Should they fail to meet that obligation, their mandate of profit will not be met. Pure and simple.
So then we all agree that Abrams met that mandate?
This isn't something nebulous like TV ratings, where we can argue about things like the effect time-shifting and downloading shows can affect ratings.
Paramount spent 'A' amount of dollars on the project, and earned 'X' from ticket sales, 'Y' from home video and 'Z' from broadcast/cable rights. If 'X', 'Y' and 'Z' are far greater than 'A', then Abrams satisfied his employers and seemingly the public that bought the product.
We can argue the artistic merit til the end of time, that is going to mean something different to each individual, but the economic argument that Abrams didn't do his job simply doesn't exist.