“Roundabout Warns Studio 54 Could Close”

It does need help, hopefully common sense prevails

It absolutely has to get renovated given how decrepit it's become. With that said, after their disastrous remodel of the Pels, not sure I trust Roundabout to be in charge of renovating anything.

From the article:

"The filing asks the city to grant new air rights for Studio 54 or to allow theater air rights to be sold more broadly across the Theater District, rather than limiting transfers to neighboring sites."

Okay, so this remarkably privileged non-profit wants to add even more legal possibilities for commercial development in the Times Square area on top of what is already on the books so they can refurbish one of their properties? They're not a theater anymore. They're a real estate portfolio.

Updated On: 12/18/25 at 11:07 AM

"Frankly I'd like to see nonprofits be forced to divest from their real estate holdings if they're not in active use by the nonprofit for a certain period of time. Why should Roundabout get to control and profit off the Sondheim when they haven't produced a show there in almost 15 years?"

Of all the weird bootlicking things posted on here... this is one of the weirder ones.

Kad said: "KJisgroovy said: ""Frankly I'd like to see nonprofits be forced to divest from their real estate holdings if they're not in active use by the nonprofit for a certain period of time. Why should Roundabout get to control and profit off the Sondheim when they haven't produced a show there in almost 15 years?"

Of all the weird bootlicking things posted on here... this is one of the weirder ones."

How is that bootlicking...? It's true that Roundabout has pulled back its Broadway programming and effectively just been a landlord for 2 of their 3 houses. They've kept the Sondheim continually rented since Anything Goes closed and most of the productions that have been in 54 over the last decade have been rentals, as well. They're the only Broadway nonprofit that continually rents out their Broadway theaters to commercial productions."

The real question is why does it matter if they rent them out or not?

broadfan327 said: "fashionguru_23 said: "Kad said: "KJisgroovy said: ""Frankly I'd like to see nonprofits be forced to divest from their real estate holdings if they're not in active use by the nonprofit for a certain period of time. Why should Roundabout get to control and profit off the Sondheim when they haven't produced a show there in almost 15 years?"

Of all the weird bootlicking things posted on here... this is one of the weirder ones."

How is that bootlicking...? It's true that Roundabout has pulled back its Broadway programming and effectively just been a landlord for 2 of their 3 houses. They've kept the Sondheim continually rented since Anything Goes closed and most of the productions that have been in 54 over the last decade have been rentals, as well. They're the only Broadway nonprofit that continually rents out their Broadway theaters to commercial productions."

The real question is why does it matter if they rent them out or not?"

Because they are crying poverty because technically they are non-profit, but they are not really producing theater in two of their holdings. Their mission when they were founded was not to be a real estate holding company. I imagine it would have been to produce theater works. They want the city to make an exception for them because otherwise, they would have to sell the theater for it to become something else, while not really fulfilling how they are allowed to be non-profit in the first place."

Agreed, but I think it might go beyond a special "carve out" for Roundabout. What they seem to be proposing is an overall change in city zoning law for theaters to continue to build on the already existing laws that allow theaters to sell air rights to commercial developers.

The Broadway World article links to a Crain article behind a pay wall but the Roundabout's filed amendment request to the city can be found here.

Here is a taste of what these cuties want to be struck-through and removed:

;.whether the bonus #floor area# will unduly increase the #bulk# of any #development# or #enlargement#, density of population or intensity of #use# on any #block# to the detriment of occupants of #buildings# on the #block# or the surrounding area; and

whether the distribution and location of such #floor area# bonus will adversely affect the surrounding area by restricting light and air or otherwise impair the essential character or future development of the surrounding area.

I would be happy to hear that I am reading this wrong.

Suggesting that Roundabout should be forced to give up theaters because they arent actively producing shows there is absolutely ridiculous. Roundabout is far from the only non-profit who acts as landlord. I fail to see how it is a bad thing. They rent out their spaces as a source of income. Direly needed income. Roundabout would love to continually support their own productions in both Studio 54 and Todd Haimes theaters, but fundraising at this level to produce this much broadway content has been difficult for some time. It's gotten exponentially worse in the last couple years. Being a Broadway landlord also means they get to be one more voice who can decide WHAT is produced on Broadway. Would you rather the Nederlanders or Shuberts have two more theaters and continue to have even more of a stranglehold over what kind of art gets produced?

Non Profits all across the country are struggling. Subscriptions have cratered. Fundraising has waned. Government grants have evaporated. People are going out less, and certainly not buying tickets in advance. But sure, let's force them to give up one of their only reliable sources of income (well...not so reliable during those years in the pandemic when rent wasnt being paid, was it?). Gimme a break.

JMH27 said: "The discussion on Roundabout mainly renting out their theaters made me curious, is the upcoming revival of The Rocky Horror Show an actual Roundabout revival, or a production they are just renting out to?"

Rocky Horror is a Roundabout production

RippedMan said: "Broadway61004 said: "It absolutely has to get renovated given how decrepit it's become. With that said, after their disastrous remodel of the Pels, not sure I trust Roundabout to be in charge of renovating anything."

What makes the Pels so bad?"

It's built like a thrust space without having a thrust stage. The random seats on the aisle in the center section that turn inward are just insanely idiotic and incredibly uncomfortable. Not to mention the single file escalator just to get to the space that they didn't even think to update.

They could always raise money by reopening the orgy pit… or was that one of the other clubs?

broadfan327 said: "fashionguru_23 said: "Kad said: "KJisgroovy said: ""Frankly I'd like to see nonprofits be forced to divest from their real estate holdings if they're not in active use by the nonprofit for a certain period of time. Why should Roundabout get to control and profit off the Sondheim when they haven't produced a show there in almost 15 years?"

Of all the weird bootlicking things posted on here... this is one of the weirder ones."

How is that bootlicking...? It's true that Roundabout has pulled back its Broadway programming and effectively just been a landlord for 2 of their 3 houses. They've kept the Sondheim continually rented since Anything Goes closed and most of the productions that have been in 54 over the last decade have been rentals, as well. They're the only Broadway nonprofit that continually rents out their Broadway theaters to commercial productions."

The real question is why does it matter if they rent them out or not?"

Because they are crying poverty because technically they are non-profit, but they are not really producing theater in two of their holdings. Their mission when they were founded was not to be a real estate holding company. I imagine it would have been to produce theater works. They want the city to make an exception for them because otherwise, they would have to sell the theater for it to become something else, while not really fulfilling how they are allowed to be non-profit in the first place."

Kad knows this. I don't understand, he's usually the pragmatic truth teller. But lately he's just been being a reactionary against some of the truisms and statements people on this board have made!