Deer Slayer, with all due respect I think you might be mistaking someone's personal opinion of what happened, with having a credible knowledge of what happened. I've never heard Mr. Kia's story, but if he presented his ideas as any more authoritative than simple opinion, then I'd have to question it.
Even if he were close personal friends with the Shah himself, (as opposed to knowing a guy who knew a guy) please explain to me how this would make him privy to secret details from the government who drove him from power, out of the country, and was actively seeking to have him extradited, tried and executed.
But I'm sure they were still keeping him in the loop on those American hostage negotiations just for fun.
Everything you have is sheer speculation, (like the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and the gunman on the grassy knoll) It's no less circumstantial than the evidence that Bill Clinton murdered Vincent Foster. And anyone who fully believes either theory is a certifiable wingnut.
This particular Iranian conspiracy theory was first widely distributed in a late-80's book whose author I previously discussed. If this was not the origin of your opinion, I apologize for the mischaracterization. But your allegation is still completely unsubstantiated.
There are many possible reasons Iran waited until the last minute (the day before inauguration day) to cut the hostage deal (with Carter's administration mind you). One theory is they wanted to yank our chains as long as possible, but still wanted to seal the deal with Carter in office, because they didn't know what they'd get with Reagan.
Another is that it was a parting shot at Carter, who was hardly popular with Iran's new leadership. After all, it was Carter admitting the exiled Shah to the US for medical treatment (without extraditing him to Iran) that triggered the whole hostage crisis in the first place. I don't blame Carter for the crisis, but Iran certainly did.
Or maybe they wanted to prove they were in control... releasing the hostages after it was too late for Carter, but before Reagan could take any credit for the negotiations. Which brings me to another point. If Reagan really had the power to make the call on when to have the hostages released, wouldn't he have done it later? Why wouldn't he give it a week or two more, so he could take full credit for both the negotiations and release? Would he really intentionally set it up so Jimmy Carter got to finish the deal?
Anyway, all of these are more plausible than the idea that Reagan, without the power or diplomatic connections of the Presidency engineered a deal with Iran in a few weeks, while Carter, with all his might, couldn't make any deal for well over a year.
I guess the evil genius/bumbling buffoon dichotomy never gets old.