>I came across this earlier. I have edited it for branding purposes.
>
>

>The Company is announcing today that it will expand its presence in India by opening an office in Mumbai in order to bring work currently outsourced back into the company
>and hire employees of The Company to fill these positions.  We plan to open the new office by mid-2006 with approximately 200 employees who will do work that we currently
>outsource to vendors in Mexico and India.  The work currently outsourced includes claims data entry jobs, IT coding/application development jobs and IT quality assurance
>jobs. Our existing business in India is a joint venture in which we own a majority interest in Another Company, which sells widgets and related widget services.
>

>
>How is this still not considered "outsourcing?" The jobs are still going to residents of India, as much as I can tell.

And this one today in reponse to someone's inquiry as to whether calling it outsourcing really mattered:

One more point and then I'll leave this topic alone -- what we're doing in India is really no different than what we did in the U.S. 25 or 30 years ago as we expanded 
beyond Widget City to locations that offered more cost effective ways of doing business.  Over the last 25 years we have built operations in Widgetville, Widgetson and 
Widgetton, among other places, because there were significant pools of talent and cost effective facilities in those locations that we couldn't get in Widget City.  It's 
the same reason we have widget expertise in Widgetdom.  Because it's there -- not here.  Now we're merely expanding beyond U.S. borders and looking around the 
globe for talent.