and you presumably have an argument for why that isn't true? I've seen exactly this at about three or four companies that had used Clojure. Successively switched to rewrite their codebases in Java because the Clojure codebase became too idiosyncratic as time went on and new workers had trouble being productive in it.

What is it with Lisp advocacy that turns people into religious advocates where market adoption seemingly doesn't matter, because it paints a very clear picture.

If you bring in new people who know Java and don't want to learn anything else, of course the result will be a rewrite in Java.

Not being able to find Clojure people is a problem, but not indicative of any problem with the code itself.