The analysis assumes—and to be relatively accurate would require—rational behaviour on the part of delegators. I am not sure that is a safe assumption. For example, many delegators do not seem to understand important details of how staking works. That is a challenge of education, not the protocol.
It would be useful to hear how CF and other entities signing off on such a decision may be planning to identify and take responsibility for any negative unforeseen consequences or externalities as they may arise as a result of such a change (as there also have been as a result of introducing a mPC in the first place, as others have described above).
In general, the analysis places too much emphasis on the protocol and not enough on the people involved. That is why I put together https://github.com/paradoxicalsphere/cardano-improvement-proposals/blob/main/CIP-x/README.md