This is a very interesting chain on how people interpret comments. To me (and you) it is obvious that GP only had one reason to mention Google (the 1.4 trillion valuation), but both the OP and the person you are responding to were convinced the GP "didn't get it". Fascinating.

Actually, it's certainly not "pretty clear".

The GP responded to each line in the original comment with a number. So, their point about Google (point #2) was seemingly unrelated to their point about Xiaomi's market cap (point #1) as they addressed different parts of the original comment.

The GP mentioned Google perhaps not because of the market cap mentioned in point #1, but rather as a response to the original comment's mention of American companies.

This is further evidenced by their use of point #3 to refer to the term oligarch, which was the third topic raised in the original comment.

You can see how not clear this is based on other replies to the comment as well.