Arthur Lhoist (Tero): “We will no longer develop standalone restaurants”

INTERVIEW - A flagship of the “farm-to-table” movement, the Brussels restaurant Tero seemed to be “so in tune with the zeitgeist.” Yet, the founders of the eponymous hospitality group have decided to close this venue. Co-founder Arthur Lhoist speaks candidly about this unexpected choice and shares the lessons learned from his entrepreneurial journey.

“A sparkling foodie parenthesis.” At 1 Rue Saint Bernard in Brussels, in what was once the studio of symbolist painter Fernand Khnopff, Tero offered its own kind of art: bistronomy. As the Michelin Guide poetically described it, the restaurant “pays tribute to the land and demonstrates great respect for produce. Each ingredient is assembled in intelligently curated, light dishes that favour a natural approach. Playful, flavoursome and bang on target.” Though starless, the establishment shone brightly with its terroir-driven cuisine, seasonal menu, and over... 100 covers.

Yet within two months, Tero Brussels will serve its very last meal. The Lhoist brothers, who head the Belgian hospitality company Tero, made the difficult decision to close their restaurant. Multiple economic and strategic assessments realities led to this pragmatic move, a closure marking the end of a chapter, not the end of an entrepreneurial story. Co-founder Arthur Lhoist shares his vision on this transition and offers his lucid take on the transformations shaking up the HORECA sector. Interview.

Gondola Food Service: As with the Bierges restaurant, should we interpret this closure of Tero Brussels as a consequence of the pandemic?

Arthur Lhoist, Chief Impact Officer at Tero: Several factors came into play, actually. First, yes, there are the long-term effects of Covid. never fully regained momentum after lockdown; attendance dropped and never quite recovered. Then, like the entire sector, we faced a generalized increase in costs: rent, energy, raw materials, wages up more than 20% cumulatively over the past five years. The economic model was under pressure. To this, we can add a certain loss of momentum for the concept in Brussels. Not because it was no longer trendy, but honesty, it was no longer a top destination as it was when we launched in 2017. This simply means that other restaurants have opened, and part of the clientele that contributed to our early success also began exploring those other venues. All of this made things increasingly challenging.

Your virtuous model, sustainable gastronomy supplied notably by your Rabanisse farm, was no longer suited to the restaurant industry?

We had a demanding model: 128 covers, a farm-to-table bistronomic cuisine, a menu changing six to eight times per year. The restaurant was open six days a week – lunch and dinner, Monday through Saturday. Inevitably, that means a substantial payroll. And unlike the old days, staff today no longer wish to work beyond a 38-hour week. We had to juggle all of this with flexi-jobs and students. This obviously created an administrative burden. It required a lot of organization, and even so, we were among the best-managed operations in the field.

But in today's world, balancing the need for high volume with the complexity of our concept, with entirely homemade dishes using ingredients sourced directly from our farm, has become very difficult. Choices have to be made. If the restaurant had had only 40 seats, perhaps it would still be around. But given its size, its standards, and a somewhat less loyal clientele, it was no longer sustainable.

Did financial factors also influence your decision?

We have always been very good at paying our suppliers, wages, and rent. But being tenants rather than owners did play a role. Had we owned the property, we could have created value through the real estate itself.

In the end, an opportunity arose, we received an attractive offer. It won’t offset all the losses, but it allows us to close on a positive note, which makes the situation easier to accept.

Unlike our Bierges restaurant, this location will be taken over by another restaurant group, ensuring a sense of continuity. Something that mattered to us.

Does this closure mark a definitive break with, let's say, classic restaurant dining?

What’s particular is that Tero is no longer a restaurant group, strictly speaking. We were when I created my first restaurant in 2014, and up until 2020, when I merged my activities with those of my brother. Since then, we have become a group focused on hospitality, events, and leisure. Today, through our group, we do much more than just the pure and simple job of a standalone restaurateur.

This doesn’t mean we’re stepping away from hospitality. Quite the opposite. We are strategically refocusing on our event catering and our leisure venues, which are hybrids between padel clubs and event spaces, with on-site F&B concepts.

We also manage accommodation, like holiday lodges in the Ardennes, a hotel in Rochefort, and ongoing projects on the Belgian coast. This is not a halt for our group, but a strategic pivot. It allows us to approach the closure of Tero Brussels with a relative peace of mind.

