Disney should continue the Star Wars Saga in perpetuity

I accept this challenge. My position will be that Disney should keep making Star Wars movies for an indefinite amount of time, and that these movies should be part of the main saga. I invite Con to consider the following counter-arguments. 1. Not all long runners jumped the shark at any point in their existence. Franchises such as Doctor Who or the Amazing Spider-Man have followed a nearly uninterrupted thread of sequels for over 50 years, spanning various derivatives in the process. Long runners have their ups (Spider Island) and downs (One More Day), but the quality rollercoaster rarely stays down for long (they'd shut the franchise down if the fans' interest dropped for too long). The Star Wars saga may only be at its 7th movie in almost 35 years of existence, but there is no reason to believe it would make less good of a long runner than the previously mentioned Doctor Who and Spider-Man, whose average quality is at least the same today as it was at their beginning, despite sudden drops in quality from time to time. 2. While a story may end (such as the story of the war against the Empire), the expectation is that the universe in which the story happens continues to exist. The Empire is defeated, but many of the people that took part in the rebellion are still alive and well. The ending of episode VI was never too explicit on what happened to them afterwards, so how their life unfolded later on is a story untold. Maybe they will all be old or dead in episode VII, and must train younger heroes to take their mantle. Done right, this could be a form of poetic repetition between the second and third trilogy. And if they are successful in rebuilding the Jedi Order, the writers can afford to skip many generations of relative peace when going from the third to the fourth trilogy, where something else happens to change the status quo. 3. Consistency is obviously an issue that all long runners eventually end up facing. Either the actors grow too old (or too dead) for their role and they have to find new ones or get away with the character, or the other people on the franchise (writers, drawers, music-composers) retire. But consistency can be as much as boon as a curse: it can help the audience recognize that the sequel really is a continuation of the franchise, in which case the person looks essential to everyone involved until he dies or retires and they must find someone else to take his place (Doctor Who faces the same problem when an actor playing an older doctor dies, and they have to show the older doctor on-screen). Or it can also make the audience tired that the same things happen again and again until they become predictable. As a concrete example where consistency proved detrimental for a serie, take Heroes. They initially planned to keep similar storylines across seasons but with a different cast each season. Due to the popularity of the first cast, they decided not to change it but went along with the same storyline, resulting in a repetition of the story. This, along with poor execution of plot twists (and the infamous case of writers forgeting an important character entirely), caused a progressive drop in serie quality. To keep quality of content, a franchise must always have original content to spare, and Heroes didn't have enough to keep its fanbase (season 4, which did have many of the content that gave the serie its charm, was too little, too late).