if it got past the editor.
And this is the crux of the point. It is more likely (but I admit, not certain), that the higher ranked the journal, the higher the quality of the AE team. I've had some long and in-depth debates with editors about my own papers. Generally, those at the higher end journals are happier to take a step back and make a more considered view, often contradicting a reviewer if what they've written is clearly bollocks, and then suggesting the appropriate improvements to make the MS acceptable.
Conversely, at 'lower' journals (still not OA though), I've had papers chucked out where it's clear the reviewer has made a fundamental mistake, and actually had more success at a higher impact outlet. It is a lottery, but on the whole, it works. And in the end, my view is only n=1, regardless of my own anecdotal experience of the process.