Yes, I wouldn't want a Trek show to depend on selling toys, either. That would almost certainly generate episodes that I would not enjoy watching. GL and YJ were very good, though (but they were apparently financial failures, and I wouldn't expect a new Trek series to be ordered under similar conditions).
I'm sad to admit it, but you have a good point there. However, cartoon shows being tied to how well toys sell is not a new issue. In fact, it goes back to the same era the original Star Trek animated show was made in. An animated show based on or depended on toy sales can still attract a larger audience than just the 6-10 crowd. Take a look at something like Batman The Animated Series from the early 1990's. I gurantee toy sales from that show were being look at. Yet, that didn't end up affecting the quality of the show. And it's not alone. My point being is that it can happen, but the stars have to be aligned just right and the powers that be from the studios have to give some leeway to the creative forces.
Well, I could easily have overstated things somewhat. You're quite right that shows can
be well-written and still be financially supported by tie-in products.
I was reacting, though possibly overreacting, to the cancellation of Young Justice
and Green Lantern.
Both were good, well-written shows. However, YJ in particular suffered production delays and consequently, I presume, cost overruns. That wouldn't be allowed to happen again on a production, so I was assuming, rightly or wrongly, that that would imply that quality would be compromised in some way; production issues on YJ are something that can be blamed for its failure, even though the tie-in marketing end of the enterprise probably wasn't well thought-out either.