A new phrase has emerged in the digital landscape of creative startups: outlier.
The term is being coined to describe startups that do not conform to the norms of traditional businesses.
It’s a term that is used more frequently than any other word and has been adopted by some of the biggest names in tech, including Facebook, Apple, and Google.
“Outlier” is an adjective that evokes a feeling of being atypical or out of place.
It is, however, a term widely used by startups in the technology and media industries.
In the last year, the word has been used to describe a wide variety of things: companies that don’t conform to a particular standard of behavior, companies that seem to be out of step with the industry at large, companies with a high risk of failure, companies offering less-than-standard services, and so on.
What makes it outlier is that it is a term used to label the company or startup that is different than the norm.
Outlier is the product of a different set of assumptions than other companies, and the assumptions are based on an understanding of the way technology works and the way humans behave.
“It’s a product of an assumption that’s embedded in our DNA,” said Aaron Coyle, CEO of Upstart Ventures.
“Our DNA is that we think we can be the best in the world at something and that if we don’t, then it’s not worth trying.”
It is the assumption of our DNA that allows us to think we are unique.
That’s why, in the case of companies that lack a clear mission or value proposition, “outlier” comes across as a negative word.
In fact, “outsider” has become a buzzword in the tech industry, which is often referred to as a tech bubble.
The tech bubble is a bubble that has been built up by a number of factors, including the recent financial crisis.
It has also been exacerbated by the lack of transparency in how the economy works, and a sense that venture capital is not really funding startups, but is rather pouring money into a handful of big tech companies.
The problem is that when you start talking about startups that are outlier, you are implicitly referring to the failure of the economy and not just the failure to build a sustainable business model.
In an interview with Bloomberg last year Coyle called this “the bubble,” referring to an asset that is considered risky by the investing public.
This asset is typically a large portion of the value of a company, and is often the result of the failure in one of the companies that made the investments.
“There’s this huge bubble and everyone is trying to get in on the action,” said Coyle.
“But the reality is, it’s going to take years and years of investment to get back to the bottom.”
In addition to the bubble, startups that have the characteristics of an outlier are also seen as riskier.
A recent report by Gartner, an information technology consulting firm, found that, between 2008 and 2016, venture capital invested in a total of $2.9 trillion.
This investment was made in sectors like technology, finance, healthcare, media, and consumer goods, according to Gartners analysis.
But the investment was mostly concentrated in the space of those industries, as the average funding round for these sectors was just $11 million.
In a way, the bubble was created by the failure or inability of other businesses to adapt to changing circumstances.
According to Gannett, in 2015, the median funding round was $3.6 million.
For 2016, that number was $9.6 billion.
That was a big jump from a year earlier when the median round was just over $2 million.
When these companies fail, it is not because of a lack of funding, but because they were unable to attract capital to the business.
In contrast, startups like Uber and Airbnb, which were founded to provide transportation services to people, were able to attract funding to the company.
In other words, these companies were able because they had the right people who were willing to invest, and they had their own vision.
The lack of investment in startups like these is partly because it is seen as risky.
But more importantly, venture capitalists see a problem with these companies.
They think these companies are not going to survive because they are not like Uber or Airbnb, as they don’t have a vision and they don