Slightly confused; are you saying they should say they're more than 5 years old? 2009 was 5 years ago, and if that's when the company was founded, saying they're 5 years old makes sense.
The graph on the article is demarcated in months, leading me to believe they are indicating that Uber is exactly 5 years old.
Travis' LinkedIn says he has been working for Uber for: 6
years, 2 months
Crunchbase founding date of Uber (Mar 1, 2009): 6 years, 4 months ago
Last day of 2009 (conservatively based on Uber's about page): 5 years, 6 months ago
It is just very sloppy fact checking. They wanted to write the story about how Uber is the fastest growing company ever (which it very well might be), but they care much more about the headline than the facts. Again: this is one of the most successful companies of all time in terms of growth, and the tech press is still exaggerating it.
This is why you shouldn't compare yourself to the myths of other startup's success that are being written about by the press.
Travis' LinkedIn says he has been working for Uber for: 6 years, 2 months
Crunchbase founding date of Uber (Mar 1, 2009): 6 years, 4 months ago
Last day of 2009 (conservatively based on Uber's about page): 5 years, 6 months ago
It is just very sloppy fact checking. They wanted to write the story about how Uber is the fastest growing company ever (which it very well might be), but they care much more about the headline than the facts. Again: this is one of the most successful companies of all time in terms of growth, and the tech press is still exaggerating it.
This is why you shouldn't compare yourself to the myths of other startup's success that are being written about by the press.