What really irks me is quibbling about headlines that are technically inaccurate, but are actually just common everyday usage that everyone understands perfectly well not to take literally. Comments like that have deeply negative value and drive me up the wall. In this case though I think I agree with the criticism, in everyday usage "a fraction of" is generally taken to mean quite a small fraction, which this isn't.

Another commenter is applying the literal definition of fraction to argue the title is accurate, and quite rightly getting downvoted into oblivion for it. Everybody (who is a native English speaker) knows very well what this phrase is taken to mean in everyday English.

> rather than the actual meat of the content

To be fair, there isn't much "meat" in that article, it's mainly about the price - and I guess most would agree that when we hear the word "fraction" used like that we don't think about 73/100.

If you were told you could get a laptop at a fraction of the cost on Black Friday, and the fraction turned out to be 98/100; wouldn't you be somewhat confused?

Well what is the meat of the content? The article says they are a bit cheaper, overstates by how much and does not put that in relation to any measure of performance.

"Lada Cost a Fraction of Bentley" thank you very much.