David Van den Weghe (Colmar): "The impact of coronavirus called for structural choices, not quick fixes"

INTERVIEW – Targeted closures, strategic indebtness, streamlining the buffet model… The historic "casual dining" chain refuses to become a relic of the Belgian industry. Moreover, the third-generation CEO explains why it's a mistake to consider the Colmar relaunch plan as a bailout.

© COLMAR / READY TO RUMBLE

“We are proud of our past and driven by the future,” David Van den Weghe readily affirms. In 1957, his grandfather launched a restaurant chain in Brussels named after the famous Alsatian city of Colmar. Thirty-two years later, the family business opened its first establishment in France, in Englos, near Lille, under the Crocodile brand (named after an iconic 20th-century locomotive) to avoid any confusion with Alsatian cuisine. His mother, Anne Dossche, then went on to lead the group for many years, continuing this expansion. In early 2025, after more than a decade working behind the scenes and in support roles, David took over the reins.

Across its twenty locations, "the restaurant in the train carriage" now welcomes over 1.5 million diners annually, who indulge in some 23.5 tons of Belgian beef steak, 270 tons of fries, and 10,000 kilos of chocolate mousse. The brand employs over 600 people and boasts a turnover of 35 million euros. Last December, the CEO unveiled "a completely redesigned, modern concept for a new generation of customers" by welcoming the public to a newly rebranded Ghent location. A facelift, a relaunch plan, or a rescue plan? An interview.

Gondola Foodservice: Colmar has deepened its losses, exceeding one million euros in the last fiscal year. Is this 7 million euro plan announced in December a growth project or a rescue plan?

David Van den Weghe: It would be misleading to describe this as a rescue plan. The losses you refer to are the consequence of a deliberate transition phase, during which we chose to absorb short-term pressure rather than postpone necessary decisions. Given the enormous challenges that the restaurant sector has had to face since the COVID crisis...

The €7 million plan is first and foremost a structural repositioning and growth project. Its objective is to restore sustainable profitability by modernizing the guest experience, improving operational efficiency and reinforcing the relevance of our core sites.

What objectives will determine whether the plan is successful?

Success will be measured by very concrete indicators: a gradual return to positive operating margins, an increase in revenue on a like-for-like basis at renovated sites, better cost control, particularly on food and energy, and strengthened customer satisfaction scores.

The rollout is gradual. The first tangible impacts are expected within 12 to 18 months on the renovated sites, with a full visible effect by 2027. At this stage, the group aims to be structurally profitable and positioned for long-term growth.

Colmar closed its Aartselaar and Massy locations this spring. Are these isolated

cases, or is the portfolio restructuring still ongoing? Are other non-profitable

sites at risk of closing to finance the renovation of the core estate?

Closures in Aartselaar and Massy were not the beginning of a broader downsizing, but the result of a targeted portfolio review. These locations no longer met our long-term profitability or market relevance criteria. The strategic review phase is now largely complete, and our focus is on strengthening and renovating the core estate. There is no plan to close profitable or strategic sites in order to finance investments elsewhere.

Board members have explicitly acknowledged that the group did "not react

sufficiently" to post-Covid changes. In what fundamental ways does the current

strategy differ from what should have been done earlier?

In hindsight, the group did not adapt quickly enough to post-Covid structural changes in

consumer behaviour, mobility and cost structures. The impact of coronavirus called for structural choices, not quick fixes. The current strategy differs fundamentally in three ways: decisions are now data-driven and market-specific; investments focus on deep repositioning rather than maintenance; and governance has been streamlined to enable faster, more decisive action.

Is this 7-million-euro investment financed with Colmar’s own funds, suggesting

healthy cash reserves, or did you have to rely on debt in a context of still-

volatile interest rates?

The €7 million investment is financed through a balanced mix of own funds and external

financing. Colmar has sufficient internal financial capacity, but we deliberately use debt as a

strategic tool. This investment fits within a long-term value-creation plan and does not

compromise the group’s financial stability.

With an average investment of €350,000 per site (or slightly less if technical

upgrades are included), what “lift” in revenue is Colmar targeting?

Our objective is not short-term revenue inflation, but sustainable performance

improvement. Depending on the site, we target a high single-digit to low double-digit

percentage increase in revenue, driven by higher visit frequency, improved experience and

better space productivity.

Your collaboration with the GIRA consulting firm suggests a shift toward a

"value-for-money" positioning. Does this imply a mechanical increase in the

average ticket? Could this pose a risk to your historical customer base, which

may be more price-sensitive?

Value-for-money does not mean a mechanical increase in the average ticket. The goal is to

improve perceived value rather than price levels. While average spend may increase slightly

through mix and experience, accessibility for our historical customer base remains a

priority.

You aim to attract younger generations without losing long-time customers. In

marketing, trying to appeal to everyone can be risky. Which target is the

priority: the one that fills the restaurant (volume) or the one that spends more

(margin)?

Our priority is balance. Restaurants need volume to create atmosphere and brand strength,

but margin sustainability is essential. The strategy focuses on increasing visit frequency

among younger guests while maintaining loyalty among long-time customers, rather than

choosing one over the other.

The buffet model suffers from image and profitability challenges in the face of

food inflation. Have you considered partially abandoning or rationalising the

buffet to increase the share of plated service, which is easier to control in terms

of food costs?

We continuously adapt the buffet model. Rather than abandoning it, we are rationalising it

by improving assortment control, reducing waste and complementing it with plated options

where relevant. This hybrid approach allows better cost control while preserving the

brand’s DNA.

Is operational profitability currently better in France (Crocodile) than in

Belgium? Does maintaining the central kitchen in Oudenaarde still make sense

if the "centre of gravity" of your activity is now in France?

Profitability levels differ by site rather than by country. The central kitchen in Oudenaarde

remains strategically relevant for quality, consistency and purchasing power, even as

France represents a growing share of activity.

If this relaunch plan succeeds and the brand is revitalised by 2027, is the goal to

keep the group in family hands, or to prepare the company for a sale or an

opening of the capital?

Our primary objective is to revitalise and strengthen the brand by 2027. At this stage, the

focus is on long-term value creation, not on preparing an exit. Keeping the group in family

hands remains the reference scenario, while remaining open to strategic options if they add

value.