I guess any study of what the 'survivors' did could inevitably be accused of survivorship bias, but IMO the framing of the article itself manages to avoid it, it's mostly just listing the growth strategies that these companies had and stays away from any claims that others will be successful by implementing them.
If we had 1,000,000 apps using the same tactics but in the end only 10 get successful would think the tactics had anything to do with the success of the 10?
You have to look at the losers too.
Nobody claimed that these strategies guarantees getting a global audience. What in the article would you claim is survivorship bias? Just looking at survivors doesn't automatically lead to survivorship bias, it is a good strategy if you just want to find a bunch of strategies that has worked rather than trying to gauge how likely they are to work.
