Great minds obviously think alike (see post #59)Not necessarily - the smaller company will have much lower overheads, less advertising, fewer sales bods, less need for company BMW's, fancy office space..
Quite so - again, exactly as I said in #59. However, to be fair, a generic medicine has to be approved by the relevant regulatory authority (MHRA in UK) on the basis of "efficacy, safety and quality". Efficacy and safety do not have to be demonstrated, since that has already been established in relation to the original branded medicine, but extensive evidence of 'quality' has to be provided and approved (but see *** below). In contrast, a 'copy' or 'me too' electrical item is likely to be 'self-certified' (by CE/UKSA marking), so not scrutinised by any independent body.When I (rarely) buy any medicine, I read the contents, then look around the shelves for the cheaper product with the same active ingredients, often at a fraction of the cost. All have to be approved, to be on sale.
[*** many generic medicines are actually even 'safer', but much cheaper, than the original branded product than you may think - since they (at least the 'active ingredient') are no uncommonly manufactured by the manufacturer of the branded product and sold to the 'generic house' at very low cost. That may sound daft (on the part of the branded manufacturer) but they often take the view that (once a medicine is 'off-patent') people are going to find ways of making or buying a generic product whether or not the branded manufacturer is involved, so that might as well get 'something, rather than nothing' out of the generic sales.
That is possible because the literal cost of producing a medicine is often tiny, nearly all of the usual price being attributable to the vast historical; cost of development (including attempted development of all the products which didn't 'make it to market') ]