To make it easier for you to read this article, we suggest downloading it in PDF Format.
You have an extensive career and a strong professional track record, having served as CEO four times. Could you briefly introduce yourself?
I was born in Palencia, as most of you know, a small city in Spain, and my parents, both school teachers, instilled in me the values of education and hard work. At 16, I embarked on a life-changing experience as an exchange student for a year in Ohio, which broadened my perspective and solidified my ambition to pursue an international career. This drive led me to ICADE’s international E-4 program, where I studied in Spain, the UK, and (French-speaking part of) Belgium, and after a few years at the Monitor Company (founded by Professor Michael Porter) later to Harvard Business School
After undergrad, I joined the Monitor Company, where I met incredible people such as Jim Vestermann (one of the most successful SFs ever). After my MBA, rather than following a conventional corporate path, I was drawn to leadership roles where I could drive transformation. My first major leadership opportunity came at Tele2, a telecom company undergoing significant challenges. After successfully turning around its German operations and accelerating growth in Italy, I became CEO of Tele2/Tango Luxembourg, growing sales significantly and leading the company through a successful exit.
This experience set the stage for my next roles. At Relacom Spain, I took over as CEO and grew revenues significantly while increasing margins, positioning the company for a strategic exit. Then, at Prosegur Alarms, I led a team of over 5,000 professionals across 11 countries, reversing negative growth and doubling the size of the business. We expanded into new markets like Turkey, India, and South Africa and ultimately positioned the company for a €600 million sale of the Spanish unit to Telefónica.
Later, I took on a new challenge as Managing Director at Plug and Play Spain & Benelux. In just four years, together with my team, I multiplied by 4 the size of the Spanish subsidiary, turning around the Dutch subsidiary and launching the Belgian subsidiary. We helped corporations innovate faster by connecting them with high-potential scale-ups. After scouting the best scale-ups, we facilitated a pilot between corporations and scale-ups to prove the concept. If the pilots were successful, we facilitated scaling.
Despite these achievements, one thing remained constant: while I had successfully grown and transformed businesses, I had never owned one. That realization led me to the SF model—a path that would allow me to leverage my experience in business growth and transformation while also becoming a true stakeholder. At this stage in my career, I am fully committed to leading a company as both CEO and shareholder, bringing my operational expertise, strategic vision, and hands-on leadership to create long-term value.
I see this next step as the culmination of my journey—an opportunity to take everything I’ve learned and apply it to building something of my own. For me, it’s now or never.
What led you to transition from your previous roles to launching a SF at this stage in your career? Was there a particular moment or insight that made you take the leap? Do you see your seniority as an advantage or a challenge?
Throughout my career, I have led businesses through growth, transformation, and turnaround, successfully doubling revenues, expanding into new markets, and executing strategic exits. However, despite these achievements, one thing was always missing: ownership. I have built and scaled companies, but I have never had the opportunity to be both CEO and shareholder.
The idea of launching a SF developed over time. A key moment was seeing a close friend from The Monitor Company, who successfully executed this model, acquire a business and, after driving strong growth, successfully exited. It was Raptor Technologies, a true adventure and one of the 10 most successful SFs in history. Jim Vesterman, who is the name of my friend, later became a professor of EtA at Wharton. That experience resonated deeply with me. At the same time, my work at Plug and Play, where I helped corporations identify and implement innovations, reinforced the idea that I wanted to apply my expertise in business transformation to a company I could truly call my own.
At first, I wondered whether the SF model—typically pursued by younger professionals—was the right fit for me. But I soon realized that while I may not fit the traditional mold, my experience is a strength, not a limitation. Years of leading teams, scaling businesses, growing companies, and navigating complex M&A have given me the ability to assess risks, execute strategies, and create value from day one. I remain adaptable and eager to take on new challenges. My background allows me to combine strategic vision with hands-on leadership. I have always worked with technology, and to implement new things, the first thing you need to be is open-minded and open-to change
Moreover, I am at a point in my career where I can fully dedicate myself to this endeavor. A SF is a long-term commitment, requiring not only strategic expertise but also resilience and leadership. I am prepared to invest the next decade into acquiring, growing, and scaling a company, applying everything I have learned to create sustainable value.
For me, this is the natural next step and the culmination of my career—a chance to build something lasting, with full alignment between leadership and ownership. It’s now or never.
Your SF was oversubscribed by more than 300%, an outstanding achievement. What do you think were the key factors that convinced investors to back you so overwhelmingly? Did you have a specific strategy for selecting and allocating investors?
The overwhelming investor interest in my SF was both unexpected and humbling. Initially, I wasn’t sure how the market would respond, especially since the model is often pursued by younger professionals. However, I believe a few key factors contributed to this strong backing.
