There are many ways to have "ownership". One can imagine Hassy with lots of interest in new products, but needing either cash, software development or possibly contemporary production expertise, and going out to get it. Somehow the idea of them just giving away the store doesn't feel anywhere close to this situation. One could rather imagine them protecting their product line, resurging reputation, and newly emerging models in any negotiations with investors or shareholders.
For reasons pointed out above, this may well be one of those cases it's good for both parties, on any levels. Mature Chinese companies have shown in other cases they know how to honor and protect the management and engineering expertise of companies they have acquired. Maybe its time to give Mr. Perry the benefit of the doubt in his negotiations until more is known.
I'm choosing to read the article as a plea to Hassy and its owners to be upfront and make a proper statement about the changes, and what they mean for this hallowed brand. In that light, it's a good article.