ColorTheHours048, you're taking this to a silly level of high drama.
While I agree that people on this board (and certainly in this thread) tend to get a little vicious, you're just as ridiculous in saying that they're "crushing dreams" by daring to point out the fact that [title of show] making a return is economically foolish, which is a blunt truth based on its Broadway performance.
You said it yourself: you're naive. It's nice to be all idealistic and sappy about how they defied the odds (because they did,) but the numbers don't lie. While I think you should be able to be as hopeful as you want to be, you can't fly off the handle when people who don't share your idealistic viewpoints cite facts, even if they do tend to get a bit nasty.
Though I am in the camp of those who would like to see the show come back, I seem to be in the minority of those with that opinion in that I recognize just what a bad business decision that could potentially be. While the run at The Lyceum was a success in many ways, it was a financial failure, end of story.
That being said, the team at The Producing Office was aware from day one that giving the show a commercial life stood almost no chance at turning a profit. Jeffrey Seller and Kevin McCollum funded [title of show] because they felt it deserved the pinnacle of a Broadway run from an artistic standpoint. Because of that, I don't see them hesitating to bring it back again, especially Off-Broadway where it would stand a chance at attaining the longevity that alluded it this past summer.
If it does return (which I would say is likely,) 37 Arts as the venue would be a given, considering Seller and McCollum own the space (which is starkly vacant) and produce the show.
Tonya Pinkins: Then we had a "Lot's Wife" last June that was my personal favorite. I'm still trying to get them to let me sing it at some performance where we get to sing an excerpt that's gone.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.