I just caught the phrase "early demise."
The problem with that being, people have been criticizing Pentax video fo as long as I've been on the site, like 10 years. If the lack of video had caused Pentax's demise after a couple years, that would have been early. We are already fairly late in the process, and the only clear answer is, it hasn't caused anything yet.
As for "early demise" that boat has already sailed.
After 10 years, no one has ever presented any evidence the position of Pentax video in the market hurts the brand at all. No one has ever presented any evidence that a camera that costs more with better video would make Pentax more money.
We have people who've left Pentax for better video, and we've had people adopt Pentax for better stills and less video, and better price performance for their stills.
"Would adding better video lead to Pentax's demise?" is at this point an equally relevant question. In that sense, the bias of the OP is apparent in the question.
But hey, run a poll.
Pick one of the cameras, that you think is more Pentax like, the one you think is most desirable.
https://www.techradar.com/news/best-4k-camera
Run a poll. Who would buy that camera rather than a Pentax based on the cost and video performance.
Lets find out some stuff.
The big rule for camera companies. Know your user base and cater to them first.