First, investors appreciated my operational experience and ability to lead businesses through transformation. While I don’t fit the traditional searcher profile, my background in leading and scaling companies and executing M&A reassured them that I could not only find a strong target but also run it effectively post-acquisition. And in the ecosystem for some investors is key that before the searcher has been previously a CEO, this gave me access to some very supportive investors at the start of my project.
Second, my deep commitment to this journey resonated with investors. This isn’t just another career move for me; it’s a long-term commitment to building something meaningful. I made sure to be transparent about my motivations and approach, which helped build trust. For example, I assume they saw my commitment in the fact that I prepared a strong PPM in which they saw a lot of hard work and research. Someone could agree or disagree with the content, but what could not be argued was the hard work and commitment shown in its execution.
I wanted to have diversity in the investor base to be able to face any unexpected situation and outcome. I will do everything to target the best outcome, but be prepared for the worst. I looked also to have a good base of international investors that could bring another perspective. I also looked for hands-on support; this was my top criterion, and I had conversations with close to 40 searchers during my fundraising. With some of them, I had several conversations to make sure I had a supportive and hands-on investment base.
Finally, I was fortunate to attract a great group of investors, many of whom bring experience in private equity, M&A, and the industries I’m targeting. My investors are JB46, Alza, Orca (Ethos), Ambit, TTCER, Scipio, Aurica, OnetoOne, Luis Camilleri, Ruíz Family, Aniol, Plug and Play Tech Center, Thomas Bühler (Agirax), Gernot Eisinger (Geharon), Jürgen Rilling (Mira Blau), and Will Thorndike (Cromwell Harbour). I see them not just as financial backers but as advisors whose insights will be invaluable throughout this process. More than anything, this response reinforced that experience and dedication matter, and I’m incredibly grateful for the trust and support I’ve received.
Given your experience and access to capital, you likely had multiple investment paths available to you. Why did you choose the traditional SF model over other alternatives, such as a self-funded search, independent sponsorship, or an MBI with private equity?
As I explored different investment approaches, I read about self-funded searches, independent sponsorships, and MBIs with private equity. While each had its merits, the traditional SF model stood out for its structured yet flexible framework. What truly appealed to me was its collaborative nature. Unlike other models where financial backing is often transactional, SF investors act as partners, providing not just capital but also mentorship, strategic insights, and valuable connections.
This alignment between operator and investors was a key factor in my decision. I wanted more than just funding—I wanted to surround myself with experienced professionals who could challenge my thinking and contribute to the long-term success of the business. The model also provides a clear, step-by-step process, minimizing risks at each stage while allowing the CEO to focus on building and scaling the company.
Ultimately, I chose this path because it allows me to combine my leadership experience with a proven model for long-term value creation. It offers the right mix of autonomy, guidance, and strategic support, enabling me to focus on what I do best—leading and growing a business with a strong foundation for sustainable success. So the 2 main reasons to pursue this model were:
–The value investors can bring: the combined experience of all of them is hundreds of transactions, making it much more difficult to miss. Building on that, collective learning is for sure providing me an edge
–The value of the traditional SF model: according to the numbers of IESE and Stanford, there have been over 1000 SFs (between US + international), This formula has the right checks and balances and ensures alignment between searcher and investors, so it is a robust and well-proven model. So why risk doing my own thing and re-inventing the wheel?
I find the traditional SF model quite superior to a private equity deal. Here, I can be in the driver´s seat and develop “my own” project (of course teaming up with investors) however, on a private equity deal the company is given to you, in a SF traditional model, you get to drive the full journey and have more significant impact and upside.
Many searchers are in their 30s or early 40s. With your level of experience, do you feel you have a competitive advantage when it comes to sourcing deals, negotiating with sellers, or managing a company post-acquisition?
I recognize that many searchers tend to be younger, and while experience can be an asset, I also believe that success in this journey depends on a combination of factors, not just seniority. That said, having spent years in leadership roles, I’ve had the opportunity to build relationships with a wide range of professionals—business owners, executives, advisors, and investors—which may be helpful when sourcing deals or negotiating with sellers. However, I don’t see this as a personal advantage as much as a natural result of time spent in different industries.
More importantly, I strongly believe that the collaborative nature of the SF ecosystem is one of its greatest strengths. Investors are not just financial backers—they provide invaluable guidance, challenge perspectives, and help searchers refine their approach. Even among other searchers, there is a spirit of shared learning, where people openly exchange insights and best practices. I see this as a major advantage for everyone involved, myself included.
When it comes to managing a company post-acquisition, prior experience is certainly helpful, but every business presents unique challenges. I will need to approach this role with humility, a willingness to learn, and an openness to input from both my investors and the company’s existing team. I don’t assume that my background alone will guarantee success—what matters is the ability to adapt, listen, and execute effectively.
