The open question here (as I see it) is not that Zeta was...

The open question here (as I see it) is not that Zeta was diluted, but the degree that they have allowed themselves to be diluted. By not participating at all they will end up being diluted down from 35% to 13% when the dust settles. That one hell of a drop. I can understand WSA wanting to ensure that they would be at least on par with ZER at, say, ~20% each, or even WSA slightly higher, which would involve ZER participating to some degree by not taking up their full entitlement. But to completely abstain and allow themselves to drop down to 13% beggars belief. The point here is that it didn't need to be a binary all or nothing approach. ZER could have purchased ~145m new shares through via their entitlements to end up being diluted to ~20% when the dust settles (i.e. (265m + 145m) / 2,051m final new SOI). That would have meant ZER participating to the tune of ~48% of their entitlements, but they didn't. Furthermore, they sold 3.4m shares to slightly exacerbate their dilution. (That's an immaterial number of shares for them to be selling, but what about the optics of it?)

Even if they (ZER) had purchased enough (via entitlements) to end up roughly on par with WSA (i.e. ~20% each), they each have a seat on the board and ZER's man has now been relegated out of the Chairman's seat, with a new independent Chairman now appointed. So, the new composition at board level is enough to ensure it's not "The Zeta Show" any more.