Wal-Mart "outsources" everything. They are a retailer, not a manufacturer. They look for the lowest possible purchase price, a process that may involve playing one company or region against another and/or forcing companies to accept low-profit contracts, often to their detriment. Bottom-feeder economics, as some call it. Retailing very low cost commoditized products to consumers does not promote research and development, investment in manufacturing facilities, or improvements to wages, benefits, and working conditions of the manufacturers' employees. It also helps promote our outrageous levels of consumerism (e.g., it's so cheap, throw it away and buy a new one, instead of repairing it). Wal-Mart is not alone in this process, but since they are the largest purveyor of this brand of economics, they are an easy target. As one of my brothers-in-law said: "How can we compete with someone that sells paint for less than we can buy it from the manufacturer?" (He was not referring to Wal-Mart, but to another oversized retailer operating along similar lines.) For the manufacturers, it's tough to say no to a company that comes along and says they will take your entire output for the next six months, especially if they don't give you any business if you don't accept the contract. Contracts such as these may have profit margins for the manufacturers that look good on the quarterly balance sheets, but are unhealthy in the long term.