I guess you're right. I didn't think of it that way. But you know there was this subtext of the post that was a criticism of how SV works as far as sane investments go and I think if you apply Groupon to that it makes sense. Groupon is the kind of company that is unsustainable yet has been allowed to grow so large through investment even though any sane person knows they're hemmoraging money. He definitely should have picked a company based in SV but I still get his point.
I mean I got the point of what the author is referencing and agree with some of his points about the Valley being an echo chamber. However it can not be considered a Silicon Valley darling unless one wants to admit that success (I think that Groupon is, but I will accept that many don't think so) is somehow only associated with the area. I guess that is why I felt the need to point out that Groupon is not based in SF.
Edit: clarifying success reference to be clear that I mean I think that Groupon is a success and not that I think that success must be associated with SF