also forget many decisions you made that have a huge impact on the result (words chosen, period of time of significative importance chosen, source of measurement chosen).
I think what you did was very valuable (coming up with the idea of googling the companies in order to have a indicator of how things worked for N, MS and S). But you are wrong when you try to convince us that your methodology is flawless and there's no point in discussing which the "winner" of E3 was.
As someone before said, I clicked in order to read "everyone".
