Give me original and cohesive detailed commentary on this using a critical straitforward informal tone: 



Do Companies sabotage their artists on purpose? Do companies intentionally restrict the expansion and fame of their artists Companies desire their artists to achieve success; nevertheless, if they attain an excessive level of success, it may result in an overpowering influence, potentially leading to a decision of not renewing their contracts, I find it entirely plausible that a company would resort to dubious tactics to maintain control over popular groups, However, it is my belief that many fans have an inflated perception of just how much more successful their favorite groups would become even with optimal promotional efforts, I believe it is not entirely implausible that companies intentionally hinder the progress of their artists, There seems to be a strategic balance of achievement that these companies aim to maintain, ensuring that the artist does not overshadow the company itself, Consequently, they resort to undermining the artist's success when the group starts gaining significant popularity, I have witnessed labels engaging in peculiar actions that ultimately lead to a decline in revenue, The only logical explanation I can fathom for such behavior is that it ultimately benefits the company more than it does the artists, The main desire of music labels is to retain control and authority, ensuring that the power remains in their hands rather than being transferred to the artists, Out of all the kpop acts, it is highly likely that blackpink and BTS are one of the only ones who could easily secure a record deal in the Western music industry without facing significant obstacles, Although the quality of the deal may be uncertain, it is undoubtedly certain that they would have no trouble in acquiring one, and this is why Labels are hesitant to grant artists too much power, as it may result in artists prioritizing their own interests and preferences over those of their fans and shareholders, It may not be an ideal situation, but unfortunately, it is the reality, let's take SM groups as example, After closely observing various SM groups, it has become evident to me that their management tactics can be characterized as less of a deliberate act of "sabotage," and more of an excessive control mechanism that ultimately hampers the potential for growth, It seems that the company's incessant insistence on adhering to a rigid image and promoting only what aligns with their preconceived notions limits the opportunities available to their artists and groups, Even when these individuals express a genuine desire to explore new avenues, they are consistently met with resistance and are told that certain ventures are not in line with the company's desired image, This can range from denying them acting opportunities, refusing to facilitate desired collaborations, neglecting to work with individuals who possess the potential to expand their reach in other markets, and even engaging in questionable marketing and distribution practices, The list goes on and on, I strongly believe that SM is severely lacking in their willingness to relinquish control, which is highly problematic from a professional standpoint, This refusal to let go of control limits the growth potential of their groups, as they can never surpass the dominance of the company, The artists are constantly conditioned to rely on the company, believing that their careers would crumble without it, Additionally, I have noticed that once a group is considered past its prime and overshadowed by a newer, more glamorous group, SM actively divests and neglects them, even if they still have the potential to thrive, It is truly disheartening to witness this, but it serves as a major deterrent for me from focusing solely on numerical achievements, The sheer incompetence of the company is astonishing, although the talent and craftsmanship of their artists remain undeniable, In fact, I believe that many other companies employ similar tactics, but SM's approach is particularly obvious to me due to my years of following various groups under their management.