Usually, when this sort of thing happens, it's because the rent was artificially low due to a long-term lease without appropriate escalations. In other words, the tenant is getting a hell of deal, and then a lease rolls over permitting the landlord to again charge market rent. Not sure if that's what happened here. If not, then it was likely something similar. Real estate is a remarkably transparent market.

When you look it that way, it seems a little less "awesome". Subsidizing a losing business isn't the sort of activity that makes one rich.