The Downfall of the Underground

slinkybender said:
You know, I really don't know, but I'm not sure the Harmony wasn't an "underground" club....... it's just that so much more was aloowed to go on which was "semi-legal", and as time has gone by, the noose has tightened farther and farther. Remember, at one time in Times sqaure there were "Swingers Clubs" which had neon signs out front and hawkers, and they were places where you pay an admission and one of the ladies who "didn't work there" would have sex with you. I guess it depends on exactly were the line was when The Harmony was open, and I'm not so sure that line was clear.



I remember seeing an interview with Koch after Guiliani changed things. As I remember the gist was that Koch didn't take on the sex industry because he was certain the courts would rule against him. And, he was impressed by the tack Guiliani took.

Guiliani made a "shades of gray" set of laws and regs and made it black and white. He drew a line in granite.

Of course I think that the lawyers for the industry argued poorly and chose the wrong arguments to begin with. That and a change in the political environment thanks to a concerted push by Conservative christian movement. We can thank Pat robertson and Reagan for that.
 
slinkybender said:
I think you vastly underestimate the impact rising Real Estate Values played.
Remember the greenery accross the street from Church Street. See the hotel there now. How much money do you think the city made off that? How much are they getting now with employees paying taxes.
Not about quality of life. It's about raising revenue for the city.
 
slinkybender said:
I think you vastly underestimate the impact rising Real Estate Values played.
Well, I'm not so sure about that. Having seen the "books" on one now defunct underground, there is substantial profit even after a markup for the type of business being run.

Also, as I understood (I could be wrong) the proprietress of the Harmonies owned the buildings.

Many of the popular establishments of the past were not under lease and therefore, were not impacted by rising rents. As we know property taxes only recently rose and even now it's not that high. Even poorly run stripbars were cash cows.

That said, as you remember real estate prices didn't start rising until the G man cleared out Times Square (which I think is a good thing) and re-zoned (which I think was unfair). Even with that it was the mayor who substantially increased the minimums for rent control and that is what caused the explosion in real estate prices. I was recently checking rents on craigslist and you can still get decent square footage for a rate that can allow a brave soul to make good money.
 

Slinky Bender

The All Powerful Moderator
You miss the point entirely: take a look at all of the spots where Studio 90 used to be. Take a look at the character of that neighborhood back then. Take a look at the same neighborhood today.

There's a huge difference in tollerence of Adult establishments depending on what real Estate Values are doing in that neighborhood. On Third Ave in Brooklyn, there have been streetwalkers and Peep shows forever. Recently... almost out of nowhere, the "neighborhood" folks are protesting. Why? because as Real Estate Values increase, the middle class moves: don't ask me to define that except to say it's whomever can't afford the current "prime" neighborhoods and therefore moves close to them, but into the areas previously occupied by a class lower.

Well, there used to be loads of areas which were "semi-vacant" and tollerated the existence of semi-legal activities. people who colonized Tribeca tended to be artsy types who really wouldn't call up their local whatever and try to get a Harmony Club shut down. Not quite the same for the crowd no in Tribeca, where almost all of the IMD artisits have been pushed out and replaced by affluent people spending $3 Million for lofts. Same in the West 20's, then West 30's.

And don't even get me started on Times Square.... it was one of the biggest "takings" to occur in the history of the US (after us whiteys took all of it from the natives). The redevelopment of Times Square involved one of the bigger thefts of private property in the last century. The State used the Empire State Development Corporation, and it's subsidiary the Times Square Redevelopment Corp. and condemned all the private property on 42nd Street between Broadway and 8th Aveneue (except for a few parcels conveniently left out which just happened to belong to big NY developers - like the Milstiens), and then handed the properties over to "selected" developers, for signifcantly less than those properties could have been bought for on the open market (and the losers were mostly small Real Estate holders who had held onto those properties for years while getting substantially less in rent than surrpunding areas who were waiting themselves for the next jump in the Real Estate market, but got screwed out of the opportunity to cash in on investments which they had held for, in the most part, decades).

read between the lines here to get an idea:

http://www.gowlings.com/resources/publications.asp?pubid=790

http://www.gothamgazette.com/iotw/condemned/

http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/trends/columns/cityside/n_10215/
 

Slinky Bender

The All Powerful Moderator
nyctruth said:
I was recently checking rents on craigslist and you can still get decent square footage for a rate that can allow a brave soul to make good money.
I'd be very curious to see what your calculations were.
 
