Economies of Scale Quotes

There are really two things that have to occur in order for a new technology to be affordable to the mass market. One is you need economies of scale. The other is you need to iterate on the design. You need to go through a few versions.

Among the reasons for this was the fact that the U.S.A. is one mass market. It is only when you have a mass market that large-scale manufacturing which involves very substantial expenditures can be justified.

When General Motors builds a car, they want to meet the specific needs of many customers. But if they custom-make each car, then it will not be economical.

If you look across the economy, if you have multiple players in an industry, you have more customization, more innovation, greater choice for consumers. The more you have consolidation, the less likely you are to invest in innovation. It becomes all about driving down cost and mass production. And that's not good for innovation in an industry.

Large companies are not going to disappear. Multinational companies with tens of thousands of employees are not going to disappear. In fact, many of them are getting larger because they can benefit from economies of scale.

On the Internet, companies are scale businesses, characterized by high fixed costs and relatively low variable costs. You can be two sizes: You can be big, or you can be small. It's very hard to be medium. A lot of medium-sized companies had the financing rug pulled out from under them before they could get big.

If you have six corporate centres, six treasuries, six of everything, and then if you bring it down to one of everything, obviously there are some savings.

It's not about revenues: The fundamental economics in digital business is scale and margins. The top line has become the bottom line.

The bigger the city is, the less infrastructure you need per capita.

Possible economies cannot be used as a defense to illegality. Congress was aware that some mergers which lessen competition may also result in economies but it struck the balance in favor of protecting competition.

Economies of scale are a good thing. If we didn't have them, we'd still be living in tents and eating buffalo.

The 500X and Jeep Renegade are very different cars, but they are manufactured in the same plant and share R&D, which reduces the total investment required by 1 billion euros. That is why I'm convinced that the industry needs and will see more consolidation in the future.

Once you go from 10 people to 100, you already don't know who everyone is. So at that stage you might as well keep growing, to get the advantages of scale.

When you're smaller and leaner, you're not going to have that large a presence throughout the world.

If you're a large organization, you may welcome a bit of regulation to keep the small guys out.

The 2008 financial crisis is usually attributed to vampire squid greed. There was certainly a lot of that. But it was also just as likely to have been caused by the chaos of process created by those big, sexy bank mergers when, in the name of 'economies of scale,' critical members of the trust and responsibility chain were cavalierly eliminated.

A consumer doesn't take anything away: he doesn't actually consume anything. Giving the same thing to a thousand consumers is not really any more expensive than giving it to just one.

We do not believe in oversupplying the market. When you are a large company, you can afford to do it. When you are a small player, your flexibility gets reduced.

We had to figure out how to produce books in a cost-effective way.

Wal-Mart does not do big mergers, though it will buy much smaller competitors in so-called 'tuck-in acquisitions.'

Decreased business base increases overhead. So does increased business base.

The most efficient way to produce anything is to bring together under one management as many as possible of the activities needed to turn out the product.

I don't think it's good in any business for anyone to have a monopoly. On the other hand, you need to have size to get costs down.

It is common for rural hospitals and nursing homes to operate as a single unit in order to take advantage of savings related to cost-sharing of some services and staff.

It is true that we are interested in scale but there are very sound reasons for this.