I know that what became Three's Company was the result of combining two British sitcoms of the 1970s - Man About the House (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=man+about+the+house) and George and Mildred (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=george+and+mildred). When the Ropers spun-off into their own show, it became more like George and Mildred, with the Jeffrey Tambor and wife couple next door being similar to the next door couple in the original series.

Wasn't The Ropers actually very successful until ABC killed it by moving it to Saturdays at 8 p.m. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979%E2%80%9380_United_States_network_television_schedule#Saturday)? Meanwhile, I'm assuming that Three's a Crowd failed because people were tired of the original show (the super obvious/broad, '70s bred, cheesy/farcical humor that Three's Company thrived upon had likely become a relic by 1984) by then and Mary Cadorette was rather bland as John Ritter's love interest. Maybe Three's a Crowd simply didn't have as good of a supporting cast for John Ritter as on Three's Company.

I remember them as being terrible.

There are a lot of theories. Yes the time-slot for The Ropers changed and that's what Norman Fell always said killed it. But the Ropers were best used as B-plot characters. It was tough to see them alone so much, because after a while an unhappy marriage is just an unhappy marriage and not funny anymore. Also the neighbors (and the kid) were not that interesting, in my opinion. Jeffrey Tambor's character was too snotty and his wife was nice but bland, and the kid could be annoying.

Three's A Crowd was a rush-job. Some people say that Vicki was bland, but I did not like the Mr. Bradford character and his dynamic with Jack...he belittled Jack constantly and neither Jack nor Vicki ever stood up to him or made fun of him in return. With the TC landlords Jack always had the upper hand and the audience knew it, but it wasn't fun watching Jack repeatedly taking Bradford's abuse. (Bradford was similar to Mr. Angelino in Three's Company, but we got Mr. A in small doses, and Jack usually had it coming...but there was no reason for Bradford to dislike Jack.)

I think Three's Company was a farce that worked best as an ensemble. Yes John Ritter was the main guy, but the format of TC was its key to success, not its character development. Both spin-offs tried to switch from farce to character-focused shows, which never fit audience expectations.

tldr - lots of reasons both spinoffs failed :D

I couldn't stand the Mr. Bradford character and the interactions with Jack. The Ropers had the same formula every show, those darn neighbors. It got old after a couple of episodes.

Back to threes a crowd, I'm thinking that John Ritter himself may have contributed to the show's failure, indirectly. I think that John asked for a bigger salary, along with the other two stars. They probably didn't have much left over to vary the scenes and locations. I still believe that Jack was at his best as a chef and not a restaurant owner.

I've never actually seen Three's a Crowd, but The Ropers was mediocre, at best. It doesn't help that they were already like my least favorite characters on Three's Company.

But yeah, wasn't Three's a Crowd more or less The Jack Tripper Show? That's what I heard.

In hindsight, I suspect that Stanley Roper wasn't the right character to build a show around. Mr. Roper when you get right down to it, was pretty unlikable and had virtually no redeeming qualities. And unfortunately, in order to make him more palpable to work as a lead character, you would have to water down anything that made the character interesting in the first place.

And while Mr. Furley could also be pretty homophobic, you at the very least, felt that he genuinely liked Jack and the girls. Meanwhile, Mr. Roper really seemed to look at Jack with disdain.

Yeah, the Ropers worked best as supporting characters. And even then, they are the worst characters in the show. When Mr. Furley came along, he was a much-needed replacement.

I think the only reason they even gave the Ropers their own show is because Three's Company is based on the Britcom Man About the House, which had a spin-off called George and Mildred, which I guess were that show's version of the Ropers.

The Ropers was hilarious but the time change to Saturday night must have helped kill it off.

Here's my .02:

The Ropers (1979-1980): This show focused on the Ropers, after they sold their apartment building & moved to another community in CA. I found the show below average, and IIRC only saw one episode back in the day (probably a re-run). Though these two were amusing as supporting characters in TC, giving them their own show was a stretch. They were at their best when interacting with the other characters in TC - and, IMHO couldn't really carry their own series.

