The issue that I have with DMA is not about why they sold their...

The issue that I have with DMA is not about why they sold their minority stake, but it's about management's openness about everything.

I probably won't be as ticked if over the years the CEO hadn't been proclaiming how he likes to treat his shareholders like true partners, where he will tell everything as it is without the need for any embellishment.

DMA had been promoted heavily for a few years even when their financial contribution was even smaller. Therefore the argument that it doesn't need to be mentioned since it only represented a very small contribution to ONT's overall earnings simply doesn't stack up in my opinion.

This omission follows other similar things that have happened in the past and it produces a clear behavioural pattern:

- selling marketing right for a number of practices to an external party. This was mentioned in a half year report a few years ago, only to be never mentioned again thereafter. This decision contradicts ONT's claim as an expert in dental practice management.

- a very long list of senior staff that have gone through ONT's revolving door, each one given slightly different title name and most of them only managed to stay for less than 2 years.

----

Having said these, I recognise that ONT has a number of things going in their favour:
- the continuation of corporatisation of the dental industry
- the huge increase in dental graduates looking for jobs
- the CEO's measured approach in acquisition
- the availability of acquisition prospects as older dentists retire.

---

All the best to all ONT holders. I will be interested again if I can see a permanent change in the frankness of the CEO and ONT is able to show its ability to keep and nurture senior staff.

Anyway, the current share price is not exactly in the bargain territory.