Hacker News Reader

Comment by danieltillett | Hacker News Reader

I am going on a rant, but can we stop using the term lifestyle business for non-VC startups? Almost anything would be better - I came up with the term founder focused as an alternative [1], but almost anything would be better than the term lifestyle. A serious business is a serious business no matter the funding source.

1. http://www.tillett.info/2014/11/24/lets-kill-the-term-lifest...

View on HN

Not disagreeing with you in the slightest, but how about just calling them all "businesses" and adding the qualifier "VC-funded" if they've taken funding? It makes more sense to qualify based on VC funding, rather than lack there of, since taking venture capital is the exception in business, not the norm.

Terminology aside, Silicon Valley's argument that this is a what a real business looks like, not that, is ridiculous. They're all businesses. And if you really want to play that game, it's often the VC-funded startups that aren't "real" businesses (no profits, revenue, etc), not the derisively labeled "lifestyle" businesses.

I agree that having to preface the term business is stupid, but since this is the current terminology it is hard to get people to change back to just using business. Even the term startup is redundant as a startup is just a new business.

The problem is if you don’t preface then someone else will do it for you. Letting the VC industry choose the preface is not ideal - I don’t run a lifestyle business, I run a serious and highly profitable technology business with the aim of maximising my returns as the founder. The fact that I don’t have outside investors is irrelevant to what my business does or the value it offers my customers.

> Letting the VC industry choose the preface is not ideal

This actually touches on an important point. The whole reason that, "No no, that's not a real business," gets bandied around is because it benefits VCs. If founders think that they need to take VC money to assuage their insecurities about being a "real" business, that doesn't help the founders. It helps the VCs' deal flow.

The is exactly why I hate the term lifestyle business - it make it sound like you are running a beach bar on some tropical island.

With technological change the need for VC money is much less than the past. With a relatively small amount of money these days you can start and build a very serious tech business (assuming you have the skill and drive) all on your own. I am not running a lifestyle business - I am running a business 100% focused on hitting my end value target and providing my customers with the best product possible.

The other side of this coin in the tech world is the term indoctrinates successive waves of potential entrepreneurs into the belief that the only businesses worth starting are the investor-backed companies that can generate a 10x return. It leads to “startup theater” and an unending stream of pitch deck promises that can never be realized.

What a colossal waste of time, considering many of the people getting involved in “startups” could start real businesses that generate real revenue and real profits ... without turning to VCs.

I agree with you. To be generous the good VCs recognise this too. VC funding is just one way to go and we really need all options visible to entrepreneurs so that they choose the best option for them.

I think the aim should always be to support people building real businesses, not just those building unicorns. It is a real accomplishment (and one that should be celebrated) to build a business that makes a useful product that customer love even if it is only for a smallish market. Lets avoid using terms that disparage this effort.

There has been a term for this type of business for a very, very long time.

A small business.

It's also nearly universally understood in regards to what it means. A layperson will get it immediately.

Small businesses are not the same as what is called a lifestyle business. What we don’t have a good term for technology businesses that aim to be large businesses, but don’t want or need VC money. The closest we have is bootstrapped businesses, but this has a connotation of very early stage start-ups.

Are you saying lifestyle businesses aren't a real thing or that they're being defined way too generally on this board?

I agree about "serious" business but there are different types of businesses and terms like these help

There are real lifestyle business, the problem is we don't have a good term for serious startup businesses that don't need external funding. A business going after a midsized market that will make it only be worth $50 million is of no interest to the unicorn hunters, but to everyone else it is a major business.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com