I think this shows that static typing becomes more desirable and a better investment as size and complexity of a codebase - and company - grow. This might not be the same as evidence that starting with static typing is preferable.
To your earlier point, larger systems are harder to migrate. This suggests that starting off with an investment in static type systems is more tenable as a long-term strategy.
That's the catch, yes. All other things are very rarely equal. There are almost always other factors worth paying attention to when forming a long-term strategy. A handful that spring to mind are availability of talent, software runtime performance, schedule impact of static vs dynamic typing, and expected runway of the business.
Producing a statically typed system that runs slowly and correctly after the business has folded is not always more valuable than producing a buggy one in time to start producing revenue.