To accept the idea that the Simon, or any theatre, is in some way responsible for a show's success or failure, you have to imagine that patrons were on the fence about seeing a show, but decided against it because of the theatre. Of course, you can have productions that fail to suit themselves to the specifics of a theatre, such as its size or Circle in the Square's thrust, but the fault there is not in the theatre but the production. Thus, the idea is ludicrous.
Here's a legitimate question for those comparing the two Parisian shows: which movie do we think has more name-brand recognition today? I suspect it's AAIP but have no empirical evidence to support that. I suspect that the shows' brands are more valuable than either Hudgens' is to GIGI or the lack of recognizable names is to AAIP.
Words don't deserve that kind of malarkey. They're innocent, neutral, precise, standing for this, describing that, meaning the other, so if you look after them you can build bridges across incomprehension and chaos. But when they get their corners knocked off, they're no good anymore…I don't think writers are sacred, but words are. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.