Here's a different spin on the whole "I want to start a business!!" trope, from another field I've been active in for 35 years:

Homebrewer to old established brewery owner: "I want to start my own brewery!"
Old brewery owner: "Great! How much capital have you raised so far?"
"Well, none--but here, try my double India Pale Ale!!!"
"............ and how much business experience do you have?"
"................. I've worked for a paycheck--but try this terrific Baltic Porter of mine!"
"............okay, the beer's great, but do you have any experience running a business--especially in the crazy food and restaurant business?"
"Try this coffee blonde!"
"Got a marketing plan?"
"My beer's so good it sells itself!"
"You and about two thousand other microbrews on the megastore shelves. How many partners do you have, and how much do they have? Presuming, of course, you'll need about a quarter-million bucks just to start......."
"Well, I figured we could sell shares at the next beer festival...."
"Kid--and I mean this sincerely.............. GOOD LUCK, because you're gonna need it!!"

EVERY "old-guard" brewer I've talked to in-depth has reported having that exact conversation almost verbatim with their "fan boys"--repeatedly, over the decades.

Now, is that "attack mode"?

The common theme I have heard from so many long-established microbrewers is that you will need at least twice as much capital than your most cynical and pessimistic estimates may tell you, and that the fewer partners in the pot other than the holder of your debt, the better. The cooperative/collaboration partnerships have a tendency to self-implode; the ones that stay in business for decades end up under the control of a "benevolent dictator" who starts out as, or ends up in, complete control of the operation, or at least the final say in all matters. The hard-earned lesson they espouse: "MORE MONEY, FEWER INVESTORS!!!!!"

I know of a few now-successful brewers that heeded such advice over the years. I've also witnessed the closure of a few that didn't, and a few spectacular flame-outs as well. As one example, one postponed his plans five or six years to build enough savings at the job he disliked but which paid well, and transitioned to a successful catering side gig to build his experience and reputation.

I found out years ago that it is always better to work for a railroad (especially short lines) than to own one.

The 'thrill" of running your own locomotive on your own track fades quickly in the daily grind of fixing bad track, meeting all regulations,paying all the bills before paying yourself and constantly trying to interest your Class 1 carrier connection in handling new business which you are responsible for creating. Many marriages and families have been destroyed attempting this quest.

Yep, a lot easier to "enjoy the satisfaction of railroading" running their locomotive on their money.

Exprail

When I was in HS, I fantasized about acquiring PC's ex-Michigan Central Joliet Cutoff, officially the Joliet & Northern Indiana, to be run as a tourist line / common carrier ala Strasburg and C&LC. Steam of course. LOL It never got passed the fantasy stage. Most of the line is now the incongruously named* "Old Plank Road Trail" bike & hiking path.

I'm sure my idea would have been a big failure unless many connections were restored and I got some overhead traffic which I would not have.

*There never was a plank road tho ROW had been acquired for it. But it was a RR for 150+ years. So of course they name it for something that never existed.

If you really think that you want to start your own railroad, you might want to read through another current thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=46827

Would you consider NOKL a success, at least from Pollock's standpoint, or not?

A friend of Grandfather's describes his career in the short line industry as having, "Held every job on the railroad from unskilled track laborer all the way down to owning the damn thing!"