Three's a Crowd (1984-1985): This took place after the events seen in TC, and depicted Jack Tripper living with his new gf - while managing/cooking in a popular restaurant. However, they were being constantly bothered by the gf's father - hence the "Three's a Crowd" title. I thought the show was just OK - and only caught a handful of episodes when it originally aired. I honestly didn't find it that funny, and so never kept up with this.

I still say the Ropers was funny enough to last 4 to 5 seasons if given a consistent time slot.

Remember, it was NOT the Ropers alone! Jeffrey Tambor was just as much a star on the show as the Ropers were & the interaction between them was GREAT!

Tambor was a guest star in some of the FUNNIEST episodes of TC like when he played a psychiatrist! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Here's my .02:

The Ropers (1979-1980): This show focused on the Ropers, after they sold their apartment building & moved to another community in CA. I found the show below average, and IIRC only saw one episode back in the day (probably a re-run). Though these two were amusing as supporting characters in TC, giving them their own show was a stretch. They were at their best when interacting with the other characters in TC - and, IMHO couldn't really carry their own series.
Yep, the Roper's work best in small quick bits and Jeffrey Tambor was a blessing to the show, I haven't seen all episodes but I remember the Roper's taking in some runaway girl later on I think.

Three's a Crowd (1984-1985): This took place after the events seen in TC, and depicted Jack Tripper living with his new gf - while managing/cooking in a popular restaurant. However, they were being constantly bothered by the gf's father - hence the "Three's a Crowd" title. I thought the show was just OK - and only caught a handful of episodes when it originally aired. I honestly didn't find it that funny, and so never kept up with this.
I actually enjoyed TAC and still have original broadcast episodes on VHS, had the show continued I think Mr. Bradford would have eventually accepted Jack. Supposedly Stuart Pankin, the character who played the kooky director in the series' last episode would have joined the cast I'm guessing as Jack and Vicki's neighbor?

As I recall, Three's A Crowd, although not a big hit, was holding its own, but ABC couldn't guarantee a complete 2nd season and John Ritter wouldn't return if ABC couldn't guarantee a full 2nd season. Besides, Ritter was being called to the big screen and probably wouldn't have returned for a 3rd season, had a 3rd season been possible.

The Ropers had the right idea but the supporting characters were weak and the show needed balance

Three’s A Crowd was a fail from the start

It didn't help that (for whatever reasons) Mary Cadorette had like zilch chemistry with the late Mr. Ritter. Yes, she was pretty but rather blah and not even that good for a straight woman foil (and I know she's worked steadily since).

Of course, I think after eight years, the audience was simply getting tired of the whole 'Three's Company' concept and it would take quite a bit of effort (including being willing to do dramatic roles,etc.) and not a few misteps on Mr. Ritter's part before his own career got back on a smooth track after this was over.

So would ABC have Laverne and Shirley next to Happy Days for 3 seasons and not the Ropers next to Three's Company on ABC? It would lasted a longer if it aired after TC

Three's a Crowd main cast should have been

Jack
Vicky
Felipe
Angelino instead of Bradford,,,,,,,,occassionally

It didn't help that (for whatever reasons) Mary Cadorette had like zilch chemistry with the late Mr. Ritter. Yes, she was pretty but rather blah and not even that good for a straight woman foil (and I know she's worked steadily since).

Of course, I think after eight years, the audience was simply getting tired of the whole 'Three's Company' concept and it would take quite a bit of effort (including being willing to do dramatic roles,etc.) and not a few misteps on Mr. Ritter's part before his own career got back on a smooth track after this was over.

John Ritter himself disagrees with you because he said he chose Mary because they had fantastic chemistry together!

Three's a Crowd is better than ANY comedy on today but the competition was MUCH stronger back then. TAC needed a better supporting cast like Felipe should've been brought back instead of that MORON Ez!

John should've realized he'd never get such a prominent role ever again so he should've taken the half season of TAC Season 2!

John Ritter himself disagrees with you because he said he chose Mary because they had fantastic chemistry together!

Three's a Crowd is better than ANY comedy on today but the competition was MUCH stronger back then. TAC needed a better supporting cast like Felipe should've been brought back instead of that MORON Ez!

