Brendy. That's twice you've sneered at the term "moderately successful", the second time apparently out of context.   You seem to interpret the term as equal to failure.   I chose the term "moderately" to avoid overclaiming – noting that I'm aware of more successful clubs in the country. There is a spectrum in these things, as in everything.   However, the club I attend runs about one third "big" names, one third "lesser" names or new acts, and one third local interest or singers nights. It isn't always full to the gills, but it is some distance from failure. It appears to be fulfilling the need to provide a platform for established professionals and rising newcomers: though there are always more potential guests than evenings.

More generally, although a professional artist or a concert promoter has to be businesslike, a club (folk, dance, model railways or whatever) is essentially an amateur organisation run for the benefit of its members/attendees. If the finances are not run sensibly, then the club will fail, but it is not the purpose of its existence. A club is not a business. Its health is not judged by its growth rate or profit margin. Clubs can be stable for many years at a "moderate" level, if that satisfies the members/attendees.

Captain; I went to Kingston club a few years before you. Sadly, the only acts I remember are the club residents Dunedain (what happened to them?) and a visit from Martin Wyndham Reed, complete with bush-hat.