Destination or attraction. Which is more important?

We’re working on a branding project for a company that is planning to build a destination around a few existing attractions. One of those attractions is drawing over a million paid visitors a year, while two others are struggling.

Initially, we were hired to address the as yet to be built/named destination’s brand position and identity. But after initial diagnosis, it appears that one of the struggling attractions has a brand positioning and promotion problem that may very well be the cause of its underperformance.

This begs the question: Do travelers choose the destination first and then which attractions to visit second, is it the other way around, or are both scenarios valid?