Calomiris believes that large financial institutions are worth preserving given the various perceived benefits these institutions provide.  However, many of the benefits Calomiris mentions appear to be nonexistent upon closer examination.  In addition, other benefits Calomiris attributes to large financial institutions and the consolidation waves that create them could be attributed to other factors such as technological advances.

Financial institutions need to be global in today's economy due to the global needs of their clients.  Merged financial firms can accrue economies of scope as they can cross sell numerous products, in the process saving in terms of infrastructure costs and information cost.  Calomiris asserts that economies of scope "imply economies of scale within finance suppliers, since small financial firms cannot afford the overhead costs of building platforms with many complex products."

However, economies of scale are generally realized only in mergers of smaller banks according to numerous studies.  Efficiency gains really don't apply to mergers that create the megabanks Calomiris is determined to protect.  Nonetheless, Calomiris states that bank consolidation has been successful because productivity growth for the entire industry rose by more than 0.4% per year from 1991-97, the "heart of the merger wave."  Did productivity grow at a high rate across other industries not experiencing a merger wave during the period?  Given the technological advances that were occurring in the 1990s, it is very possible that much of the productivity experienced across all industries had more to do with a secular movement in technology as opposed to efficiencies realized by managerial acumen.

What may be the most surprising claim is Calomiris' belief that customers benefit from the creation of mega financial institutions, stating "many of the gains of consolidation accrued to customers, not banks, in the form of cheaper and better financial services. For example, my research shows that from 1980 to 1999, after controlling for changes in the mix of firms, the underwriting costs of accessing the public equity market fell by more than 20%.