Splitting straws on semantics is how all classic bad faith arguments start, FYI.
By that logic they wouldn't be removing Tower of Terror track either because of the "financial situation" they're in and how pointless it is.
Struggling business or not, Dreamworld is a theme park and spending money on making the place look like another place/world/thing is actually one of the most important things they should be doing every single day in making it great again instead of watering the joint down with sub-par facade replacements and giant fences aimed at covering up SBNO rides. These days shopping centres are better designed and better themed. Ergo, i'd say that if they can't meet the consumer expectations set by a local shopping joint (let alone be completely unable to step out of the shadow of its former self) then they have no business operating a park to begin with.
This is a beautiful oxymoron and i'm here for it. 😄 It just so perfectly summarises why the park is the way it is right now.
For a park that's trying to shift their image away from a brand that half-arses stuff to the point of fatalities, i'd say leaving a 100m tall sign of a closed ride up for all to see is about as half-arsed as it gets and does a lot of damage in terms of affirming guest perceptions of what they hear on the telly about the joint. That perception is further concreted in place when, throughout their day they come across all of the SBNO/closed rides littered across the park.
I often wonder how many guests, sweaty and exhausted from walking half a mile to a closed ride (because there's no printed or useful maps in-park anymore), look up into the sky utterly exhausted and see that glorious grey phallus with "Tower of Terror" painted down the side, almost taunting them of the money they spent, and think to themselves "never again."