#95 Rejections — What Was Actually Behind Them
In an interview in Chapter 3 of Lee Taek-kyung's book (pp. 116–120), Kim Sul-ah names three broad reasons behind the rejections. All three trace back to the market simply not being ready to accept the dawn-delivery, fresh-food category itself.
- "Is dawn delivery actually operationally possible?" — doubt about the operating model itself
- "Is fresh-food e-commerce even a big enough market?" — distrust of the market-size estimate
- "Is this the team that can actually solve this?" — doubt about whether a team of consulting-background hires could execute
#Three Categories for Sorting a Rejection
Which category you sort a rejection into completely changes what you do next. Based on Kim Sul-ah's interview, here are the three.
| Rejection Category | Example VC Phrasing | Next Move |
|---|---|---|
| Materials problem | "I get the what, but I don't see the how." | Run through the 8 IR-deck writing tips — a 2-week fix |
| Market problem | "The market looks small." | Re-run your TAM/SAM/SOM and redefine your timing story |
| Team problem | "Is this the team that can solve this?" | Prove your execution track record with an MVP, interviews, or payment data |
The key insight here is that the same rejection phrasing can actually belong to a different category. "The market looks small" sometimes really means "this team defined their market incorrectly." That's exactly why it's worth doing even a short debrief right after you get a rejection, to sort it correctly.
#"Better to Take the Hit Early" — Treating Rejection as Data
For this to actually work, you need to write down the following three things right after a rejection — memory distorts fast once time passes.
- The exact wording of the rejection — record phrases like "best of luck with your business" or "we couldn't reach internal consensus" verbatim
- Your best guess at the stage — first meeting, follow-up, IR pitch, or IC
- Your best guess at the category — materials, market, or team
#"Dominant in a Small Market" or "Clear Edge in a Big One" — Kim Sul-ah's Two-Path Logic
| Market Type | What You Need to Answer | Validating Data |
|---|---|---|
| Small market | A dominant position — we can come close to owning it | Customer interviews + one real barrier to entry |
| Large market, fierce competition | A clear edge — one thing no one else can do | A comparison matrix showing real trade-offs |
| Neither is clear | Rejection — that ambiguity is itself the red flag | Go back and re-sort your positioning |
Market Kurly's pass rate rose once it settled on a clear position — "fresh-food e-commerce: a large market, with dawn delivery as our edge." Before that, the pitch had been the vaguer "fresh food plus Kurly's curation."
#When to Re-Approach After a Rejection — 6 to 12 Months
Once you've sorted the rejection into a category, the next question is when to re-approach that same VC. Too soon, and it reads as "showing up again with the same deck." Too late, and the partner you dealt with may have moved on, forcing you to start from zero.
| Rejection Category | Right Time to Re-Approach | What Needs to Change |
|---|---|---|
| Materials problem | 1–2 months later | Fix the deck and spell out exactly what you changed |
| Market problem | 6–12 months later | Redefine your market position and back it with more data |
| Team problem | 6–12 months later | Add execution proof — MVP, payments, interviews |
| Multiple categories | 9–12 months later | Address all three categories |
#Not Taking Rejection Personally — Kim Sul-ah's Marriage Metaphor
The point of the metaphor is that a rejection calls for checking two things at once.
- What you can actually fix — your materials, market definition, or team track record
- Fit with this specific VC — the rejection may just come down to a mismatch in stage, sector focus, or investment philosophy
If it's the latter, re-approaching that same VC won't get you anywhere — it's the same dynamic as a marriage that was never going to happen, no matter how impressive you make yourself look to a partner who was never a fit. The right answer is to find a VC that actually matches your stage and sector.
#Self-Check Checklist
Six items to check whether you're actually treating rejection as data.
- Do you write down the tone, stage, and category right after every rejection?
- Have at least 5 rejection notes piled up so a pattern (materials vs. market vs. team) is visible?
- Does your market sort cleanly into either "small but dominant" or "large but clearly differentiated"?
- If it's still ambiguous, have you started redefining your market positioning?
- Does your re-approach email lead with a line stating exactly what you fixed?
- For VCs where the rejection looks like a simple fit mismatch, have you moved on to VCs that actually match your stage and sector?
Sort Your Rejection Risk With AI Review
OpenSeed's AI review can help identify whether materials, market, or team is the weakest part of a plan.
Pre-submission business-plan review with clear service limitations
Start OpenSeed Review →