There's no point repeating yourself because I've already debunked your nonsensical "explanation" (air quotes because you mostly just made matter of fact statements with little to nothing backing them up throughout this whole thread). Making more money and pleasing customers isn't redundant, that's the main goal of a business, hence good business sense.
Instead of making excuses to not acknowledge my argument, what you'd need to do if you want to continue to assert you're correct without looking like a fool is to actually address my points. Above all else, I really just want to know what game you think is gonna sell more than MK9. To say it's bad business sense comes with the implication that there's a game that's a safer bet to sell more.
Then I'll ask you too, what game do you think the Mario Kart team will make instead that's a guaranteed massive hit like MK9 would be? ARMS 2 lol? Unless you can name one, then you have no place to say it's bad business sense. Your excuses for why Mario Kart alone should be exempt from getting a sequel do not outweigh cold hard numbers when talking from a business standpoint. You even admit MK9 will sell over 20m! Where the hell is your consistency!? xD
I already addressed your biased assumptions in the rest of my post you quoted yet completely ignored, but I'll add this to further highlight the weightlessness of such assumptions. I could just as easily say that MK9 on Switch will be a revolutionary game that grows the franchise much like BotW, that it would be different enough to warrant owning both it and MK8D, and make MK10 even more of a killer app for the Switch 2. The only reason you and others are opting for the negative outlook is because it's convenient for your argument, not because of any real facts or evidence.
It's just silly the notion that a MK9 on Switch is not okay but it suddenly becomes okay just because you put it on a different system. Doing so doesn't change the fact that a sequel is (generally) going to be played more than the previous entry. It doesn't magically change the fact that it's still a sequel and thus would still cannibalize sales, split the user base, and lower interest in another sequel, so you say anyway. Again I stress, Nintendo's entire existence destroys this logic, they're nothing but a sequel machine.
Why on earth do you think the team is limited to Arms 2 if not Mario Kart 9? Silly argument on your part.
And the rest of your argument is already defeated by my above post. So I'll repeat:
"Nintendo dulls the potential of a killer app for Switch 2, and cannibalizes 10 million+ Mario Kart 8 sales, needlessly."
"Mario Kart 9 on Switch would be replacementware for a game that doesn’t need replacing. It would cannibalize sales, split the user base, and kill off a killer app for Switch 2. Ultimately, it would be bad business."
I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.