No, it doesn't, because you're ignoring all the physics required to get the mass into a small enough region so that it will collapse to form a black hole. The only way to make that happen that we know works is to form massive stars, where a fraction of the star's mass, in the center of the star, will eventually form a black hole. But the largest stars we know of have masses of ~ 200 times the Sun, and so can't form black holes more than a fraction of that.
If you imagine a more massive gas cloud collapsing under its own gravity, it will fragment into subclumps before getting very dense; these subclumps will themselves fragment or go on to form stars directly, but with an upper limit of, say, ~ 200 solar masses.
(It's possible that if you start with a cloud of pristine gas in the early universe -- nothing but hydrogen and helium -- that it might collapse to form a single supermassive star, or even a black hole directly. That might give you something like a 1000-solar-mass black hole. But that's still fairly speculative, and requires unusual conditions that don't exist generally.)
This certainly does not follow from the rest of your comment. I'm pretty sure it's false.
Mind you, I don't know if this actually works. What was the density of the early universe, compared to the density required to form a black hole? How large were the fluctuations? Is this scenario plausible at all?
I suppose that if you go back close enough to the big bang, then you can get a density high enough. But then, if you go back not much farther, shouldn't the whole universe have formed a black hole? And if it didn't, can we trust the logic that says that the situation should have led to the formation of giant black holes?
Based on your previous sentence would it not be the opposite?
As I understand, a BH is a singularity, so all mass is at one point which means all BHs have the same (infinite) density.
Is it a kind of "virtual density", e.g. the mass of the singularity devided by the schwarzschild radius or the event horizon?
Singularity is a result of applying a theory of relativity in a case where we know relativity doesn't work, so it's unlikely it's real.
The event horizon is a three-dimensional null hypersurface, though, encompassing a four-dimensional spacetime "volume". You are probably referring to the two-dimensional apparent horizon, which depends on the spatial slicing.