John should've realized he'd never get such a prominent role ever again so he should've taken the half season of TAC Season 2!

1.Mr. Ritter can't agree or disagree with me because he's no longer in this world.

2. Yes, HE may have been attracted to her but she had zero chemistry going his way as far as I (and no doubt other viewers) could tell!.

3. Comedies aren't so great these days, but even so, it's still not that good IMO- and I think folks were just getting tired of 'Three's Company' altogether!

A thread on The Ropers board mentioned that George and Mildred had better ratings than the parent show, mainly because Mildred was a salty person (unlike Mrs. Roper) who became its breakout character.

I wonder if the producers ever considered spinning Janet and her new husband off onto their own series. Considering how weak (IMO) The Ropers and Three's a Crowd ended up being, I might've been open to watching that instead.

A thread on The Ropers board mentioned that George and Mildred had better ratings than the parent show, mainly because Mildred was a salty person (unlike Mrs. Roper) who became its breakout character.

I wonder if the producers ever considered spinning Janet and her new husband off onto their own series. Considering how weak (IMO) The Ropers and Three's a Crowd ended up being, I might've been open to watching that instead.

No I think they was only focused on Jack's character which is why there was no real finale

A thread on The Ropers board mentioned that George and Mildred had better ratings than the parent show, mainly because Mildred was a salty person (unlike Mrs. Roper) who became its breakout character.

I wonder if the producers ever considered spinning Janet and her new husband off onto their own series. Considering how weak (IMO) The Ropers and Three's a Crowd ended up being, I might've been open to watching that instead.

No way Janet could carry a show on her on & I bet she would tell you that herself.

Phillip was almost as boring as staring at a WALL so no way that show would've worked.

I think Janet wanted to be included with Jack on any TC spinoff which is why she was pissed when she wasn't on Three's a Crowd.

No I think they was only focused on Jack's character which is why there was no real finale

There was a real finale although Janet's wedding was rushed. You can say it could've been a better finale.

There was a real finale although Janet's wedding was rushed. You can say it could've been a better finale.

Atleast could have had them go to the beagle for last time

Atleast could have had them go to the beagle for last time

Did they even show the Beagle at all in Season 8??

Did they even show the Beagle at all in Season 8??


I think only once, when Janet was eating fries over and over because she was mad that Jack was dating a call girl who was actually a therapist

I think only once, when Janet was eating fries over and over because she was mad that Jack was dating a call girl who was actually a therapist

And then Furley tried to take her fries! :lol:

There are a lot of theories. Yes the time-slot for The Ropers changed and that's what Norman Fell always said killed it. But the Ropers were best used as B-plot characters. It was tough to see them alone so much, because after a while an unhappy marriage is just an unhappy marriage and not funny anymore. Also the neighbors (and the kid) were not that interesting, in my opinion. Jeffrey Tambor's character was too snotty and his wife was nice but bland, and the kid could be annoying.

Three's A Crowd was a rush-job. Some people say that Vicki was bland, but I did not like the Mr. Bradford character and his dynamic with Jack...he belittled Jack constantly and neither Jack nor Vicki ever stood up to him or made fun of him in return. With the TC landlords Jack always had the upper hand and the audience knew it, but it wasn't fun watching Jack repeatedly taking Bradford's abuse. (Bradford was similar to Mr. Angelino in Three's Company, but we got Mr. A in small doses, and Jack usually had it coming...but there was no reason for Bradford to dislike Jack.)

I think Three's Company was a farce that worked best as an ensemble. Yes John Ritter was the main guy, but the format of TC was its key to success, not its character development. Both spin-offs tried to switch from farce to character-focused shows, which never fit audience expectations.

tldr - lots of reasons both spinoffs failed :D

Like with The Ropers (https://jacksonupperco.com/2015/06/24/why-did-i-spend-14-hours-of-my-life-watching-the-ropers/) and Jeffrey Tambor's character, it was probably a mistake to give Three's a Crowd a clear antagonist/villain in Mr. Bradford. The problem with that (https://jacksonupperco.com/2015/07/29/when-three-became-a-crowd-a-look-at-the-last-threes-company-spin-off/) is that if you have a regular villain in a sitcom, then it’s going to be difficult to find the type of comedy that warrants fondness and the type of familiarity necessary for a weekly series.

