Taking you back to the Disney Decade

[ArielRae]

Saw this video and it is funny how much did not turn out happening and what did. Makes you think about all the changes going on now.
http://youtu.be/dvbXZPzI9co

 

[bethany0417]

Funny! Soviet Union, Roger Rabbit. What might have been.

 

[OurLaughingPlace]

That was neat to watch. I had no idea that there was once a plan for the Soviet Union and Switzerland pavilions in Epcot. I would still love a Switzerland pavilion with ride

 

[kay1864]

Weird that they're pushing the Dolphin, and putting S&D on par with YC/BC--when S&D aren't owned by Disney.

Good thing they didn't end up with that roller-coaster-shaped lattice at the back of BW--a lot of people would have been ticked off to find there wasn't a coaster.

Dang, we could've had a Matterhorn ride

 

[Candleshoe]

I want Switzerland instead of Frozen!

 

[DisneyFive]

Weird that they're pushing the Dolphin, and putting S&D on par with YC/BC--when S&D aren't owned by Disney.

Good thing they didn't end up with that roller-coaster-shaped lattice at the back of BW--a lot of people would have been ticked off to find there wasn't a coaster.

Dang, we could've had a Matterhorn ride

There's some VERY interesting back story on the Swan and Dolphin. I don't know the exact story, but there was a falling out somewhere. I could be way off on this... but I think they maybe were originally planned to be Disney Resorts? Also there was some controversy about sight lines to Epcot or something like that. I've seen the information somehere, but don't remember where. It's kind of a fascinating little story, especially for us WDW geeks.

Dan

 

[kay1864]

There's some VERY interesting back story on the Swan and Dolphin. I don't know the exact story, but there was a falling out somewhere. I could be way off on this... but I think they maybe were originally planned to be Disney Resorts? Also there was some controversy about sight lines to Epcot or something like that. I've seen the information somehere, but don't remember where. It's kind of a fascinating little story, especially for us WDW geeks.

Dan

Here's what I got from Wikipedia, which is my (rough) recollection as well:

The Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin are the only Walt Disney World resorts to carry the Disney name and receive special Disney benefits, while not being fully owned and operated by the Walt Disney Company.

In the late 1980s, Disney saw that they were losing business to area hotels that catered to conventions and large meetings, so Michael Eisner decided to build a convention-oriented hotel near Epcot. The Tishman Group, the contractor who was hired to build Epcot and who also had hotels in the nearby Disney hotel zone, claimed that the Epcot deal gave them exclusive rights to operate convention hotels on the Disney property, so Disney partnered with Tishman to develop the Swan and Dolphin complex. Eisner had used Graves for other company projects and wanted to continue to build striking, unique buildings.

Tishman and MetLife own the buildings, but has a 99-year lease on the land from Disney. Disney also receives a share of the hotel's revenues, and has a say in any design or architecture changes to the interior or exterior of the buildings.

Remember that at the time, the only Disney hotels were the monorail hotels plus Caribbean Beach. Disney didn't think of themselves as being "in the hotel business" until Eisner came along, who built most of the ones after S&D.