I find the two sources he mentions in his post rather irrelevant, given completely wrong impressions. Firstly, the absolute number of successes is not interest

I find the two sources he mentions in his post rather irrelevant, given completely wrong impressions. Firstly, the absolute number of successes is not interesting: if there 1-founder startups outnumber 2-founder startups by a factor of 10, then 1-founder startups are suddenly a lot less likely to succeed. Secondly, both lists list not just successful, but a very limited set of extremely successful startups. These lists tell you nothing about your chances of being the next Dropbox. It's an entirely different category of companies.