On Three's Company in comparison, even though Mr. Roper was occasionally, an antagonist, you can on the same token argue that he was really more of an obstacle for Jack. In other words, he was somebody who could be worked around, and worked over. But with Mr. Bradford, his dislike of Jack you could say (https://www.reddit.com/r/80s/comments/bxd54y/comment/eqfzho0/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) was really uncalled for.

They both failed for different reasons. The Ropers were hysterical on Threes Company. But their banter was not something to build an entire sitcom with. They had some of the funniest lines sometimes on Threes Company. Mr Roper was their foil. But Helen was almost the anti-foil and on the kid's side. It made for a great dynamic. Mr Roper was the owner/landlord of the building. He had a reason to bud into the kid's lives. Once the Ropers moved out, they had no purpose. Neither of them worked and Stanley had nothing to do but be annoyed by the neighbor. The sexual tension between Stanley and Helen was also mostly written out of the script. Their hysterical insults were mostly gone. They were in battles with the neighbor or Helen's sister. There is not much depth there and it was boring.
Threes A Crowd was a horrible Threes Company wannabee. After 8 years of TC, it just was stale.

Like with The Ropers (https://jacksonupperco.com/2015/06/24/why-did-i-spend-14-hours-of-my-life-watching-the-ropers/) and Jeffrey Tambor's character, it was probably a mistake to give Three's a Crowd a clear antagonist/villain in Mr. Bradford. The problem with that (https://jacksonupperco.com/2015/07/29/when-three-became-a-crowd-a-look-at-the-last-threes-company-spin-off/) is that on if you have a regular villain in a sitcom, it’s going to be difficult to find the type of comedy that warrants fondness and the type of familiarity necessary for a weekly series.

On Three's Company in comparison, even though Mr. Roper was occasionally, an antagonist, you can on the same token argue that he was really more of an obstacle for Jack. In other words, he was somebody who could be worked around, and worked over. But with Mr. Bradford, his dislike of Jack you could say (https://www.reddit.com/r/80s/comments/bxd54y/comment/eqfzho0/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) was really uncalled for.

Vikki wasn't great, but she wasn't that bad. The biggest problem with Three's A Crowd is with Mr. Bradford. The character was the worst and the actor didn't have chemistry with anyone in the cast. I guess they hired Robert Mandan because he was a big name at the time, but my goodness that was a bad decision.

Ropers was unwatchable, Three's a Crowd wasnt

Vikki wasn't great, but she wasn't that bad. The biggest problem with Three's A Crowd is with Mr. Bradford. The character was the worst and the actor didn't have chemistry with anyone in the cast. I guess they hired Robert Mandan because he was a big name at the time, but my goodness that was a bad decision.
I must be in the small minority of TC fans that actually liked Three's A Crowd, I was 8 when TC ended and I did not understand the concept of a spin-off so I thought it was a natural transition of Jack Tripper moving on, yes it's true that Mr. Bradford detested the idea of Jack and Vicki living together but halfway through the series you start to see Bradford warming up to Jack, I point to the episode in which Jack thinks Vicki is pregnant due to a misunderstanding and believes she wants to get married to which Mr. Bradford believes as well.

I always thought that episode 13 "A Friend in Deed" was the point the show knew it was in trouble with ratings and they made a Threes Company type of script. Its all sexual misunderstanding where Jack thinks Vicki's friend wants him as she stays the night in the apartment. I can almost here the producers saying....the ratings are horrible. We need to do something. People dont like these silly scripts. So they resorted to try and create some Threes Company magic. That episode screams Threes Company wannabe.

A misunderstanding about Vicki being pregnant was done in season 5 of Threes Company with Cindy.

The episode where Jack interferes with Vicki's commercial was also done on Threes Company. Remember the jeans commercial on Threes Company.

