From "The Ropers" Wikipedia page:

In 1986, distributor D. L. Taffner revealed its plans for a spin-off of The Ropers called Three Apartments. The spin-off would again star Fell and Lindley, this time as landlords of a three-unit apartment building. The show was offered as either a two-year, 44-episode package in syndication starting April 1987, or as a 52-episode package on NBC-owned station checkerboards beginning in September 1987. Guest stars would include John Ritter, Joyce DeWitt, Richard Kline and Don Knotts from Three's Company; Robert Mandan from Three's a Crowd; and Jim J. Bullock and Nancy Dussault from Too Close for Comfort/The Ted Knight Show. Three Apartments was to replace The Ted Knight Show, a fellow Taffner-distributed show that ended production after the death of show namesake Ted Knight in August 1986.[5] The spin-off was withdrawn in January 1987 because of a glut of syndicated sitcom offerings, a lack of time slots, and a difficult advertising market.[6]

From "The Ropers" Wikipedia page:

In 1986, distributor D. L. Taffner revealed its plans for a spin-off of The Ropers called Three Apartments. The spin-off would again star Fell and Lindley, this time as landlords of a three-unit apartment building. The show was offered as either a two-year, 44-episode package in syndication starting April 1987, or as a 52-episode package on NBC-owned station checkerboards beginning in September 1987. Guest stars would include John Ritter, Joyce DeWitt, Richard Kline and Don Knotts from Three's Company; Robert Mandan from Three's a Crowd; and Jim J. Bullock and Nancy Dussault from Too Close for Comfort/The Ted Knight Show. Three Apartments was to replace The Ted Knight Show, a fellow Taffner-distributed show that ended production after the death of show namesake Ted Knight in August 1986.[5] The spin-off was withdrawn in January 1987 because of a glut of syndicated sitcom offerings, a lack of time slots, and a difficult advertising market.[6]

I had no idea of any of this. Thank you very much for sharing!

This idea doesn't seem like it got very far, it may not have even made it to the pitch phase. The title is nothing more than a working title, I mean are you going to have two legacy characters associated with a huge hit sitcom and not feature them in the title. That would make zero sense. The final sentence speaks to viability:

"The spin-off was withdrawn in January 1987 because of a glut of syndicated sitcom offerings, a lack of time slots, and a difficult advertising market".

So the whole thing was conceived of in the late summer of 86 and dropped four months later, outside of having preliminary talks with Fell and Lindley and maybe market analysis the show probably died in a meeting room.

Chris Mann the guy who wrote the Three's Company book, asked John Ritter about the spin-off and John said he agreed to do it.

This would have been cool if it went forward...

https://thekidsin201.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/found-the-missing-ropers-spin-off/

If the original series of The Roger's didn't last how would a spin-off bringing them back do any better?

If the original series of The Roger's didn't last how would a spin-off bringing them back do any better?

It looks like the producers were going to try to recreate the original Three's Company formula because that was successful. That's why the show was called "Three Apartments" and had the Ropers as landlords again.

They probably were going to have young people living in the other two apartments. Casting would have been important.

The reason The Ropers show didn't work was because the cast chemistry wasn't there like it was in Three's Company.

Maybe thats why they didnt do it.......

So……where would Henry from “TCFC” have been? Ted Knight was deceased by then.

It looks like the producers were going to try to recreate the original Three's Company formula because that was successful. That's why the show was called "Three Apartments" and had the Ropers as landlords again.

They probably were going to have young people living in the other two apartments. Casting would have been important.

The reason The Ropers show didn't work was because the cast chemistry wasn't there like it was in Three's Company.

It was arguably, also why Three's a Crowd didn't work because they didn't surround John Ritter with a better cast.

It was arguably, also why Three's a Crowd didn't work because they didn't surround John Ritter with a better cast.

Exactly!

Chris Mann the guy who wrote the Three's Company book, asked John Ritter about the spin-off and John said he agreed to do it.

This would have been cool if it went forward...

https://thekidsin201.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/found-the-missing-ropers-spin-off/

What would've been the extent of John Ritter's participation though? I would've imagined that he would've been awfully expensive by 1986, especially if the show was going to be syndicated instead of being on a major network like ABC. I also wonder if he still wanted to play Jack Tripper have doing such a thing, if you count Three's a Crowd, for nine years straight.

What would've been the extent of John Ritter's participation though? I would've imagined that he would've been awfully expensive by 1986, especially if the show was going to be syndicated instead of being on a major network like ABC. I also wonder if he still wanted to play Jack Tripper have doing such a thing, if you count Three's a Crowd, for nine years straight.

It said the old characters would be guest stars, so probably one episode.

It's like when stars did an episode of Love Boat or Fantasy Island. One week of work and you get a nice check. Plus he was friends with the producers already.