As a corporation, Disney has a significant economic impact in three main areas in the United States: The Western entertainment industry, Orlando tourism, and Anaheim tourism. In fact, Disney World in Orlando alone impacted Florida’s gross domestic product (GDP) by 10 billion dollars just from gate admissions and theme park sales in 2014, accounting for 2.4 percent of Florida’s GDP (Sevigny, 2017). The presence of this one company creates a ripple effect throughout southern Florida, creating jobs and additionally positively adding to the economy of the area. With an oligopoly such as Disney having such a huge effect on the economies of the areas it serves, there is one question that has not been fully explored and might give even more insight into why this company is so successful: why does Mickey Mouse wear pants but no shirt while Donald Duck wears a shirt but no pants?
Clothing manufacturers understand that their products must meet several needs for their customers. Style, comfort, durability, practicality, color, fabric, and other considerations must be carefully weighed when making clothing, However, one of the most important questions to be answered when designing and making clothing is the purpose of the clothing. Is it to be used to make a fashion statement? As a uniform? For a functional purpose (such as a hospital gown or a maternity garment)? As a personal statement? In order to be successful, clothing manufactures must anticipate who their customers are and what they want so that they can supply what their customers demand. In Disney’s case, company uniforms are worn by many employees, and as a uniform consumer, Disney needs specific uniforms for specific positions. The clothing manufacturers who provide uniforms for Disney must meet Disney’s requirements for price and value, execution, and quality.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Economic Naturalist Essay".
The uniform for Mickey Mouse consists of shorts and suspenders. There is no need for Mickey to wear a shirt as part of his uniform for several reasons: it is hot in Southern Florida and Southern California, and there is nothing on his chest to cover. It would be fiscally irresponsible for Disney to invest uniform expenditures on shirts for Mickey when they are not needed. On the other hand, Donald has plenty of feathers to cover his nether regions and therefore needs no pants; again, Disney does not need to budget for these. He does, though, need a shirt and a hat to help Disney customers recognize him as an employee of Disney. He also needs them to protect his skin where his feathers are more sparse than they are on the bottom half of his body.
Of course, there is an opportunity cost of Mickey not wearing a shirt and Donald not wearing pants. If Mickey suddenly sported a stylish T-shirt with a Disney logo, it is likely that this shirt could be replicated and sold in Disney gift shops, generating more revenue for the company. Additionally, with the choice to have Donald roam pants-free, Disney is giving up the opportunity to develop what could be the next hot fashion trend – duck britches. However, Disney must feel that the comparative advantage of leaving Donald pantless and Mickey naked from the waist up is, in itself, a “good” with a low opportunity cost.
Adam Smith would likely agree that Disney has specialized in what it has an absolute advantage in – mice with no shirts and ducks with no pants. Disney is absolutely more productive in this than any other company in the world, and the ongoing cost-benefit analysis that Disney undergoes regarding the shirt/no shirt, pants/no pants decision must come out in favor of the current wardrobe for each employee.
- Sevigny, J. Disney’s economic impact. The Economics of Disney. Retrieved from http://economicsofdisney.blogspot.com/2017/01/disneys-economic-impact.html
