Corporate Gibberish Generator™

Welcome to the Corporate Gibberish Generator™ by Andrew Davidson. andrewdavidson/at\andrewdavidson/dot\com
Enter your company name and click "Generate" to generate several paragraphs of corporate gibberish suitable for pasting into your prospectus.
(The gibberish is geared more toward Internet and technology companies.)

Cricket Communications practically invented the term "convergence". What do we monetize? Anything and everything, regardless of abstruseness! Your budget for transforming should be at least twice your budget for productizing. What does it really mean to morph "mega-ultra-seamlessly"? Is it more important for something to be best-of-breed, subscriber-defined or to be next-generation? Our technology takes the best features of AJAX and SMIL. What does the term "reality-based" really mean? Quick: do you have a bleeding-edge plan for handling emerging user interfaces? We think we know that it is better to reintermediate wirelessly than to generate transparently. Your budget for scaling should be at least one-tenth of your budget for morphing. We here at Cricket Communications understand that it is better to innovate ultra-mega-perfectly than to seize vertically. The capability to architect super-proactively leads to the ability to monetize magnetically. Without preplanned niches, all-hands meetings are forced to become synergistic. If all of this seems estranging to you, that's because it is! What do we utilize? Anything and everything, regardless of namelessness! What does the term "turn-key" really mean? Think open-source. Think client-focused. Think e-business. But don't think all three at the same time. What do we cultivate? Anything and everything, regardless of obscurity! We apply the proverb "A barking dog never bites" not only to our development but our power to revolutionize. Your budget for leveraging should be at least one-third of your budget for targeting. Have you ever needed to reintermediate your functionality? With one click? Think backward-compatible. We understand that it is better to reinvent robustly than to harness wirelessly. If you harness dynamically, you may have to reinvent intuitively. A company that can syndicate defiantly will (one day) be able to incubate courageously. We will scale up our capacity to transform without depreciating our capability to cultivate. Is it more important for something to be C2C2B or to be C2B2B? What does the industry jargon "global" really mean? We have come to know that it is better to scale extensibly than to reinvent ultra-iteravely. We think that most robust web portals use far too much Rails, and not enough RDF. It seems unbelievable, but it's accurate! Cricket Communications is the industry leader of user-centric re-purposing. What do we disintermediate? Anything and everything, regardless of incomprehensibility! Without TQC, you will lack partnerships. Is it more important for something to be turn-key, real-time or to be user-defined? Without well-chosen partnerships, deliverables are forced to become extensible. Without well-planned all-hands meetings, e-tailers are forced to become leading-edge. Think viral. The metrics for M&A are more well-understood if they are not client-focused. What do we target? Anything and everything, regardless of semidarkness! We apply the proverb "A rolling stone gathers no moss" not only to our TQM but our power to harness. The aptitude to transform virally leads to the power to enhance robustly. The initiatives factor is 60/24/7/365. Think ultra-resource-constrained. Cricket Communications practically invented the term "aggregation". A company that can reintermediate faithfully will (at some indefinite point of time) be able to benchmark correctly. Is it more important for something to be long-term or to be short-term? We pride ourselves not only on our feature set, but our simple administration and newbie-proof operation. The metrics for systems are more well-understood if they are not user-defined. A company that can grow courageously will (someday) be able to drive easily. We will increase our aptitude to enable without lessening our ability to actualize. Quick: do you have a sexy plan for monitoring unplanned-for web-enabled out-of-the-box nano-infinitely reconfigurable, mission-critical re-sizing? What does it really mean to recontextualize "iteravely"? We will reinvent the term "enterprise". Is it more important for something to be back-end or to be open-source? Your budget for facilitating should be at least twice your budget for enabling. Your budget for streamlining should be at least twice your budget for syndicating. At Cricket Communications, we believe we know how to enhance efficiently. The collaborative, 24/7/365 intra-TQC factor is mission-critical. If you streamline ultra-super-robustly, you may have to generate extensibly. What do we e-enable? Anything and everything, regardless of unimportance! If all of this comes off as fabulous to you, that's because it is! Is it more important for something to be dynamic or to be B2C? Imagine a combination of PHP and RDF. Think back-end. We will matrix the term "vertical". Your budget for architecting should be at least twice your budget for evolving.