You're right, he did. When I saw it I did a major facepalm. :smack:
I figured this was how it would go. I figured some people would read this as a veiled "Do you think it's okay if we make more stuff overseas?" trial balloon, when nothing is further from the truth. You guys have to look at it more like a research paper to stimulate discussion among the management team as we consider the landscape 5, 10, 15 years out.
This morning I was thinking this was ill-timed, but in Evan's defense I think he tried to frame it as a positive. "What does it mean to you?" elicits (in me anyway) thoughts like: It means the intellectual capital of a company is in the same place/culture/language/etc. as the manufacturing. That usually means good connections between those who invent and those who build. Good connections between quality control, engineering, etc. These things are less important in things like iPhones and household appliances, especially when you get into production runs of hundreds of thousands or millions. That's a whole different beast.
I also think it's worth mentioning that the discussion can be framed in different ways. One sub-category is: "When a company is founded in country X, (whether that's European, Asian, North American, etc) and then later switches manufacturing of their products to lower cost labor. (Asian or otherwise) I would think of this as outsourcing. The other sub-category is what do you think about the value of American products vs the products of other countries? (native or outsourced) In other words, regardless of what country you live in, how do you perceive a US product's value differently than other countries?