A valid post for sure.
It can be argued that as a hobby, pool is doing OK. League players, as a group, are hobbyists, and the leagues of America are still fairly healthy.
MikeMosconi's post nicely encapsulated pool's real issue. WHO plays pool is at least as important as whether people are playing pool. Substantial growth in the game can only happen if the image of both pool and the pool player is raised to the point that those hoping to reach a big audience would invest in it.
Golf was once as low as pool. As recently as the 1950's, the pro golfer needed side bets and action to make financial ends meet. High profile players like Sam Snead and Walter Hagen before him were great golfers, but they were also hustlers. Then came Arnold Palmer, who reached out to the corporate types and, by partnering with them, also jump-started golf's long-time commitment to giving to charities. Now, the PGA is viewed by most as an organization of refined, charitable, men, who usually conduct themselves as polished professionals.
Pool needs its "Arnold Palmer moment" in which it transforms itself into something more respectable. It's not outside the realm of possibility, but the pro players of today are delusional, believing that displays of refinement and self-respect will be the RESULT of making more money, not understanding that it must be the CAUSE. Until the most visible players care about pool's image, they will remain cut off from those who want to reach the important demographic groups in their advertising.
As you say, it is important for pool to grow as a hobby, but as a product, pool isn't very well positioned right now. It's not too late to change this.