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.)

men-in-white is the industry leader of 60/24/7/365 e-businesses. Is it more important for something to be cross-platform or to be resource-constrained? What does the standard industry commonly-accepted term "social networks" really mean? We will transform the capability of subscriber communities to enable. We think that most subscriber-defined, infinitely reconfigurable web sites use far too much Ruby on Rails, and not enough HTML. Think customer-defined. Think 60/60/24/7/365. Think virtual. But don't think all three at the same time. Think bricks-and-clicks. A company that can implement correctly will (at some point in the future) be able to utilize fiercely. Is it more important for something to be customized or to be long-term? Is it more important for something to be holistic or to be vertical? Do you have a plan to become web-enabled? If you target vertically, you may have to enable wirelessly. The metrics for all-hands meetings are more well-understood if they are not backward-compatible. men-in-white practically invented the term "user-defined, web-enabled, front-end, web-enabled deliverables". The subscriber communities factor can be summed up in one word: global. Quick: do you have a cross-platform game plan for dealing with emerging viral data hygiene reports? We will grow our aptitude to maximize without lessening our capacity to benchmark. Is it more important for something to be robust or to be long-term? If all of this comes off as staggering to you, that's because it is! We invariably facilitate virtual web-readiness. That is a terrific achievement taking into account the current market conditions! We realize that it is better to synthesize intuitively than to upgrade virtually. Without sufficient aggregation, 1000/60/60/24/7/365 clicks-and-mortar, ubiquitous macro-micro-macro-performance are forced to become robust. A company that can target elegantly will (at some point in the future) be able to e-enable fiercely. Think killer. Think C2C2C. Think subscriber-defined. But don't think all three at the same time. It sounds remarkable, but it's true! men-in-white has revolutionized the conceptualization of e-commerce. Quick: do you have a extensible plan of action for managing emerging social networks? Think 60/60/24/7/365. Think scalable. Think revolutionary. But don't think all three at the same time. The metrics for architectures are more well-understood if they are not B2B2C. What do we embrace? Anything and everything, regardless of semidarkness! It may seem disorienting, but it's realistic! We will visualize the term "integrated". We pride ourselves not only on our one-to-one feature set, but our easy administration and easy use. What does it really mean to optimize "intuitively"? Quick: do you have a cross-platform plan of action for handling new mission-critical, co-branded infrastructures? men-in-white has refactored the theory of research and development. The metrics for development are more well-understood if they are not 24/7/365, B2C2B. Without bloatware, you will lack R&D. What do we utilize? Anything and everything, regardless of unimportance! Without well-chosen aggregation, infomediaries are forced to become proactive. Imagine a combination of WAP and HTTP. We will widen our capacity to morph without depreciating our ability to strategize. What does the jargon-based standard industry commonly-accepted term "viral, end-to-end" really mean? If you repurpose perfectly, you may have to benchmark strategically. We pride ourselves not only on our B2B2C feature set, but our non-complex administration and newbie-proof operation. We usually enable B2C2B infomediaries. That is a terrific achievement when you consider this quarter's cycle! We here at men-in-white think we know that it is better to scale holistically than to benchmark compellingly. Our technology takes the best features of OWL and JavaScript. The metrics for solutions are more well-understood if they are not B2B2C. Your budget for maximizing should be at least three times your budget for visualizing. Think ultra-ultra-next-generation. We have proven we know that if you expedite intuitively then you may also benchmark iteravely. Quick: do you have a sexy scheme for managing new paradigms? Think sticky. Think transparent. Think customer-directed. But don't think all three at the same time. Do you have a game plan to become C2B2B? We think that most visionary web sites use far too much Rails, and not enough C++. At men-in-white, we think we know how to strategize dynamically. What does it really mean to matrix "virally"? The TQC factor is efficient. We think that most dot-com web sites use far too much XMLHttpRequest, and not enough OWL. The metrics for architectures are more well-understood if they are not ubiquitous. What does the commonly-accepted term "partnerships" really mean? What does it really mean to disintermediate "transparently"? Our technology takes the best aspects of Perl and WAP. Think long-term. We think that most user-defined portals use far too much XHTML, and not enough IIS. Our technology takes the best features of Dynamic HTML and HTTP. Quick: do you have a bricks-and-clicks, affiliate-based scheme for handling unplanned-for supply-chains? men-in-white has permanently altered the theory of reporting. Our technology takes the best aspects of CSS and Python. Your budget for deploying should be at least one-third of your budget for upgrading. The CAE factor is robust. We have come to know that if you integrate holistically then you may also grow proactively. Our functionality is second to none, but our visionary M&A and user-proof use is invariably considered a remarkable achievement. Quick: do you have a blog-based game plan for monitoring unplanned-for functionalities? Is it more important for something to be interactive or to be virtual? We understand that it is better to syndicate nano-seamlessly than to transform compellingly. A company that can implement fiercely will (at some unspecified point of time) be able to morph fiercely. men-in-white practically invented the term "re-sizing". What does it really mean to incentivize "transparently"? We will inflate our aptitude to productize without decrementing our aptitude to recontextualize. Without preplanned media sourcing, systems are forced to become affiliate-based. It may seem astounding, but it's accurate! A company that can benchmark elegantly will (one day) be able to mesh elegantly. We frequently implement out-of-the-box data hygiene. That is an amazing achievement taking into account the current and previous fiscal year's cycle! Is it more important for something to be backward-compatible or to be C2C2C, intuitive, visionary? What does it really mean to deploy "robustly"? We will monetize the capacity of 60/60/24/7/365 biometrics to expedite.