So you felt no need to fight to keep the restaurant at all costs?

If we had a restaurant group with five venues across Brussels and Brabant Wallon, perhaps we would have. But, in all humility, we should also have spent more time in our restaurant. I did it during the first years in Bierges, but it was a choice we made to integrate this one into a group, day-to-day management was delegated.

The model where the owner-restaurateur ensures a daily presence, close oversight and control, that makes a difference. I believe that, unfortunately, our hands-off approach may have worked against us at certain times . All this to say that we accept this closure, not as a forced decision but as a as a logical outcome of our group’s evolution.

To put it bluntly, is this the end of the Tero restaurant model?

(smile in his voice) I believe one should never completely close doors in life. That said, it is certain that if I were to redevelop a new concept today, it would definitely be in a location with an existing, built-in clientele. Creating new concepts, why not in the future. But not with the same foundational ideas as ten years ago. I believe today's models must be adapted to today.

If I were to open a restaurant again, it would not be a replica of Tero Brussels. I think every restaurateur today faces the same challenges. We are not closing the door to projects, but I believe we will no longer develop standalone restaurant brands. Instead, we will do it intelligently in environments where we can combine hotels, restaurants, leisure, and events, or even catering. That's what makes models more robust and resilient.

Your press release announcing the closure mentioned societal changes. Have you experienced a clash of generations, both among consumers and staff?

Yes, and not just in the restaurant industry. More broadly, it’s essential to understand the rising generations. You have to put yourself in their shoes. I know restaurateurs who are very successful today in reconciling the desires and aspirations of younger generations with the constraints that today's restaurant models bring.

Young people still want to to work. There are passionate chefs and hospitality professionals out there, and there always will be. And I think our values were a little extra. People didn't only come to collaborate with us for that, but I think it was also for the quality of what we offered in terms of service, the plate, and the setting.

This is an element that matters to the new generation and will be even more of a differentiator in the years to come. This relationship to products, to the land, is something we will continue to push in all activities of the Tero group, because it is part of both our DNA and our business models.

Your announcement also referred to a a clientele that has become more versatile. Is this a forced adaptation movement for all restaurants?

Not necessarily. There are customers who obviously keep their habits, and there are timeless restaurants in Brussels that we all easily turn to and that continue to succeed because they are iconic brands that have shaped the culinary history of the capital. There are also many establishments that attract those who decide to grab a bite at the last minute.

But Tero has always been somewhere you plan to visit, not a casual drop-in. Or at least much less spontaneously than another restaurant. It remained an experience one planned, not just on a whim. Being a little off the main gastronomic circuits – not in Sablon, Place Brugmann, or around the Ixelles ponds – so not “triple A” in terms of location. That may have weakened us at times.

Especially in an ultra-competitive environment like Brussels, which has one of the highest densities of restaurants among European capitals?

Indeed. There is also a new generation of restaurateurs who are breaking the mold with new concepts that spark curiosity. Quality fast food also continues to develop, with this premiumization of street food.

Customers might prefer to spend a little more on quality fast food two or three times a week rather than pay €80-90 for an average bill at a restaurant like Tero. Because there's no denying it, the current economic climate means people might prefer to turn to establishments that revisit street food rather than fine-dining experience at our place.

Then there’s the competition from quality brasseries, which continue to do very well according to traditional codes, while modernizing their processes. Brussels diners love their classics, their comfort food. I believe the healthy cuisine we developed ten years ago, plant-focused, where you also felt good about eating out, is no longer as popular as before. I think people have since learned to eat vegetables; we no longer have to teach them.

And while before we offered and let them taste novelties, I think people still want to find that originality, but their priority at a restaurant is to indulge. There is a greater search for more comforting cuisine. Actually, in our menu, animal protein is experiencing a much more significant phase than a few years ago, when the vegetable was highlighted. Competitors may have caught on to this phenomenon and adopted it more "easily" than us because they arrived more recently.

What is the moral of this story?

We don't view this closure as a failure. It’s a step along the way. We are refocusing on projects that are more adapted to our current vision. And we remain convinced that hospitality has a bright future. Provided one is agile, coherent, and faithful to one's values.