@Vlad: I know very well that Buffy is not Twilight.  I was a huge fan of that series well before Twilight had been conceived, but I've heard enough about Twilight to know that there are a number of parallels and Whedonites are understandably pissed about that.  I have a couple cousins who were Twilight fangirls until I introduced them to Buffy; they went out and bought all seven seasons, then the Season 8 comics, a Buffy calandar and I'm not sure what else.  They were more willing to spend money on Buffy because they believed it to be better quality. Whovians, I imagine, would perhaps be inclined to purchase replicas of the Sonic Screwdriver, or a TARDIS cookie jar.  I'm not sure how many followers of Jersey Shore are willing to invest in Snooki action figures, so there's that angle as well.  And though I have not looked into it, I don't think that boxsets of Survivor do especially well against, say, Dexter.  A larger audience doesn't mean a more appreciative one.

Because Twilight was successful it indicated a need for more of the Vampire/Human romance, and so then True Blood rose to success, yet it was hardly alone in modern literature feature vampire/human romance, it was just better so others remain in obscurity.  For all this talk about intelligence, I expect you to exercise critical thinking.  Because so far all you've done is demonstrate an intolerance to people who enjoy things that you do not, accusing them of being unintelligent because they have different tastes.  If you are to continue to do so and expect to be taken seriously, you will be expected to demonstrate intelligence superior to their own or explain how one's tastes is a reflection of their intellect without having to rely solely on your opinion.  You must be objective when making such extraordinary claims.

@Everyone who disagrees with my claim: If not sales/profit, what would you consider to be the best objective measuring stick for quality?  I have yet to hear a single proposal.  Most people are just disagreeing outright, using their own opinions as evidence enough.  How should I be able to tell the difference which opinion is correct?  I get the feeling that people are disagreeing simply because they believe something to be high-quality but it's financially less successful than things that the same people consider low quality.  I urge you to explore beyond the limits of your own personal preferences and explain how one can recognize quality in something that you detest, or at least admit that you could be absolutely wrong when you believe that something is very good. 

@Everyone who disagrees with my claim: If not sales/profit, what would you consider to be the best objective measuring stick for quality?  I have yet to hear a single proposal.  Most people are just disagreeing outright, using their own opinions as evidence enough.  How should I be able to tell the difference which opinion is correct?  I get the feeling that people are disagreeing simply because they believe something to be high-quality but it's financially less successful than things that the same people consider low quality.  I urge you to explore beyond the limits of your own personal preferences and explain how one can recognize quality in something that you detest, or at least admit that you could be absolutely wrong when you believe that something is very good. 

@People who appreciate my grammar: thank you.  If I must sound insane, at least I appear lucid.

You've just made the same mistake as so many others in this thread.  A diamond ring is not a form of entertainment; the quality of jewelery can be scientifically measured without bias.  Entertainment cannot.  Sales=Quality is a formula that can only be applied to things entirely subjective in nature, like entertainment. 

But onto that ring.  The scientific measurements in terms of quality would include the mass of the precious materials (the preciousness somewhat determined by the opinions and tastes of the population, might I add), the purity of each of them, the length of time it took to fashion the materials into the ring in question, and the distance it had to travel to reach the market.  Two rings equal in terms of the aforementioned attributes should have the same value provided they are both released within the same population...if it weren't for the artistic angle as well.

Some designs would be more appreciated by the customer than others, and the one that the customer likes the best would likely be the one purchased.  Given a dozen choices of rings of the same price, the customer will purchase the one preferred.  In this process, the quality of the work is determined.  The inferior designs won't sell so easily and will have to be adjusted in price to reflect its value, superior designs will increase in value.  The formula of Sales=Quality influences things thus, but since jewelery is not a form of entertainment or exclusively a piece of art, your example is an unsatisfactory rebuttle against my formula.

You've just made the same mistake as so many others in this thread.  A diamond ring is not a form of entertainment; the quality of jewelery can be scientifically measured without bias.  Entertainment cannot.  Sales=Quality is a formula that can only be applied to things entirely subjective in nature, like entertainment. 

But onto that ring.  The scientific measurements in terms of quality would include the mass of the precious materials (the preciousness somewhat determined by the opinions and tastes of the population, might I add), the purity of each of them, the length of time it took to fashion the materials into the ring in question, and the distance it had to travel to reach the market.  Two rings equal in terms of the aforementioned attributes should have the same value provided they are both released within the same population...if it weren't for the artistic angle as well.

Some designs would be more appreciated by the customer than others, and the one that the customer likes the best would likely be the one purchased.  Given a dozen choices of rings of the same price, the customer will purchase the one preferred.  In this process, the quality of the work is determined.  The inferior designs won't sell so easily and will have to be adjusted in price to reflect its value, superior designs will increase in value.  The formula of Sales=Quality influences things thus, but since jewelery is not a form of entertainment or exclusively a piece of art, your example is an unsatisfactory rebuttle against my formula.