Or just call them startups if that's what they are. If someone is starting a business selling something then it's a startup, no matter how small initially.
What is the startup doing heartbeat generated art selling?
I agree 100% with OP, the term startup has been totally devalued by this trend towards ‘everything is a startup’, when a lot of things (such as some of these projects) would be better described, and I think receive better recognition, if they were considered cool projects or units of work.
Some of them may morph into businesses but it is disingenuous to try and call everything a startup.
I see it as part of a deeper trend where fake-it till you make it/style over substance world where ‘everyone is an entrepreneur’.
I get that some degree of faking it is necessary, maybe the product doesn’t exist, maybe elements of it are done by hand rather than automated, and clearly some degree of this is necessary. But too much of it as an ethos devalues the entire ‘innovation culture’
I've never seen a definition of a startup that I like. Here's my personal sniff test... To me, a business is an entity with paying customers. To me, a startup is an entity that wants paying customers before it has them, or has them now but once did not (and it remains a startup until people stop calling it that).
99% of business in this situation, you would never call a startup.
New law firm.
New dental office.
Your uncle started doing roofing, asks your little brother to work his summer off from Uni with him on roofing.
A new golf course installed in a coastal area.
A 50 new homes going up in the suburbs.
The empty spot on the corner is now a little corner store - beer, wine, chips.
New taco restaurant down the street.
Nobody is calling these situations (i.e. the vast majority of new business) 'startups. So clearly there is a kind of de-facto popular lexicon - and it's not 'startup'.
And many new businesses are just called new businesses. Like the guy who started selling modified skis at the ski resort. That's usually referred to as 'small business'.
A group of people doing some kind of new thing who are maybe not seeking funding but could possibly seek VC funding ... this is more in the realm of what we call 'startup', wherein there is generally a larger market opportunity, and possibly higher growth ... this is startup.
I'll add that the differentiating factor between a startup and a small business (or freelancer, contractor, etc.) is the ability to scale and do so quickly without increasing the company overhead, initially at least.
Wow, the Silicon Valley arrogance and echo chamber is real. It's not true that nobody is calling those situations startups. I am. So are the majority of people. And definitely so are the people who start those things. This is a helpful article for understanding the situation:
https://techcrunch.com/2010/03/06/replicators-innovators-and...
I'm quite sure that the dictionary definition is the one that most people will agree with. Silicon Valley did not create the word and so don't get jurisdiction over its definition. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/startup Words and language evolve over time according to usage. The word startup hasn't evolved to that point yet, despite what prominent tech investors and founders would say.
What does my comment have to do with the Silicon Valley?
I'm not even in the Silicon Valley, nor is is the observation of the popular usage of a term 'arrogant'. It just 'is'.
Nobody is calling a regular roofing company a startup. If said roofing company is doing something entirely different, and probably growing at an accelerated pace ... like developing a new kind of integrated tile and application process ... then maybe people would refer to this as a startup.
A law office can be a start-up. "I want to start up a law office." Words (in English) require context to have much meaning. Startup could certainly mean "investor fueled boom or bust hypergrowth ambition rocket" at a YC demo day. Or it can simply mean a company one started.
I'd argue that a trait shared by many startups is talking about themselves in the best light possible to get people focused on their future potential, and to me that leaves room for considering a bunch of mega success wannabes cranking out code on Twitch as startups in a startup competition. Shipping, failing fast, getting feedback, pitching... They all sound like startups to me, so that's what I'll call them. May the best startup win!
In general, a startup is a business that doesn't yet have a stable customer base or business model. What you're describing is a "tech startup", and the modifier often gets dropped in the tech press, for obvious reasons. The investment press also drops the modifier, because few other startups are interesting to them.
I agree and I think technology and scale also play a role. The law-tech company Atrium for example probably gets called a startup, and I think it is because it has high ambitions (nation-wide) and is tech-enabled.
I am sure that without ambition (i.e. just serving a single city) or without tech (i.e. just building one conventional law firm in every city) it would not be called a startup.
I dont see how nomadlist is a startup. I understand your want to redefine things, I myself am working on a small side-project indiestyle, but its not a startup.
I agree 100% with OP, the term startup has been totally devalued by this trend towards ‘everything is a startup’, when a lot of things (such as some of these projects) would be better described, and I think receive better recognition, if they were considered cool projects or units of work.
Some of them may morph into businesses but it is disingenuous to try and call everything a startup.
I see it as part of a deeper trend where fake-it till you make it/style over substance world where ‘everyone is an entrepreneur’.
I get that some degree of faking it is necessary, maybe the product doesn’t exist, maybe elements of it are done by hand rather than automated, and clearly some degree of this is necessary. But too much of it as an ethos devalues the entire ‘innovation culture’
My 2 c