How a global attractions operator chose one IP for nine very different markets.
A global attractions operator was evaluating which partnerships would work best across its parks worldwide. The difficulty is that appeal does not travel evenly: what excites a seven-year-old in Denmark is not what excites a twelve-year-old in South Korea.
One global decision, nine local realities
The operator was weighing partnerships for parks across North America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia Pacific. A single global answer would be convenient and almost certainly wrong: IP appeal varies by market, and shifts sharply between a six-year-old and a twelve-year-old.
Without a comparable read, the decision would come down to whichever market had the loudest internal advocate.
Place the property on a common index
The candidate property was positioned on the IP Index across three age bands and nine markets, using the same measure everywhere so the results could be compared rather than reconciled.
It was then benchmarked directly against the properties the parks already build around, so the question stopped being “is this property popular?” and became “is it stronger than what we already have, and where?”
A market-by-market case, not a global assumption
The operator could see which markets the property would carry, which age bands it genuinely reached, and how it ranked against the existing portfolio in each one.
That turned a single global bet into a set of specific decisions, with the evidence to support investing heavily in some markets and holding back in others.
A global IP decision is really local ones. Averaging them is how you end up with an attraction that works nowhere in particular.
Your next partnership
Test the property in every market before you commit to all of them.
Tell us the markets and the age groups, and we’ll show you where the appeal actually is.