I wasn't talking about Bytedance's point of view, but that of the Chinese government. As a private company without state backing, I agree that selling might have been the best decision to maximise their profits. But could have been politically advantageous for China to veto the sale- even if the platform were politically neutral- because it was basically untouchable, as was already proven by years of delay. They might have used it as a bargaining chip, and then I'd be curious to know what they got back.