I give you the "Desire" part, but I question the implied premises: 1) Selling tickets, programs, and drinks undermines the artistic value of the production. I'm not certain that "commercial success" in this case means anything more than they can pay the rent, pay the staff, and keep the lights on. If there's a deeper sinister drive towards pure wealth creation here, you haven't proven it. Selling just a program is practically de rigueur compared to many shows (google "phantom merch" for examples). 2) That "immersive" theater must also be interactive to an infinite degree, and if not, it fails. Every artwork has its own set of terms by which it is consumed, it's own frame. If SNM's terms are too restrictive for your tastes, it's fair to say so. SNM has a lot of structure and yes, it's possible for the audience to screw that up. But I don't understand the pass/fail nature of your argument or the standard you are using. 3) That because they did not destroy the entire foundation of the audience-performer relationship, they have somehow failed. Who said that was the goal?
http://www.culturebot.net/2012/11/14997/punchdrunk-and-the-politics-of-spectatorship/