SWGE was undoubtedly a poor investment. Some estimates place the DL version at nearly $2B. In comparison, DL spent $1.4B creating the DLR on the late 90s/early 00s - with DCA 1.0 costing $800M. So if you adjust for inflation, they spent more on SWGE than DCA Later, they spent over $1B in improvements on DCA but it was seen as a risky investment with many reports indicating some Disney execs preferred to not make changes but instead include the park in DL admission and keep it open on a seasonal basis.
Of course, DLR has come a long way since the early 2000s. Many believe both parks higher margins that any of the WDW parks (probably helps that much of the infrastructure is shared in the DLR).
But still. DL was already making preparations to use the SWGE site for expansion before it was decided upon, so opportunity cost prevails. Is SWGE more profitable than say a Frozen land?
TOT represented everything wrong with DCA. The park was a huge failure so Disney started making plans to bring the TOT over by summer 2001. It took almost 3 years to build, they used the budget TOT plans for Paris and cheapened it even further (exterior was suppose to be concrete for example). I’ve never seen the Guardians movies but the building is much better looking and the ride is awesome. Unfortunately, the building is visible from inside and outside of the parks. A hotel off Harbor made sense… that things an eyesore once you leave the area.
Last edited:
