An article in the New York Times (January 17, 2013) describes the Aravind Eye Hospital in India, where patients pay whatever they can afford but are provided high quality care regardless of payment. While a patient with no money might lie down on a mat on the floor after care, another with the means might get an air-conditioned room, but both would get the same quality of eye care with doctors rotating across all patient types. The clinic claims that poor patients who are provided free care enable more volume across the chain and thus decrease costs and improve quality for all patients, hence a focus on maximizing the number of patients treated. Do you agree that the volume of patients as a focus can enable a successful low cost, high quality service system ? Given low revenues, is the use of relatives who are eye surgeons, and can sacrifice incomes, an important component of the clinic’s success ? Do you agree with the strategy by the clinic to vertically integrate into lens manufacturing to lower costs as a long term strategy ?