If you read the comment again you'll notice pg doesn't claim the best companies are successful because they took funding, in fact the opposite, perhaps they too

If you read the comment again you'll notice pg doesn't claim the best companies are successful because they took funding, in fact the opposite, perhaps they took funding because they were so successful that they were offered terms they'd be crazy to turn down. Bottom line is some companies may be well suited to take outside funding early on, some might be better off bootstrapping to profitability, but it seems most successful companies in our industry do end up taking funding at some point in their lifetime for one reason or another. Much of the 37signals/anti-VC/whatever crowd fails to recognize that not all companies are created equal. Just because 37signals has done phenomenally well without outside funding (with the exception of Jeff Bezos' investment) doesn't mean that's the right path for all companies. Ditto for Google/Microsoft/etc which did take funding. It's slightly ironic because I don't think the 37signals themselves believe no company should ever take funding, rather they're fighting the perception that you must take funding to start your company.