[viscanti]

I disagree. You need to solve a problem you're passionate about. Not all problems are BIG problems that require massive scale or raising money.

Lifestyle startups aren't a myth. They're just working on a different scale of problem than the VC backed startup. I don't know that there's anything inherently better about either, but treating a lifestyle startup as a scalable startup, or vice versa is a mistake. They're separate entities, with different goals. Each has it's pros and cons.

[dmor]

some businesses are just businesses, not startups, and thats ok.

[viscanti]

I suppose our definition of "startup" differs. It seems a startup can only be a startup if it's attempting to solve a problem that requires significant upfront capital and scaling. I disagree with that view.

For me, a startup is a company exploring the solution to a problem. That can be a BIG problem and that requires significant scaling, or it can be a smaller problem. Once that solution is found, and can be replicated easily, it's no longer a startup.

The question is, how long can a startup be a startup? I'd argue that as soon as any scaling is involved, it's no longer a startup and it's just a business. Startup implies that it's the start. Lifestyle businesses and regular businesses can both be guilty of claiming to be a startup long after they've become "regular" businesses.

When it comes down to it, they're all just businesses, but it can be helpful to have terms to distinguish the scale of the business. If you feel that lifestyle businesses and lifestyle startups are diminishing the prestige of startups, then you're probably in business for the wrong reason. That smacks of too much ego and too little passion for solving the problems you should be solving.

[potatolicious]

Reading this thread, I can't help but have the thought:

We're really arguing about semantics. This is the definition "startup" in the Silicon Valley echo chamber vs. the definition of "startup" everywhere else in the world.

Sometimes I rather dislike the term - it seems to, at least in a small way, justify the bubblicious way many companies in our field are run, particularly in the Valley. Can you imagine saying to someone "I run my own business" and then be unable to answer "so what do you drive revenue from"?

It seems to me in this community there's a tendency to believe that "startup" businesses (as SV likes to define it) somehow transcend the traditional rules of business, and this quibbling over nomenclature doesn't help at all. By believing that you're "not just like those antiquated 'businesses'", you're more liable to, well, do things like run a company without a plan for revenue.