I agree. In reading the article I am not sure what the rationale was for including the Zoo in the holding company concept. Like most Council decision there are always unseen drivers and agendas - some good and some not! That said, an increase in the depth and breadth of management expertise that the Zoo can access to make it a success can not be a bad thing. I have often thought that the Zoo Enterprise Board should be more than just Council reps.
I share your sentiment though, that becoming money focussed at the expense of what the Zoo is really about would be a disaster.
From a practical perspective, being seen as (semi)distinct from the Council could make things like external fundraising easier.