There was nothing creative about the show. Most of the same writers were used as TC as the recycled scripts

ABC originally wanted Richard Kline to do the spin off instead of Ritter in a spin off called "Byrd's Nest". Don Knotts was also offered to be in the new series but both declined. ABC then decided to go full Threes Company like with Ritter. Threes A Crowded debuted only a week or two after the last episode of TC trying to keep the momentum going.

Here is an interesting tid bit. The ratings for Threes A Crowd were not good but they were not terrible either. ABC did not want to commit to a full season 2 and only ordered a half season. John Ritter declined. He would only stay for a full season. Thats interesting to know because that was lots of money to turn down. Especially since John did not have other projects that paid that much lined up. So in a sense John killed the show.

I always thought that episode 13 "A Friend in Deed" was the point the show knew it was in trouble with ratings and they made a Threes Company type of script. Its all sexual misunderstanding where Jack thinks Vicki's friend wants him as she stays the night in the apartment. I can almost here the producers saying....the ratings are horrible. We need to do something. People dont like these silly scripts. So they resorted to try and create some Threes Company magic. That episode screams Threes Company wannabe.

A misunderstanding about Vicki being pregnant was done in season 5 of Threes Company with Cindy.

The episode where Jack interferes with Vicki's commercial was also done on Threes Company. Remember the jeans commercial on Threes Company.

There was nothing creative about the show. Most of the same writers were used as TC as the recycled scripts

ABC originally wanted Richard Kline to do the spin off instead of Ritter in a spin off called "Byrd's Nest". Don Knotts was also offered to be in the new series but both declined. ABC then decided to go full Threes Company like with Ritter. Threes A Crowded debuted only a week or two after the last episode of TC trying to keep the momentum going.

Here is an interesting tid bit. The ratings for Threes A Crowd were not good but they were not terrible either. ABC did not want to commit to a full season 2 and only ordered a half season. John Ritter declined. He would only stay for a full season. Thats interesting to know because that was lots of money to turn down. Especially since John did not have other projects that paid that much lined up. So in a sense John killed the show.

"A Friend in Deed" was my favorite episode of Three's a Crowd. I guess I am a fan of silly misunderstandings. :)

When I read that ABC offered Three's a Crowd 13 episodes instead of 22 and John Ritter turned it down, I always wondered if that was a negotiation tactic on John's part. Maybe he expected them to come back and say OK, you can do 22. Instead they said no and cancelled the show. In a way, he got done like Suzanne Somers.

"A Friend in Deed" was my favorite episode of Three's a Crowd. I guess I am a fan of silly misunderstandings. :)

When I read that ABC offered Three's a Crowd 13 episodes instead of 22 and John Ritter turned it down, I always wondered if that was a negotiation tactic on John's part. Maybe he expected them to come back and say OK, you can do 22. Instead they said no and cancelled the show. In a way, he got done like Suzanne Somers.
I loved the sexual misunderstandings on TC. That is what made the show take off like a rocket. It had never been done before. However after 8 seasons of it on TC, it grew stale. By the time Threes A Crowd came around it just looked like they were trying to copy TC which they were. You are correct it was one of the better episodes though.

"A Friend in Deed" was my favorite episode of Three's a Crowd. I guess I am a fan of silly misunderstandings. :)

When I read that ABC offered Three's a Crowd 13 episodes instead of 22 and John Ritter turned it down, I always wondered if that was a negotiation tactic on John's part. Maybe he expected them to come back and say OK, you can do 22. Instead they said no and cancelled the show. In a way, he got done like Suzanne Somers.


I could see it from John's point of view, "either give me a full season or cancel the show" I guess he figured he had been around too long to accept a half of season type of deal

Vikki wasn't great, but she wasn't that bad. The biggest problem with Three's A Crowd is with Mr. Bradford. The character was the worst and the actor didn't have chemistry with anyone in the cast. I guess they hired Robert Mandan because he was a big name at the time, but my goodness that was a bad decision.

With Mr. Bradford, why would he have an issue with Jack other than the idea of Jack living with his daughter out of wedlock? Somebody else said that with Mr. Angelino, we only saw him occasionally. And whenever he clashed with Jack on Three's Company, Jack normally had it coming to him.

