I read the two as "You don't need to be rich to be a founder" and "it's very beneficial to be rich to be a founder". This would be more analogous to "you don't

I read the two as "You don't need to be rich to be a founder" and "it's very beneficial to be rich to be a founder". This would be more analogous to "you don't need to be a man to be strong", rather than "women are stronger than men". I think PG's concern is if it's understood "you need to be rich to be a founder", then if you're not rich, you think it won't be possible to be a founder.