It's not apples and oranges, though. He's saying commercial publishing is the wrong way to go because you won't get good royalties. Commercial publishing includes print editions--it's one of the advantages. You can get a print book and that print book can end up in bookstores. A lot of commercially published ebooks are still selling for higher than $.99 ~$2.99.
He isn't saying commercial epublishing is wrong. He's saying you should go with a publisher in general because you'll just get ripped off. And that's completely disregarding the fact that if you get published by a big publisher, you'll almost always get a print edition, and those come with higher price points and higher sales, meaning you'll still be making the same amount or more in royalties as the average self-publisher, and you'll make more overall.
I mention print specifically, as well, because the 10% on net is closer to the statement you hear often regarding mass market or trade paperbacks which can get royalties of 10%of gross. I don't think I've ever seen 10% as a number for an ebook being published by a big commercial publisher. Those are more likely to be on net, but they're also bigger numbers.
So either he made it up entirely and is completely full of shit and knows it, or he is misquoting an oft-heard statement that paperback print books only get 10% royalties. If I give him the benefit of the doubt and he's not just a Lying McLieface, he's actually talking about print himself. If he's just lying for the sake of lying, it doesn't make a bit of difference either way.