And Keith Giffen once claimed that TPTB at DC at the time "hated" what he and DeMatteis were doing with the JLI and related books, but they put up with them because they sold better than most of the rest of the line. By the time Morrison took over the League in the later 90's, the JLI era of the team had, in-universe, replaced the Detroit era team as the version looked back upon by the DC heroes as an embarrassment to the League, and Max Lord transformed into a caricature of an evil villain. (Like what now seems to be trying to be done with Amanda Waller, yet again.)
As I understand it, and please correct me if I get the numbers wrong, in the early '80s the New Teen Titans was outselling EVERY DC title at something like 800,000 issues a month, with my beloved LSH coming in second place by selling like 400,000 issues a month. We've come to know in recent years that there is an existing hierarchy (in DC's eyes) of characters and titles that are "supposed" to be the best-selling, and the ones that are expected to sell or perform poorly. They'll accept it when something sells well but seem to hold a grudge against whatever either outperforms what's "supposed" to be selling well or when creative teams do amazingly well using writing or art styles that fly in the face of how "things are supposed to be done." Major exception seems to be the Vertigo stuff, which got DC something else: prestige. Hell, I still remember when DC or the Superman offices were still trying to "remind" the audience that they were "supposed" to like Superman more than Batman.
Point being, "karma" always seems to happen to characters or titles that somehow violate this self-imposed hierarchy, no matter how well-made or financially successful they are. "Sabotage what succeeded but shouldn't have succeeded" seems to be a corporate policy at DC that predates Dan Didio's reign of terror.