To make it easier for you to read this article, we suggest downloading it in PDF Format.
Looking back at your acquisition of Dental Ibérica, what specific characteristics of the company attracted you? Could you also walk us through your search process?
I founded my search fund, Almond Capital, on March 7, 2020, just one week before the COVID lockdowns were implemented. What was supposed to be the official launch of my search process was suddenly put on hold until the end of the year. I used that initial period to set up the back office and start building relationships with brokers. However, I later decided to fully focus on originating proprietary deals, so I shifted my search entirely in that direction.
My focus was on the healthcare sector. From the start of the search until the signing of the SPA for Dental Ibérica in June 2023—over two and a half years—I reviewed more than 150 companies. I conducted deep analysis on roughly a third of them and signed four LOIs. Two I chose to withdraw from, one fell through during due diligence, and the last one was the one that worked out.
When I first came across Dental Ibérica, several factors caught my attention. First, the company had a highly fragmented client base, high recurrence, and a broad product portfolio—over 7,000 active customers and 10,000 references. It also had a strong platform and its own high-margin brand.
Second, the company had been growing at double-digit rates since its inception and had already reached a significant scale, with €17M in revenue and around €1.6M in EBITDA. This indicated strong operational momentum, performance driven by long-term business practices and systems, not short-term tactics. That gave me confidence we were not starting from scratch but rather building on an already solid foundation. Another significant advantage was that the company collects payments via direct debit at the end of each month, which provides complete control over working capital..
Finally, the human element was crucial. The founder was deeply committed, and we had excellent personal chemistry. The company also had a strong middle-management team in place, which meant we could activate value-creation levers that are typically out of reach in smaller, founder-dependent businesses. Their commitment and enthusiasm were essential to enabling the transformation journey.
Why did you decide to partner with a private equity firm, and what were the implications of that decision?
I ran a fairly focused search, targeting healthcare B2B sectors with a preference for companies that had untapped operational or strategic potential. Dental Ibérica was a strong platform to launch a build-up strategy. However, this type of operation didn’t always align with the investment criteria of traditional search fund investors, as you need both firepower and a real appetite to pursue something like this.
Partnering with a private equity firm to close the equity gap, gave me access to both the capital and strategic guidance necessary to close the deal and accelerate our growth post-acquisition. The scale of the transaction, and particularly the ambition to pursue a buy-and-build strategy, compelled Nzyme to secure buy-in from almost all of his investors who stepped up (some private investors proceeded with the operation).
This decision required me to slightly restructure my package. You need to adapt to the MBI model as seen by private equity, which differs somewhat from the typical “three-thirds” model used in search funds. In the end, I secured an equity stake from the outset and there were also exit-related incentives in place. The underlying philosophy was quite similar, and the outcome has been a strong success for all parties involved.
You’ve emphasized the importance of having a value creation plan from day one. What were the key pillars of your initial plan, and how did your onboarding into the company unfold?
From day one, we had a clear value creation plan in place, broken down by initiative, ownership, and timeline. It was crucial to be realistic: teams have limited bandwidth, so you need to prioritize and sequence your actions. One of the first things we did was implement simple KPI tracking to monitor performance and support decision-making. It also helped us report back to the board in a structured way.
Personally, I had to remind myself to be patient. It’s tempting to rush into creating impact, but that often backfires. We chose three or four key levers to work on and focused on executing them consistently. Setting realistic expectations and defining what success really meant helped avoid unnecessary frustration—celebrating incremental progress was much healthier than chasing perfection.
How did the presence of a strong middle management team impact your ability to focus on strategic priorities instead of day-to-day operations? How would you define your role as CEO in that context?
Having a strong team in place allowed me to focus on high-leverage areas like strategy, business development, and exploring inorganic growth opportunities (add-ons). I wasn’t tied down by day-to-day firefighting. In that sense, my role was very complementary to the rest of the leadership team: COO, CFO, Head of Sales, etc. You need to find your place.
