I think Jim is repeating and/or developing what seems to me to be an illogical explanation for the decline in the number of folk clubs, which I shall quote:

"The clubs, unaccmompanied and accompanied based began to close not because one o the other - bad performances and disappearances of any kind of folk song drove the audiences away"

The idea is still in this version of the argument that a reason for the clubs folding was that they did not include folk song as a 'genre', irrespective of the quality of performance, which is deemed to be a different issue.

I repeat my view that this is illogical because if there was a demand (and on Jim's view it was not solely bad performance at issue) then there would be no need to close. The solution to the problem would be to supply the required kind of music. Or is Jim saying that what was on offer was at one and the same time badly performed and not 'folk'?

I think Cj is right about the word 'folk' having been through a 'folk process' of sorts, though commercial factors, not usually seen as 'folk' probably played a part.