Where is my Alameda Slim Dark Ride?

I am by no means affiliated with Disney. I know the parks, love the rides, watch the movies… But I am literally a thousand miles away from any meeting room where their decisions are made. But I still wonder how it’s done. Especially when it comes to choosing which IPs to associate with a new attraction. Why is it that Finding Nemo has a ride and Cars is getting a themed land while Atlantis and Treasure Planet are not represented?

I think in my head as a kid there was a group of Imagineers who were more like a think tank, and the company said, “We need a ride!” The think tank would emerge from their office made from pixie dust and plastic cheese and respond with, “We have designed the coaster from The Emperor’s New Groove.” Then all would rejoice in the creativity.

Now, as an adult, I have a completely different view of what the process might look like. Now, I imagine executives and analysts speaking about some kind of nostalgia index. Something that can systematically help them decide on intellectual properties that could drum up more business.

Now bear with me, as this is all made up in my head, but if I were running their business, I would have something of this sort.

When looking at Disney theme park customers, I would likely break them into cohorts. They would all have a lifecycle and an LTV. Depending on where they were introduced to my product would impact how large their LTV should be since, ideally, the product is of high quality, reusable, and evergreen. So, as the owner, I would like people to return to the parks in each stage of life.

The stages I would immediately identify:

Child – These are people being introduced to Disney World/Disneyland at a young age, likely on a family vacation. Ages 0–11.

Teenager – Older kids going on one of their later family vacations. Ages 12–18.

Young adult – People at the early career stage, maybe getting married. Ages 19–25.

Young family – People who now have small children. Ages 26–35.

Matured family – Parents of teenagers who will soon leave the house. Ages 35–45.

Empty nesters – People whose children have left the house and are basically couples or singles now, with just their careers as their main responsibility. Ages 46–65.

Retirees – People who are finishing up with work and living their golden years. Ages 66+.

Then I would assign cohorts based on their birth year and what the entertainment was during their formative years. Each of those cohorts goes through the stages we identified earlier. Then I would use the cohorts to maximize their desire to return to the parks. The assumption would be that nostalgia from the use of IP would be a very good draw for that. So, I think I would want to balance the IPs across the different parks to pull in the right groups.

As of right now, 2026, I would expect the representation of teenagers to be a cohort from 2008–2014. Their major influential IPs are more like Zootopia, Moana, and Encanto. Not necessarily the movies that came out when they were born, but as they were growing up. And, of course, the films would naturally share some level of nostalgia across cohorts as well, just maybe not as strongly as with their generations.

The young adults would be represented by IP from their cohort of 2001–2007: Tangled, Frozen, Wreck-It Ralph.

Young families from 1991–2001, currently being Lilo & Stitch, Bolt, Cars, and Finding Nemo. This is one of those cohorts where Disney might lean on Pixar films over Disney if they had better box office, merch, streaming… numbers.

Matured families, 1981–1991, with movies like The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, and Aladdin.

Empty nesters, 1961–1981, currently with Robin Hood, The Rescuers, and Oliver & Company. These films are not as high-grossing as those of other generations, but Disney also owns Indiana Jones, Star Wars, and the Muppets.

And the retirees, for IPs based on birth years before 1961, with films like Sleeping Beauty, 101 Dalmatians, and Cinderella.

Then there would be the final category of evergreen IPs. Mickey and Minnie, Snow White, and Pinocchio. These seem to appeal to people of all ages.

But as older attractions age and get reimagined, I would place a high price on this nostalgia score. Look at the park in which we are placing the new IP and ask what group it is that we want to bolster attendance for at that specific park. Is there a cohort of ours that is underserved?

Then, when you find that group, what IPs were the strongest during their childhood? For the '90s kids, sure, it was the Disney Renaissance films. But for the '70s and '80s, things like Star Wars and the Muppets were much more influential. What about the early 2000s? Pixar far outsold the Disney films, so they are a likely stronger candidate to entice that group. The box office numbers, toy sales, and DVD purchases of Treasure Planet don’t compare to Monsters, Inc.

I would like to have an entire index describing the nostalgia factor of every IP and how it affects each cohort or generation. Of course, that would be informed by as much data as I could come up with. When was the property released? How big was the box office? Were there toys? A TV show attached? When was the last time something was added to the franchise? What were the target demos? And what are the practical demos? Is it a classic or is it forgotten? Is there streaming available? What are the streaming numbers like?

So this would all go into some kind of formula to get a nostalgia score. That score would help dictate what IPs get attractions. So, in the end, you could have a score for every current cohort and life stage that is attending the parks. Maybe you choose the top five by maximizing a single underrepresented group. Maybe you choose the top few that are strongest across all cohorts.

You would probably want to keep in mind the duration of these cohorts as well. For someone at the end of the empty-nester stage and moving to retiree, you might want to consider giving them a show over a ride since their lifecycle and LTV will come to a close sooner than the cohort in the young-family stage… But that is for another post.

As I always say with analytics, it isn’t a decision. I would not blindly follow the highest score. I would use that as a bridge for a conversation. Maybe Frozen is the most likely to pull my target audience, but maybe Frozen is oversaturated at the park I am looking at. That is why it should be presented as a possibility and then handed off to Imagineering, leaving them with some options, but guardrails.

And likely it rarely says, “Give me an Alameda Slim dark ride or a Milo Thatch meet and greet.”

And please understand, this is napkin math at best. I haven’t researched and designed the actual life stages or the box office numbers, but I think you get the idea.

Or… I could be out of my mind and maybe it is a think tank with pixie dust and plastic cheese.