The BBC respond (part 2)

Further to this and this I have received a conciliatory email:

'NewsOnline Complaints to me 15:48 (20 hours ago)

Dear anonymous correspondent.

I'm prepared to concede that the shorthand used in a headline doesn't outline the full detail.

In retrospect, we ought to have been more clear about the addition of longer term (up to 12 months liquidity) assets.

However, it is necessary to make some simplifications in these cases in the interests of understandability, otherwise every business news story could be dissolved into the splitting of hairs.

You could even argue about the use of the word 'cash' - as it is likely Apple has its money in the bank, as opposed to in piles of folding notes.

Similarly, the US government technically owns huge amounts of cash - currency in circulation.

At the other end of the equation - it is probably not very useful to the reader to make reference to assets such as Amtrak which are not easily liquidated and whose value is undetermined.

Please rest assured, your comments have been taken onboard, seriously. I will certainly be considering your points when next approaching an article of this nature.

Regards

Iain Mackenzie'

I could carry on 'splitting hairs' but I will settle for monitoring the accuracy of future business news.