6 Secret Multinational Giants (Infographic)

Living well on less isn’t just about spending less. It’s also understanding where your money is going and who is making the things you touch everyday. As I look into some of the biggest names I’ve never heard of I’m continually shocked. Check out our latest infographic on the multinational giants that just don’t care if you know their names or not. For me, the most impressive is the Taiwanese computer hardware producer, Quanta Computer. Quanta controls a huge marketshare and hauls in annual revenues higher than Amazon and Coca-Cola, but since they don’t carry many branded products, we simply don’t think of them as a sprawling multinational. Just consider that if you owned or gifted a Kindle Fire last year, it was manufactured at a Quanta plant in East Asia. And for those of you who follow my blog on a notebook by Apple, Compaq, Dell HP, or Lenovo, there’s a high chance that some component of your laptop came from Quanta.

I’m not worried that Quanta is cornering a market right under our nose, but I do feel embarrassed that a company I have probably supported with just about every personal tech purchase of the last five years is one that I never could’ve named before today. Understanding the market realities in which we’re spending and saving makes savvy customers more of a force to be reckoned with by even the largest companies. It’s worth all of our time to learn about the companies we’re spending our hard-earned money on. Check out this fascinating infographic on the six insanely large companies that (if you’re like me) you just aren’t thinking about.

6 Secret Giants Infographic


  1. You can make a comparison of any two companies based on revenue. It’s a pretty poor valuation comparison. Coca-Cola’s margin is MASSIVE. This is probably why you missed an amazing company that’s well-known to investors but probably under-the-radar for average folks: Berkshire Hathaway. It’s one of the most diversified conglomerates out there.

  2. The way I read the section on International Paper it implied that cutting down the trees for use in paper was bad. I disagree with this. The trees used for paper are fast growing and are harvest approximately every 10 years. New trees are planted to replace the trees that are cut down. The carbon that the trees absorb while they are growing goes into the cups or other paper products. Most of these paper products end up in the ground. Therefore the carbon is taken out of the air and put back into the ground.

    • Or better yet, incinerated for energy. It’s still carbon neutral, if that matters to you. It’s ridiculous to criticize a company that replaces every tree it cuts down as environmentally unsound.

      It’s the definition of a sustainable resource.. Just like any other agricultural crop.

      If only the electricity to make the paper came from LFTR technology!

  3. Looked back at the feed and so far this year, this blog is 2/3rds Infographics. (17 infographics and 9 real posts).

    Good Bye Forever

  4. I don’t know about your basic theme–I was aware of Saudi Aramco,
    Cargill, International Paper, and Gannet, and I’m not especially into economics.

  5. Interesting title, I wonder how many of these companies people really haven’t heard of? Personally, I once worked for Gannett back in the late 80’s. Three other companies mentioned have been my clients, Saudi Aramco, Cargill & IP. What a small, global world we live in…

  6. Maybe I just know too much about large conglomerates, but the only one here that was news to me was Quanta. Of course VF was established in my hometown way back in 1899 so that one was easy 🙂

  7. I know about as little about business as it is possible to know, but I too have heard of Cargill, International Paper and Gannett. I get it that it can be harmful to have faceless corporations holding monopolies or pulling political strings, but I’d like to see a follow up on the actual policies and world influence of such companies. I’m enjoying the infographics because I’m very visual and have gleaned some surprising and impactful insights from them. Keep up the good work, Frugal Dad!

  8. Just a slight remark: it says “10x” in the NYT image, but “20x” (which seems correct) in the text underneath. Besides that, very interesting stuff.