The Persevere Trap — Diagnosing Zombie Projects

A project pretending to be alive is the most expensive loan in your life.

5 hours a week, 50,000 KRW a month — for 5 years

I know someone who put 5 hours and 50,000 KRW into a project every month for 5 years. Features stopped getting added; users never broke 10. Revenue evaporated through product fees each transaction. He kept muttering "someday." Because he'd been taught not giving up was a virtue.

In the end, the 600,000 KRW didn't vanish quietly — it vanished with his eyes open. And here's the painful part: this project consumed the time and money he could have spent on a second MVP. Dead projects keep eating your life even after they die.

What zombie projects look like

A zombie project is a business that's dead but pretending to be alive.

When you finished your first MVP after Season 1, you assumed: "Within 3 months I'll know whether this succeeds or fails." Reality differs. The signal stays blurry. 100 users a month, 110 next. Paid users 3 → 5. Is this growth or stagnation?

5 characteristics of zombie projects

• Flat growth curve. First month 100, still 110–120
• Zero or trivial revenue. ~30,000 KRW monthly fees
• Active users falling. 100 signups, 5 active
• Nothing being learned. No feedback, no direction, no failure reason
• No personal motivation left. Maintained only as "I have to"

If all 5 are true, it's not a project — it's an installment plan. A silent monthly obligation. Korean angels call this "zombie venture" — companies chasing government grants and existing only in name.

Persevere vs zombie: "acceleration," not "direction"

In Season 1 you learned Persevere conditions — don't stop if data is positive. But "positive" is fuzzy. Is 10 users/month positive? Positive for 1–2 months then flat again?

What matters is "acceleration," not "direction."

A legitimately Persevere project sees output rise per unit effort over time. What needed 100 users of effort in month 1 needs 50 in month 3. Or 5 paid in month 1 becomes 20 paid in month 3 with the same effort. That's the real growth signal.

Zombie projects do the opposite: input rises, output stays. 5 hours got you 10; 3 months later, 5 hours still gets 10. Worse: doubling input only holds the previous level.

Many makers think: "Push harder. Stopping now wastes everything so far." That's the sunk-cost fallacy. Humans are 2x more sensitive to avoiding loss than to gain.

The "just a little more" trap

The most insidious zombie whisper is "just a little more."

• "This month will be different. I added a new feature."
• "Try again next week. Marketing strategy changes."
• "Hold until winter. The season will move it."

These aren't lies. Possibility exists. There are projects that broke through in month 6, services that went viral after 3 years. The problem is you have no way to know whether you're that project.

Park is exactly here. 6 months stuck at 5 paid. 2 hours invested per month. 2 hours "feels OK." But 6 months × 2h = 12 hours. 4 other ideas sit in Notion; one could have been validated in 1 month.

Escape: a 3-month deadline + external check

The most reliable way to diagnose is to set "clear milestones."

What state should your project be in 3 months from now?

• 100 users → 150
• Or monthly paid 5 → 10
• Or analytically proven "this problem can't be solved"

Without one of these, it's not Persevere — it's "just existing."

The strongest diagnostic: external check

On a fixed date 3 months from now, ask 3 people:

1. Is this project really valuable?
2. At today's growth, what does 6 months from now look like?
3. If this project didn't exist, what would you have done with the time?

Their honest answers are more reliable than your rationalizations. They don't feel the sunk cost.

Zombie diagnostic checklist

If 3+ apply, seriously consider Kill.

• Flat growth last 3 months (±10%)
• Output didn't change vs monthly time invested
• Active share ≤20% (vs signups)
• Paid ≤0.5% or revenue < invested cost
• No feedback, or unclear direction
• Maintained only by "I have to"
• Fatigue of continuing exceeds regret of killing
• You want to do other projects but this one blocks you

3 Korean maker zombie retrospectives

Case 1. Notion organizer tool (2 years, then Kill)

"300,000 KRW/month — hosting, banners, ads. Never crossed 50 signups. 2 years in I realized: this isn't what people want. Time spent on something else would have 5x'd my monthly revenue today."

Case 2. Team collaboration SaaS (3 years flat, then Pivot)

"Originally for dev teams; users didn't grow. But I couldn't quit — 10,000 lines of code. 3 years in, customer interviews told me developers wanted Slack integration, not our tool. We pivoted to a completely different customer. I didn't Kill, but 3 years of sunk cost delayed the Pivot."

Case 3. Community platform (to a hobby)

"Cut ad budget, minimized server. Now 100,000 KRW/month. 30 users. Zero revenue. I keep it because this is the only place my online friends gather. But this isn't Persevere — it's a hobby. Once I named it, I was at peace."

Wrapping up

If you diagnosed it as a zombie, the next is clear. Kill what should be killed; use that time for the second MVP. And the second will be completely different from the first. The know-how learned in the first, failure patterns, and tools become weapons that help you.

Next post: how a second MVP faster than the first is possible.

Previous: The Exact Pivot Point
Next: A Second MVP Faster Than the First — Leveraging Compounding Assets

About Seoyeon Park
Seoyeon Park is a fictional persona created by Fail School. Sunk-cost effect, loss aversion, and the Korean zombie-venture phenomenon are based on real research/statistics.

Minchul Kim, CEO of Freeive, Fail School