And Mr. Roper, unlike Mr. Bradford, was a genuinely funny character. Despite his ignorance regarding Jack's presumed homosexuality, you still for some reason, were able to like and relate to him. Also, Mr. Roper and his wife, had a justifiable and plausible reason to always be near Jack.

With Mr. Bradford, he just comes across as some nosy, rich prick, who has nothing else better to do than harass his daughter's boyfriend just because the plot of Three's a Crowd says so.

Here is an interesting tid bit. The ratings for Threes A Crowd were not good but they were not terrible either. ABC did not want to commit to a full season 2 and only ordered a half season. John Ritter declined. He would only stay for a full season. Thats interesting to know because that was lots of money to turn down. Especially since John did not have other projects that paid that much lined up. So in a sense John killed the show.
And actually because of that decision is what made ABC renewing Diff'rent Strokes for an 8th season after NBC had canceled it.

Yeah, the Ropers worked best as supporting characters. And even then, they are the worst characters in the show. When Mr. Furley came along, he was a much-needed replacement.

I think the only reason they even gave the Ropers their own show is because Three's Company is based on the Britcom Man About the House, which had a spin-off called George and Mildred, which I guess were that show's version of the Ropers.

I think that much of what worked on Three's Company was what Mr. Roper was reacting to. Like, he would see something Jack was doing and immediately misinterpret it as having to relate (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72cYIKSZykk) to his supposed gay lifestyle. Or he would overhear something that Jack and the girls would be saying and misinterpret it as some sort of sexual innuendo.

Mr. Roper is really when you think of it, a character who really isn't that likable on paper, but Norman Fell had the ability to transcend that. It's really hard not to laugh whenever Norman Fell would suddenly break the fourth wall (https://youtu.be/zBhO6if0XdM) by turning to the camera and smiling whenever he cracked a good one-liner on his wife. Still, I wonder if the character was really only tolerable in small doses. I don't know how much people could take seeing a crotchety old man front and center (not that in fairness, stopped other 1970s sitcom characters like Fred Sanford or Archie Bunker).

It failed because ABC didnt place the Ropers after Three's Company

It failed because ABC didnt place the Ropers after Three's Company

Yes I agree. They screwed the ropers by not airing it after Three’s Company and by waiting till after the deadline had passed to allow them to return to Three’s Company to cancel it.

I think Three’s a Crowd was a mistake and that they would have been better off having a 9th season of Three’s Company. Back then I don’t think any show could compete with the A team.

Yes I agree. They screwed the ropers by not airing it after Three’s Company and by waiting till after the deadline had passed to allow them to return to Three’s Company to cancel it.

I think Three’s a Crowd was a mistake and that they would have been better off having a 9th season of Three’s Company. Back then I don’t think any show could compete with the A team.


And season 1 of the Ropers was only a success because the TC season was over

And season 1 of the Ropers was only a success because the TC season was over
True. However people were really curious and looking forward to see the Ropers on their own. But that novelty wore off.

True. However people were really curious and looking forward to see the Ropers on their own. But that novelty wore off.

Im surprised it finished top 10 because the only watchable episode in season 1 was the one with Larry as a guest

Dave Sundstrom on his YouTube channel recently made a video that listed what he feels are the top five reasons behind the failure of Three's a Crowd (https://web.archive.org/web/20061031125202/http://www.jumptheshark.com/t/threesacrowd.htm):
7XToI5rgoRo

Remember the "Three's Company (https://web.archive.org/web/20140402220152/http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/topic/3111823-threes-company/?view=getnewpost)" spin-off (https://popculturereferences.com/after-years-of-being-mostly-the-jack-tripper-show-threes-companys-series-finale-went-all-the-way/), "Three's a Crowd" (https://jacksonupperco.com/2015/07/29/when-three-became-a-crowd-a-look-at-the-last-threes-company-spin-off/)? A better title would have been "Three's a Dud". Join me for a nostalgic deep-dive into why this sitcom struggled to reel in viewers and disappeared after just one season.

