Parks and Resorts- Unique Attractions to Specific Resorts

Disney Parks and Resorts has an eternal conundrum to deal with after a new attraction is opened; should the attraction be exported to other resorts or not? This can be a difficult decision because there are benefits and drawbacks to exporting and to keeping it solitary.

I have compiled a database of major attractions to their respective resorts (it is not ALL inclusive, only major attractions). Due to formatting issues it is not clearly visible to you, but it can be sent upon request.

Some attractions are meant to go to several different resorts. These attractions translate well to other languages and should be in every resort. These include Tower of Terror, Mickey's Philharmagic, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc.

Some attractions should not be exported and should remain at one resort so that each resort has some unique elements. Attractions such as Matterhorn, Safari's, Mission Space, California Screaming, etc. fall under here.

New attractions typically will stay at one resort for several years until it will be moved, thereby giving the original resort a short ownership privilege. However, within a few years, we should expect attractions such as Iron Man and Tron to make their way elsewhere.

How should we know what attractions should not be exported? I believe it is a few factors

1. Ease of recreation- Some attractions are not easily able to recreate due to the landscape or contributing factors. Think the Safari's at Animal Kingdom...not able to easily replicate this elsewhere.

2. Fit with the culture- Some IP's just don't mesh with certain cultures, so the attraction should not be exported (though the technology can).

3. Contractual issues- This one is more limited, but think about Marvel. Due to the Master licensing agreement, Disneyland resort is in a unique and powerful position to use these IP's to their fullest potential.

4. Unique "flavorful" experiences- By this I mean that "signature" attractions will likely be exported due to their high cost and demand. However, an attraction short of signature status, but still entertaining and popular, should remain at one resort. Matterhorn is a good example. It is a thrilling and fun attraction, but is not as legendary to most guests like Splash Mountain, etc. Therefore Matterhorn should remain solely at Disneyland, however Indians Jones which is signature should be exported to Florida (I don't count the stunt show).

Note, the exported attraction does not have to be identical to the previous versions, there can be minor changes as in Pirates of the Caribbean lengths from California to Florida.

Keeping each park unique will drive up attendance to each individual resort, but the exporting of signature attractions will make them relevant and exciting, thereby making Disneyland resort  no longer a regional theme park and will drive higher attendance at the international resorts.

Thoughts?