This is the key thing to note: it's not enough for D&D to make money. It has to make enough money.
Last Gen Con, I was at the Candlekeep seminar when James Lowder stopped in, and the conversation he had with everyone there got into the inner workings of how the D&D brand is managed. He mentioned (as an example) that it wasn't enough that the D&D novel division was making back more money than it spent; it wasn't making sufficient money to justify itself to Hasbro, who eventually had it shuttered (though he mentioned at the time there was talk of it being outsourced, and that seems to be what's happening now based on recent reports). "Return on investment" isn't just about ending up with more than you spent to a huge company, it's about making so much money that it's worth their time to bother with it at all.
According to Lowder, this is part of the reason why D&D made an aggressive push to get the movie rights back, for instance, and why we won't see campaign setting logos for things like the Forgotten Realms anymore. Branding and multimedia pushes are where D&D is going to make its money, rather than books, and brand dilution via multiple logos hurts that. It's why we're seeing so much emphasis on Critical Role and cameos in Stranger Things. D&D the brand is much more valuable, in terms of revenue generation, than D&D the game.