According to Dave, Three's a Crowd (https://www.google.com/search?q=reddit+%22Three%27s+a+Crowd%22+Three%27s+Company&sca_esv=99636c5107a06ae2&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ACQVn09Oj4maj6xmbLziKVdpWE2uHu3MxQ%3A1713261951574&ei=f00eZujZIvnTp84PrKORqAU&ved=0ahUKEwiolZ-QvsaFAxX56ckDHaxRBFUQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=reddit+%22Three%27s+a+Crowd%22+Three%27s+Company&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiKHJlZGRpdCAiVGhyZWUncyBhIENyb3dkIiBUaHJlZSdzIENvbXBhbnkyBRAhGKABMgUQIRigATIFECEYoAFIiRRQrAJY2xJwAXgAkAEAmAG2AqAB6xiqAQcwLjguNi4xuAEDyAEA-AEBmAIOoAKtFsICCRAAGAgYHhiwA8ICCxAAGIAEGKIEGLADwgIKEAAYFhgeGA8YCsICCBAAGIAEGKIEwgIEECEYFZgDAIgGAZAGBZIHBzEuNi42LjGgB8c0&sclient=gws-wiz-serp#ip=1) failed because:

At the heart of Three's Company (https://web.archive.org/web/20061031125202/http://www.jumptheshark.com/t/threescompany.htm), there was an unconventional for its time living arrangement (https://www.quora.com/Why-was-the-television-sitcom-Three-s-Company-cancelled-in-1984-Do-you-think-an-updated-version-of-this-show-would-be-popular-today/answer/Vineet-Chander) between Jack (https://threescompany.fandom.com/wiki/Jack_Tripper), Janet (https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/8434-janet-wood-flower-power/), Chrissy (https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/8436-chrissy-snow-so-pretty-so-dim/) and later with Cindy (https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/8438-substitute-chrissys-cindy-snow-and-terri-alden/) and finally Terri. Basically, a single man (who had to pretend to be gay (https://books.google.com/books?id=70szDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq=%22Three%27s+a+Crowd%22+Jack+Tripper&source=bl&ots=stQGtowXbt&sig=ACfU3U1Rt4hPqD5iAUOIOTKikupUYRCGkg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiAza_HucaFAxXV3skDHYoUDEo4FBDoAXoECAIQAw#v=onepage&q=%22Three's%20a%20Crowd%22%20Jack%20Tripper&f=false) on top of it) living with two single women platonically. On Three's a Crowd (http://www.poobala.com/threesandthrees.html) however, Jack and Vicky were merely a cohabitating couple (https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/john-ritter-responded-criticized-threes-company-spin-show.html/). Why that still may have been scandalous for its day, it still lacked the same comedic spark as the previous show provided.

The magic (https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/pmvok4/comment/hcpcq2n/) and natural chemistry (https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/threes-company.2541705/post-61978441) that John Ritter displayed with Joyce DeWitt (https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/should-jack-and-janet-have-gotten-married-at-the-end-of-threes-company.4588955/) and Suzanne Somers and later Priscilla Barnes on Three's Company (https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/89009-threes-company-general-discussion/) simply couldn't be replicated with Mary Cadorette (https://www.google.com/search?q=recent+datalounge+%22Mary+Cadorette%22&oq=recent+datalounge+%22Mary+Cadorette%22&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigATIHCAUQIRigAdIBCTc1NjBqMGoxNagCCLACAQ&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) on Three's a Crowd (https://www.countryliving.com/life/entertainment/a44890338/the-real-story-behind-the-threes-company-spinoff/), whose on-screen chemistry (https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/threes-company.2541705/post-62074641) with John (https://www.nytimes.com/1984/09/17/arts/tv-review-ritter-and-a-new-cast-on-three-s-a-crowd.html) seemed forced in comparison. The fault according to Dave lies on the production team and casting director, who chose to exclude all of the other cast members (https://moviechat.org/tt0086816/Threes-a-Crowd/58c740e66b51e905f66e5417/Couldnt-Janet-and-Terri-make-a-guest-apperance) of Three's Company (https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/76954/16-regal-facts-about-threes-company) sans a sole appearance by Richard Kline as Larry (https://threescompany.fandom.com/wiki/Larry_Dallas).

