I think you're right here - obviously it's not something that there's a single agreed definition of, but it feels wrong to describe (and worse to self-describe as such). This is especially true in the world of athletes like Philly Bowden who is probably 'elite' but gets more income from YouTube than running (I suspect) and where you have other genuine top athletes in athletics events (i.e. Amo-Dadzie with a legit job and going to the world champs in 23).
I think the fuel for it comes from being invited to the elite field at London in 24, although I think there are still lots of athletes in those fields who would describe themselves as sub elite (and definitely if they finished 4 minutes off the back of the rest of the field). Then you look at the UK rankings for that year, so where she was an 'elite' being ranked 41st for her event. Just clearly not an elite level however you cut it. Even the best rankings year - 2023 being 15th in the UK is a bit too far down the rankings to claim elite status imo.
Then in terms of the sponsorship - another way I think you'd argue someone becomes elite at running, when a shoe or clothing company is willing to sign them. I don't think people would translate being a LuluLemon brand ambassador the same way they would Bekele signing with ANTA.
So I guess it comes back to the 'how do you define elite' point - I guess you could have the invite to London, but even then I think you'd have to argue former elite should be the term given that there hasn't been any follow on major/serious race invites outside of things like the Bermuda race series etc.