Just a quick question for anyone who chooses to reply-

Right now there are really no options for us in NYC, all of the familiar names are gone( studio90, studio5, f/stop, the red door) etc..so here's my question. If someone were to open a new" underground" spot would you rather get a great $10 ld with the possibility of a hj, or a dance but with extras available?
 
nowman said:
Just a quick question for anyone who chooses to reply-

Right now there are really no options for us in NYC, all of the familiar names are gone( studio90, studio5, f/stop, the red door) etc..so here's my question. If someone were to open a new" underground" spot would you rather get a great $10 ld with the possibility of a hj, or a dance but with extras available?
Extras is what I want from an underground spot. The ld with the possibility of a hj is what I would expect from a mainstream club.
 
slinkybender said:
You miss the point entirely: take a look at all of the spots where Studio 90 used to be. Take a look at the character of that neighborhood back then. Take a look at the same neighborhood today.

There's a huge difference in tollerence of Adult establishments depending on what real Estate Values are doing in that neighborhood.
<snip>
I did get your point. I suppose I am ineffectively haggling over the cause. I view the cause as a change in policy. Higher real estate values and less choices for us are the effects.

Even with higher overhead, I'd wager a small sum that there are "high class" underground clubs in those same now expensive real estate locales.

I could be wrong. If I was right about everything I spoke on I wouldn't be right here right now.
 
This just came to mind. If laws and policy were to change tomorrow noon allowing prostitution, by 4pm there would be several venues opened even with the high real estate costs. So to my thinking the overhead can't be the main reason for current state of affairs.
 
slinkybender said:
You miss the point entirely: take a look at all of the spots where Studio 90 used to be. Take a look at the character of that neighborhood back then. Take a look at the same neighborhood today.
This is quite true. Back in the 1990s, Tina's/Studio 90/Club 90/Whatever resided primarily in locations in the 20s and 30s between 6th and 7th Avenues. She moved a few times in those years, but always seemed to stay in the general vicinity. Now look at 6th Avenue, north of 23rd St. How many high-rises have risen in those few blocks ? At least 6 or 7. The whole character of the neighborhood has changed dramatically in just the last 5-7 years
 
nowman said:
Just a quick question for anyone who chooses to reply-

Right now there are really no options for us in NYC, all of the familiar names are gone( studio90, studio5, f/stop, the red door) etc..so here's my question. If someone were to open a new" underground" spot would you rather get a great $10 ld with the possibility of a hj, or a dance but with extras available?
I'd like the option of extras being available, at least from some of the girls. Even though I may not partake of them, it's nice to know that they're there. (I mean, I'm a guy who went to the red Door almost every week for a year, and had extras maybe 2 or 3 times)
 
nowman said:
Just a quick question for anyone who chooses to reply-

Right now there are really no options for us in NYC, all of the familiar names are gone( studio90, studio5, f/stop, the red door) etc..so here's my question. If someone were to open a new" underground" spot would you rather get a great $10 ld with the possibility of a hj, or a dance but with extras available?
I'm sure you knew I would say this from what I've been posting in this thread, but I vote for the great $10 ld. Let the extras take place off-premises. It's not that I begrudge people their extras, but:

I believe there are too many mainstream(ish) girls who would work in an UG lapdance place and give a good ld, but would not want to work in an extras-on-premises place. I think there is a whole thing about identifying as a stripper vs. as a provider that this gets into.

If extras are generally available, then the focus of the place becomes about the extras, and many of the girls don't want to take the time to give a good dance.
 
BIGROD said:
Extras is what I want from an underground spot. The ld with the possibility of a hj is what I would expect from a mainstream club.
That would be nice but is not the reality in NYC mainstream clubs. Where can you go to get a good hands-on ld (no bullshit air dances or "you can't touch") without getting into some kind of overpriced VIP arrangement?
 

Slinky Bender

The All Powerful Moderator
nyctruth said:
This just came to mind. If laws and policy were to change tomorrow noon allowing prostitution, by 4pm there would be several venues opened even with the high real estate costs. So to my thinking the overhead can't be the main reason for current state of affairs.
Why do you keep insisting it's the "costs" even after being told that's not it?
 
Top