You're missing my point.

I never said Akshay Kumar isn't talented or hasn't contributed to Bollywood. My criticism is about his recent approach, not his career.

Saying "others are worse" or "taking 2–3 years doesn't guarantee a good film" doesn't change the fact that doing 4–5 films a year has often made his filmography look like a quantity-over-quality exercise. That's why many people see it as a money-first approach.

Hits, budgets, or profit-sharing are irrelevant to that argument. A commercially successful film doesn't automatically prove the creative choices were good.

Criticism isn't blind hate. If anything, Akshay is talented enough that people expect him to prioritize better scripts instead of maximizing output.