I would challenge a couple of those assertions:

1. Definition. One could come up with a definition of “wargame” that excludes skirmish games with simple rules, but I can’t imagine many agreeing with it.

2. Objectivity. GW’s turnover alone is treble what it was last century.   That is one incomplete measure.  Another incomplete but objective measure is attendance numbers at Salute, or Adepticon, or wherever.  It is not subjective to say that wargames sales and interest are many times greater than in prior decades.

The issue really as I see it is that some sectors of the wargames market may (or may not) be suffering from competition with other sectors, but there is no actual data on the number of “big” games being played, so cannot say whether this is objective or subjective, in the week of the biggest ever refight of Waterloo I hesitate to be certain.  I can’t help but feel that this is all  just a complaint about fashion and trends.

The reality as I perceive it is that the market is different now and what was the “only game in town” in the 70’s appears less popular against “sexier” alternatives that weren’t available back in the day.

I understand the feeling.  I loved White Dwarf magazine back in the early (pre-issue 100 days when it *was* roleplaying in the UK)  and often hear of it refered to as a golden age.   But WD is now prettier, bigger and more popular than it was in the 70’s and early 80’s.  I mourn the loss but recognise that times have changed and am happy that thanks to the internet I have access to more like-minded people than I ever did back when the personal ads page in WD was the inly way to find same.