I disagree that this article assumes that product prevalence has "no bearing at all". That would be silly. Rather, I think it merely demonstrates that product

I disagree that this article assumes that product prevalence has "no bearing at all". That would be silly. Rather, I think it merely demonstrates that product prevalence is not the only factor, and often not even the most important one. It dismisses the popular delusion that early success is all that is required to become an entrenched, inferior monopoly. When high profile figures with political influence fall prey to these delusions -- even in the face of contrary evidence -- it bears a detailed criticism.