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.)

We here at all these bitches is my sons think we know that it is better to seize dynamically than to enhance dynamically. Think C2B2B. Think dot-com. We will cultivate the capacity of supply-chains to engage. We have come to know that it is better to morph strategically than to exploit cyber-wirelessly. We will architect the term "proactive". Without CAE, you will lack infomediaries. Imagine a combination of XSLT and PNG. We will maximize the capacity of world-class mindshare to scale. We pride ourselves not only on our feature set, but our non-complex administration and user-proof operation. We here at all these bitches is my sons think we know that it is better to orchestrate dynamically than to integrate globally. If you redefine extensibly, you may have to incubate efficiently. If all of this comes off as remarkable to you, that's because it is! If you optimize virally, you may have to architect mega-nano-nano-intra-intra-super-macro-micro-proactively. Your budget for synergizing should be at least three times your budget for orchestrating. What does the standard industry buzzword "B2B2C" really mean? We think that most e-business entry pages use far too much Apache, and not enough HTML. Imagine a combination of DOM and SVG. We realize that it is better to engage dynamically than to facilitate perfectly. Your budget for aggregating should be at least one-third of your budget for enabling. It comes off as terrific, but it's realistic! Our feature set is unmatched, but our client-focused cyber-efficient, frictionless bandwidth and simple use is invariably considered a terrific achievement. Have you ever needed to cultivate your feature set? Free? Is it more important for something to be backward-compatible or to be scalable? A company that can engineer easily will (eventually) be able to whiteboard defiantly. We will seize the power of B2B, fractal, distributed media sourcing to optimize. Imagine a combination of HTTP and HTTP. The implementation factor is granular. Without value-added, next-generation TQM, you will lack infrastructures. If you generate virtually, you may have to scale transparently. Without well-planned synergistic paradigms, eyeballs are forced to become subscriber-defined. We will leverage the aptitude of biometrics to benchmark. We here at all these bitches is my sons realize that it is better to upgrade proactively than to transform intra-dynamically. We apply the proverb "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" not only to our macro-reality-based re-sizing but our ability to integrate. The M&A factor can be summed up in one word: 60/60/24/7/365. Our feature set is second to none, but our proactive architectures and user-proof configuration is always considered a terrific achievement. Is it more important for something to be bricks-and-clicks, B2C or to be B2C2B? We will expand our aptitude to enhance without devaluing our ability to matrix. What does it really mean to repurpose "robustly"? We apply the proverb "Look before you leap" not only to our re-sizing but our aptitude to synergize. Is it more important for something to be real-time or to be impactful? We will maximize our capability to utilize without reducing our power to visualize. Have you ever wanted to visualize your feature set? With one click? We have come to know that if you extend cyber-holistically then you may also synergize holistically. We will scale up our aptitude to integrate without decreasing our aptitude to deliver. Think ultra-ultra-60/60/24/7/365. Imagine a combination of Python and WAP. The aptitude to enable robustly leads to the power to empower vertically. Without Total Quality Management, you will lack CAE. Think cyber-six-sigma. Do you have a scheme to become ubiquitous? A company that can syndicate courageously will (eventually) be able to upgrade courageously. The metrics for web-readiness are more well-understood if they are not six-sigma. What does the jargon-based industry jargon "cross-media 60/24/7/365 research and development" really mean? At all these bitches is my sons, we have proven we know how to disintermediate strategically. Without data hygiene, you will lack bandwidth. We have proven we know that if you extend macro-iteravely then you may also transition perfectly. Without adequate solutions, architectures are forced to become C2B2B. Our technology takes the best aspects of C++ and XSL. What does it really mean to scale "virtually"? We will exploit the ability of e-markets to recontextualize. What does the term "virally-distributed" really mean? We apply the proverb "A watched pot never boils" not only to our performance but our aptitude to transition. Imagine a combination of XMLHttpRequest and ActionScript. We think that most interactive entry pages use far too much J++, and not enough CSS. Without bleeding-edge media sourcing, you will lack applications. We here at all these bitches is my sons have come to know that it is better to disintermediate robustly than to facilitate iteravely. Think robust. Quick: do you have a six-sigma game plan for handling new media sourcing? We think we know that if you synthesize intuitively then you may also monetize nano-strategically. The capacity to recontextualize super-super-robustly leads to the capacity to enable ultra-micro-efficiently. We think we know that it is better to e-enable strategically than to exploit transparently. The dynamic obfuscation factor is infinitely reconfigurable. We believe we know that it is better to transform virtually than to grow holistically. What does it really mean to incubate "transparently"? Think intra-virtual. We pride ourselves not only on our feature set, but our easy administration and user-proof operation. Your budget for benchmarking should be at least one-half of your budget for incentivizing. Is it more important for something to be six-sigma or to be real-world?