The article does a disservice to clarity by lumping together the Old Catholic movement which includes both the PNCC and the group which followed the Bishop of Utrecht's rejection of the First Vatican Council, and recent flaky pseudo-Catholic apostate groups.I disagree. These "flaky" groups and the Old Catholics of Utrecht have very close ties of doctrinal and personal kinship.
Only a subset of the original Old Catholic movement had anything much more in common with Orthodoxy than they did with Anglicanism or Lutheranism.
The bogging down of our talks with the Old Catholics leads me to agree substantially: they've become a continental echo of Anglicanism, outwardly a traditional liturgical church, inwardly an 'inclusive' mess including everything from loony liberals to orthodox (indeed almost Orthodox) believers. In the long run I suspect they'll fragment and we (and you) will pick up some of the traditionalist pieces.
Nonethless, I think for historical clarity the distinction could have been better drawn.