My focus was to act as a catalyst for change. That means defining a vision, communicating it clearly, and mobilizing the team to execute. I also had to ensure that I could trust and delegate deeply, which is essential if you want to lead rather than manage. The CEO’s personal style must fit the company, not the other way around. It’s a soft analysis that needs to be done before stepping in. If you’re not comfortable letting go, you’re probably not suited for the CEO role in this kind of context.
Communication seems central to your leadership style. How did you tailor your messaging internally with teams, externally with clients and partners, and at the board level? How would you define the role of the board in a company like this?
Communication is absolutely essential. Internally, I was present and transparent with the teams. Externally, I became the human face of the company, building trust with clients, suppliers, and even competitors. With the board, it’s a different game entirely, it requires a structured, analytical approach. You need to manage different personalities and know how to communicate both good and bad news, present effectively, discuss key issues, and respond to questions. You’re not just reporting; you’re engaging in high-level decision-making. There were several moments where soft skills were more critical than technical knowledge.
Managing individual egos and expectations—both in the executive team and at board level—is part of the job. Many searchers underestimate this, but it’s a fundamental CEO skill. You have to know how to deliver bad news, how to get buy-in, and when to simply listen.
I believe in clear role separation: the CEO manages the P&L and the executive committee, while the board should focus on balance sheet decisions—CapEx, debt, financial health—and strategic oversight. A small, well-chosen board is far more effective than a large one. When roles are blurred, noise increases and efficiency drops.
When it came time to exit, how did you manage the emotional tension between your personal attachment to the company and the board’s decision to sell?
The logic of running a business differs from that of shareholders: they follow different timelines. Both perspectives are essential, and as CEO, your responsibility is to adapt to those dynamics. Ultimately, key decisions rest with the board. You need to show empathy toward your partners and deliver returns.
We weren’t actively looking for an exit, but an offer came through the market leader that was simply too compelling to ignore. When decisions come from the top, they must be respected. It’s certainly emotionally challenging—especially when you’re in the middle of unfinished projects—but as I’ve said, the board holds the final say. As CEO, your role is to execute that decision professionally, even if it conflicts with your personal convictions.
In my case, the exit meant stepping away, which felt counterintuitive after all the effort and commitment. But that’s the nature of the role, your duty is to the shareholders and to the process. You have to embrace it, not resist it. My timeline has changed, so I need to reassess my professional priorities, but it’s nothing major.
In the end, the outcome was a clear success: investors achieved nearly a 3x return in less than 20 months. We’re likely one of the fastest exits in the history of search funds.
Looking back on your journey, what would you do differently if you were to acquire and lead another company today? Any advice for other searchers?
Honestly, I’m not sure. It’s hard to say if anything should be changed about this experience, given the excellent outcome. I think I was fortunate to be part of the pioneering group in the search fund landscape. The model is still somewhat immature and is gradually being refined. There is still a lack of track record, although in Spain, the recent wave of divestitures shows that it works.
As advice, I’d say that selecting the right company and your travel companions is crucial. It’s important to remember that this is a personal project. It’s fine to test your partners to see if they are excited about the opportunity you’re analyzing, but if you’re convinced it’s the right one, go for it. Investors will appear because a solid project always attracts the right partners.
You also need to be very careful with your budget. Search funds don’t fail because they can’t find a good project—they fail because they run out of money. I think it’s crucial to sacrifice a significant part of your salary during the search phase and to budget for unsuccessful due diligence to maximize search time.
Also, speak to many other searchers to learn from their practical experience. It will help you select the best people for your board, which needs to be as professional as possible.
You see yourself more as a builder than an investor. How does that self-awareness shape your vision for the future—and what are you planning next?
Yes, I’ve come to realize that I’m much more motivated by building companies than by managing portfolios. I enjoy the day-to-day grind of transformation, creating momentum, and seeing people grow. That’s where I thrive.
My next project involves helping build another company through an entrepreneurial acquisition. This time, I’m concretely considering moving to the USA for personal reasons, where I’ll start a new search fund, once again focused on healthcare. This time, I aim to target a company in the larger segment of the model, to shift the scale.
I’m a firm believer in the search fund model. It’s not perfect, and outcomes can vary, but more often than not, success or failure depends on the specific people involved, not the model itself.