Three's a Crowd (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Three%27s+a+Crowd%22&sca_esv=b0a2a50fd2778424&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ACQVn086C3fOV1honY06Uxt5JgUaiZ0u2g%3A1713260409703&source=lnt&tbs=bkt%3As%2Ccdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1%2F1%2F1984%2Ccd_max%3A12%2F31%2F1985&tbm=bks) simply leaned too heavily into physical humor and slapstick. Even though John Ritter of course, excelled (https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/threes-company.2541705/post-61978441) at that type of comedy, it just wasn't enough to carry the entire show. It had virtually none of the witty dialogue and clever situations (https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/66908-come-and-knock-on-our-door-all-episodes-talk/?do=findComment&comment=4124085) that were found in Three's Company (https://www.quora.com/Why-was-the-television-sitcom-Three-s-Company-cancelled-in-1984-Do-you-think-an-updated-version-of-this-show-would-be-popular-today/answer/Jon-Mixon-1). Instead, the writers for Three's a Crowd (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086816/) appeared to think that topics such as impotence (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0723036/) were a perfect catalyst for on-screen hilarity.

Just like Three's Company (https://www.looper.com/843770/the-threes-company-finale-still-bothers-fans-to-this-day/) at the very end of its run (https://jacksonupperco.com/2015/07/28/the-ten-best-threes-company-episodes-of-season-eight/), Three's a Crowd had to compete with the highly rated (http://www.thetvratingsguide.com/2020/03/1984-85-ratings-history.html) A-Team (https://cult-tv-lounge.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-team-season-3-1984-85.html) over at NBC. So naturally, it was going to be much more difficult for Three's a Crowd (https://www.tvtango.com/series/threes_a_crowd_1984/episodes) to find a foothold in the ratings against such tough competition (https://www.tvtango.com/series/a_team/episodes).

Finally and perhaps most importantly, was John Ritter himself. As the story goes, John didn't want to come back for a second season of Three's a Crowd (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three%27s_a_Crowd) unless ABC guaranteed a full, 20+ episode order instead of a proposed 13 episode order, likely midseason offer. And when John expressed his hesitation, ABC while taking into account low ratings and a disgruntled star, ultimately chose to cancel it (https://cancelled-tv-and-web-shows.fandom.com/wiki/Three%27s_a_Crowd#:~:text=Why%20It%20Was%20Cancelled,would%20place%20in%20the%20ratings.).

I always thought that episode 13 "A Friend in Deed" was the point the show knew it was in trouble with ratings and they made a Threes Company type of script. Its all sexual misunderstanding where Jack thinks Vicki's friend wants him as she stays the night in the apartment. I can almost here the producers saying....the ratings are horrible. We need to do something. People dont like these silly scripts. So they resorted to try and create some Threes Company magic. That episode screams Threes Company wannabe.

A misunderstanding about Vicki being pregnant was done in season 5 of Threes Company with Cindy.

The episode where Jack interferes with Vicki's commercial was also done on Threes Company. Remember the jeans commercial on Threes Company.

There was nothing creative about the show. Most of the same writers were used as TC as the recycled scripts

ABC originally wanted Richard Kline to do the spin off instead of Ritter in a spin off called "Byrd's Nest". Don Knotts was also offered to be in the new series but both declined. ABC then decided to go full Threes Company like with Ritter. Threes A Crowded debuted only a week or two after the last episode of TC trying to keep the momentum going.

Here is an interesting tid bit. The ratings for Threes A Crowd were not good but they were not terrible either. ABC did not want to commit to a full season 2 and only ordered a half season. John Ritter declined. He would only stay for a full season. Thats interesting to know because that was lots of money to turn down. Especially since John did not have other projects that paid that much lined up. So in a sense John killed the show.

I could be wrong, but maybe this goes back to an earlier point that I made (https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=394221). Three's Company was one of those shows where the writing when you get right down to it, were often inherently awful. But the chemistry and comedic timing between the cast, particularly between John Ritter and Joyce DeWitt was able to transcend that. So it goes without saying that Three's a Crowd wasn't going to work if you didn't surround John Ritter with the "right" cast of supporting players if they were just going to continue to write like it was still Three's Company.