[Kunzite]

Well I believe you for sure..if by that you mean that Hoya refused to invest while looking for a buyer?.....no company is going to destroy a business that it hopes to sell, Hoya didn't want to spend out all the investments knowing the return would be three or so years later......
.although looking and reading through, I could find nothing relating to the details other than an attempted block of shares, some "save pill" share scheme which allowed existing share holders to buy shares at low market prices to increase the value of the company....then the takeover..... the track is hard to follow.............
...........will you settle for saved once. LOL?

If only you being right meant that Pentax will soldier on..........

Yes, you can say that Hoya refused to invest while looking for a buyer. They were always talking about cost cutting, downsizing and their ever-precious margins - no hint of long term thinking there.
And we can see how, after the 2008 spike - lenses prepared by Pentax Corporation - the lens development slowed to a grinding halt. They even canceled existing projects like the DA* 30mm and the long telephoto.
That left the Pentax line largely neglected. Still with film-era lenses, still with SDM micro-motors on the "top" lenses, with screw drive on many others, still with no FF. Far from saving, Hoya left Pentax in a sorry state.

OTOH Ricoh took over on 1st October 2011 - this is the 7th year of ownership. The market started to decline right after that and strategies have to be adjusted; but it's past time to see some speed. (Are you reading this, Ricoh? We're still here, ready to support said 'speed' with our money).

The only saving that took place was for Ricoh to take over from Hoya. Otherwise I'm afraid Pentax would truly be dead.
But without Hoya, this saving would not be necessary.