Ultimately, I see experience as one piece of the puzzle. What will make the difference is surrounding myself with the right people, leveraging the collective knowledge within this ecosystem, and staying committed to continuous learning and improvement.
I had to drive growth, lead transformation and perform turnarounds I believe all these experiences will give me a bit of an edge when operating the business. Nevertheless key to work with humility, hardwork and building and motivating a TEAM with capital letters will also be key elements of success.
You may have more flexibility than other searchers when it comes to company selection. Are you approaching the search differently? Are you considering larger deals, different industries, or more competitive processes? What are the top three characteristics you look for in an ideal acquisition target?
I do have some flexibility in my search, but my approach remains disciplined and aligned with what makes the SF model successful. I prioritize industries where I have direct experience—such as security, technology-enabled services, and technician-based field services—because familiarity can help accelerate execution. That said, I’m not closing myself off to opportunities outside these areas. If a company has strong fundamentals, a solid market position, and room for sustainable growth, I am open to exploring it, regardless of industry.
One of the most important aspects I focus on is people. A great business is more than just financials—it’s about the team behind it. A strong middle management structure and engaged employees are critical for long-term success, which is why I place a lot of emphasis on understanding the leadership and work culture before moving forward with any acquisition.
Culture, in particular, plays a key role in my decision-making. Businesses with a strong foundation—where employees feel valued, operations are well-structured, and there’s a clear sense of purpose—tend to perform better in the long run. My goal post-acquisition wouldn’t be to make drastic changes but rather to build upon what’s already working, ensuring stability while identifying areas for growth and improvement.
When it comes to deal size or process, I remain flexible. While I may look at slightly larger businesses than a typical first-time searcher, I am mindful of maintaining the characteristics that make the SF model effective—profitable, cash-flow-positive companies with strong customer relationships leading to recurring cash flows. I also understand that competitive processes can be more challenging, which is why I value proprietary deal sourcing and building relationships directly with sellers.
I am also looking in fragmented industries where roll-up strategies give an additional growth and value creation opportunity. I strongly believe that a lot of value can be created through add-on acquisitions.
At the end of the day, I’m looking for a company with a strong team, a predictable revenue model, and a culture that supports long-term success.
One of my investors said that something quite important is that you (as searcher) need to be happy with the company you buy, the industry…because if it is something you really like, you will do great.
Given your experience, do you have a specific exit strategy in mind from the outset? Are there particular factors you believe are underappreciated when thinking about long-term value creation in SMEs?
While it’s natural to consider exit strategies early on, my focus is first and foremost on building a strong, sustainable business. I believe that if you create real long-term value— through operational improvements, a strong leadership team, and a culture that fosters growth—the right exit opportunities will follow, whether through strategic acquisition, private equity interest, or even a long-term hold.
One factor that I believe is often underappreciated in SMEs is the human element. Financials and market positioning matter, but ultimately, it’s people who drive success. A company with engaged employees, a leadership team that is empowered to make decisions, and a culture of continuous improvement will always outperform a business that relies solely on financial engineering or cost-cutting to drive value. Investing in people— ensuring they have the right tools, incentives, and growth opportunities—is just as critical as optimizing operations or expanding market share.
Another overlooked aspect is patience. Sustainable growth doesn’t happen overnight. The pressure to deliver quick results can lead to short-term decisions that don’t maximize the company’s true potential. I believe in taking a disciplined approach, making the right changes at the right time, and letting the business evolve naturally under strong leadership.
I am also betting on industries where roll-up is an option to grow and add profitability through add-ons
Some investors may need to exit earlier than others, for example, institutional funds. I think that if the opportunity is good and if there is teamwork, once the needs of everyone are well understood, a liquidity event can be created in order to replace some investors for others
For now, my focus is not on the exit but on the journey. Step by step, the first challenge is finding the right business—one that aligns with my values and has the foundations for long-term success. The rest will come in due course.
Finally, why did you name your Search Fund Covadonga?
Covadonga symbolizes resilience, determination, and unwavering commitment — qualities essential for a SF. Just like the Reconquista, which started in Covadonga and required 800 years of dedication through victories and defeats and the commitment of many generations with a common vision to re-conquest Spain, a SF demands persistence and long-term vision. The name also reflects a point of no return, like Cortés burning his ships in Veracruz in front of his soldiers, emphasizing full commitment.
The Covadonga bridge in the logo represents the connection between generations — experienced business owners and new entrepreneurs — working together to preserve a company’s legacy while driving growth. Lastly, Covadonga holds personal significance as a tribute to my childhood summers spent in Asturias, blending professional ambition with meaningful memories.
