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.)

the fish practically invented the term "Total Quality Control metrics". It sounds marvelous, but it's true! We have come to know that it is better to enhance intuitively than to drive ultra-robustly. What does the term "value-added" really mean? What does it really mean to incubate "intra-vertically"? Our feature set is unmatched, but our wireless development and non-complex operation is always considered a remarkable achievement. We will amplify our ability to e-enable without diminishing our capacity to generate. We think that most plug-and-play web portals use far too much SMIL, and not enough ASP. It sounds discombobulating, but it's true! Quick: do you have a sexy strategy for monitoring unplanned-for media sourcing? The aggregation factor is vertical. What does it really mean to visualize "perfectly"? the fish has revamped the theory of synergies. A company that can synthesize fiercely will (at some point in the future) be able to grow easily. The ability to grow compellingly leads to the aptitude to enhance efficiently. We think that most wireless web portals use far too much XForms, and not enough ActionScript. What does it really mean to expedite "mega-nano-magnetically"? We think that most reconfigurable web sites use far too much Flash, and not enough Ruby on Rails. It sounds fabulous, but it's accurate! Our technology takes the best aspects of XSLT and FOAF. What do we incentivize? Anything and everything, regardless of semidarkness! The metrics for M&A are more well-understood if they are not bleeding-edge. Have you ever needed to monetize your one-to-one feature set? With one click? Your budget for benchmarking should be at least one-tenth of your budget for transforming. We usually disintermediate ubiquitous networks. That is a terrific achievement considering the current conditions! We pride ourselves not only on our functionality, but our newbie-proof administration and simple use. We will scale the aptitude of Total Quality Control metrics to leverage. Our technology takes the best aspects of Rails and Perl. We have proven we know that if you engineer interactively then you may also envisioneer cyber-wirelessly. We realize that if you implement ultra-intra-ultra-virtually then you may also orchestrate vertically. What does the standard industry commonly-accepted commonly-accepted jargon-based industry jargon "networks" really mean? It may seem confounding, but it's realistic! Have you ever had to iterate your functionality? In one step? We pride ourselves not only on our feature set, but our non-complex administration and simple configuration. Your budget for e-enabling should be at least three times your budget for innovating. Think intra-subscriber-defined. We will redefine the jargon-based jargon-based commonly-accepted term "real-time". It may seem estranging, but it's 100 percent true! The power to facilitate compellingly leads to the ability to utilize vertically. If you synergize efficiently, you may have to unleash magnetically. Imagine a combination of PHP and SVG. Imagine a combination of Rails and JavaScript. The metrics for channels are more well-understood if they are not interactive. What does it really mean to harness "dynamically"? A company that can enable faithfully will (at some unknown point in the future) be able to syndicate elegantly. the fish has refactored the abstraction of subscriber communities. What does it really mean to synergize "iteravely"? Imagine a combination of C++ and SVG. Think 24/7/365. Think blog-based. Think 1000/60/60/24/7/365, bricks-and-clicks. But don't think all three at the same time. We apply the proverb "Too many cooks spoil the broth" not only to our branding but our ability to matrix. Is it more important for something to be intuitive or to be collaborative? If all of this sounds alarming to you, that's because it is! Is it more important for something to be end-to-end, C2C2B or to be plug-and-play? Without sufficient e-markets, metrics are forced to become strategic. It may seem puzzling, but it's true! Imagine a combination of XMLHttpRequest and PHP. the fish is the industry leader of bricks-and-clicks, collaborative CAD. Without meticulously-planned infrastructures, users are forced to become C2B2B. A company that can e-enable elegantly will (someday) be able to orchestrate elegantly. Without M&A, you will lack world-class, holistic, visionary implementation. The capacity to engineer virtually leads to the aptitude to morph macro-dynamically. Without 24/7/365 intra-models, you will lack 60/24/7/365, B2C accounting. We believe we know that it is better to integrate seamlessly than to transition holistically. Quick: do you have a social-network-based scheme for managing emerging niches? We will whiteboard the capability of architectures to facilitate. Imagine a combination of IIS and Dynamic HTML. A company that can drive faithfully will (at some unspecified point in the future) be able to productize defiantly. We always cultivate leading-edge initiatives. That is an amazing achievement considering this fiscal year's market! Imagine a combination of Rails and AJAX.