The four funds that control most of Celsa’s capital have asked the board of directors to explore how to exit the steelmaker. The alternatives put forward include a sale, a merger or a stock-market listing. No route has been chosen and no timetable has been set so far: this is the start of a process, not a completed transaction.
Celsa Chairman Rafael Vilaseca explained the decision alongside Chief Executive Officer Jordi Cazorla when presenting the results for the first half of 2026. According to available information, the main funds—SVP, Attestor, Golden Tree and Cross Ocean—hold around 98% of the capital and are seeking to coordinate their exit.
The decision comes after the restructuring
The move comes after the company completed a far-reaching financial and operational restructuring. The funds took control of Celsa following a court process that converted part of the debt into shares and displaced the founding family as owners. Since then, the group has reduced its debt and sold its businesses in the United Kingdom and the Nordic countries, among other measures.
Celsa reported net profit of 50.7 million euros in the first half of 2026, compared with losses in the same period of the previous year, and revenue of 1.786 billion euros. The company put its net debt at 1.134 billion euros and its leverage ratio at 2.3 times, according to the published figures. These data provide context for the process, but do not by themselves determine the value of any potential transaction: executives did not specify a valuation for the company.
The alternatives remain open
Vilaseca said that both a potential corporate transaction and a stock-market listing are being considered, and that neither the format nor the timing has yet been decided. The choice will depend on the opportunities that arise and on factors such as price and the shareholding stability that might result. The company plans to assess the options with advisers; media coverage reports that they had not yet been formally appointed.
The funds intend to exit in a coordinated manner. Although the possibility of selling the Polish business separately has been mentioned, that option does not amount to a decision to break up the group: the main transaction is being considered for Celsa as a whole, and no final structure has been announced. A stock-market listing also presents a practical difference: according to Vilaseca, it would be difficult for shareholders to sell 100% of the company all at once.
The process may be subject to public review
Celsa has informed the Government that the process has begun. The company has indicated that, if the potential buyer were from outside the European Union, the transaction would have to be reviewed by the Strategic Investment Committee, which reports to the Ministry of Economy. The scope of that review will depend on the buyer’s identity and the specific terms of the transaction; no investor or agreement has been announced.
In particular, Vilaseca denied that Celsa had held talks with Jindal Steel, an Indian conglomerate whose name had appeared in reports about potential interested parties. Its mention therefore does not confirm that negotiations are under way.
The next stage will be to assess the available options and market conditions. Until the shareholders and the board announce a decision, a sale, merger and stock-market listing remain possibilities, not commitments or guaranteed outcomes.