Nicolas Bargelès — At first, there’s astonishment. None of it seems real. The discussions had been constructive, so we wonder whether it’s just a misunderstanding. There were no hints that the giants would say no. Even in the worst case scenario, we only imagined we’d lose one of the giants. Not both. Not a few days apart, without the slightest possibility of holding them back or relying on the power of one of them to put together a team. Then there’s awareness. It’s a reality and we just have to make do. A question arises that’s both extremely simple and immensely complex, at the crossroads of our three personal trajectories and the project: quit or continue? Should we stay or should we go?
Once we’ve recovered (somewhat) from our emotions, we start by asking what we really want. We still want to see the project through to the end. Despite the abandonment, we still believe in Midnight Trains and its vision of the night train of the future. Then we move on to a colder, less passionate analysis of the situation. We’ve certainly lost our giants. But they came close to investing millions in our project. Others might therefore be tempted to do so. Although we know that it will be even more difficult to raise funds after such companies withdraw from the project.
Romain Payet — We decide to work with two scenarios simultaneously: the closure of Midnight Trains and the adventure, ongoing. Moving forward on the first, we're looking to draw Midnight Trains to a close as cleanly as possible. Without partners, our investors and certain creditors are suffering. There’s the option of selling it, perhaps to another rail operator, which might be interested in the value of our team, design of our reinvented night trains and in our agreements with certain key partners. So we make a few phone calls to check the temperature, without saying too much. We wouldn’t want to announce our own death, before it’s officially recorded.
This brings us to the second scenario, which is to continue, by asking our strategic committee to help us bridge the gap. That is to say, the members could buy us a little time while waiting for a solution. We’re obviously not going to show up in front of people who have trusted us from the start and just ask for money. We have to create a new narrative and new scenarios, and provide them with serious arguments. Like new potential investors.
Adrien Aumont — And just like that, we actually have one. A few days before the withdrawal of the hotel group, I’m invited to a dinner, organised by an ethical shoe brand and a podcast about entrepreneurs. I go with a heavy heart, worried about what I’ll say when everything is falling apart. There, however, I come across an old acquaintance, a woman who runs an avant-garde French investment fund, which has a real long-term vision. I admire this woman. I consider her to be the conscience of venture funds in France. In fact, since the start, I dreamt of her fund investing in Midnight Trains. Besides, we’d discussed it a few months earlier, but it didn’t go any further. So, I’m ready to try everything - what do I have to lose? I told her that they should invest in us, as it corresponds perfectly to their thesis. I say that no one wants us because we’re so out of the box. At our rock bottom, the company could save an important project that would be working to decarbonise European rail networks. We spend the evening talking together and she suggests that we open the file again to look into it. She promises to give me a first response in two days. And forty-eight hours later, we actually hear something. She can tell me in two months whether her fund could take the lead in financing Midnight Trains.
Romain Payet — We have to present several key elements to our strategic committee. First of all, we still have possible investors. This famous fund and the major international brand we mentioned in previous episodes. But also an infrastructure fund and a hybrid fund which we’ll come back to later.
We propose to reduce the costs, by firing all three of us, by suspending this newsletter and so on. The response from committee members is clear: if we continue, Nicolas must stay. Without him, the project would lose too much value. And we have to continue: it would be too bad to throw in the towel after coming so close to the goal. The committee members are unanimous. We won’t say anything publicly about what’s going on. This would amount to announcing our failure. Announcing to the world that we are dead. So if we agree to halve Nicolas’ salary, they will cover us for two months. He doesn't hesitate for a single second. Two months is exactly what we need to ensure that the adventure continues.
