I don't think this is valid anymore. The author states that team is more important than product. However, if you have a great team you will always have a great product. If you have a bad team, you will never have a good product. For that reason, team = product, so product is removed from the equation.

Then you have these three statements

1. When a great team meets a lousy market, market wins

This is probably true, since a great team can win in any market, no matter how small - or they simply open a new market.

2. When a lousy team meets a great market, market wins.

I don't think this is correct as this is not the case for 99 out of 100 startups and it normally only holds true in really, really strong markets. However, in most cases, a lousy team means a lousy product, means no product market fit.

As an example you can take Facebook. Insane market, however, it took an extremely good team, in our case Mark Zuckerberg with a unique launch strategy to finally open that market of social networks.

3. When a great team meets a great market, something special happens.

This holds true and this basically happened with Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, Instagram and all of the unicorn startups.