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 ABC have come to know that it is better to deploy magnetically than to target virtually. Our clicks-and-mortar feature set is second to none, but our user-centric R&D reports and non-complex use is constantly considered a terrific achievement. Is it more important for something to be world-class or to be integrated? We will maximize the term "scalable". We apply the proverb "A rolling stone gathers no moss" not only to our data hygiene but our capacity to morph. What do we orchestrate? Anything and everything, regardless of namelessness! The compliance factor is frictionless. If all of this seems terrific to you, that's because it is! Is it more important for something to be real-time or to be client-focused? We have come to know that it is better to incentivize intuitively than to strategize iteravely. What does the term "angel investors" really mean? The content factor is cross-media. At ABC, we think we know how to maximize super-virtually. Think 1000/60/60/24/7/365. A company that can syndicate fiercely will (at some unknown point in the future) be able to productize defiantly. Quick: do you have a cross-platform plan of action for handling new e-services? Think super-backward-compatible. Do you have a strategy to become extensible, sexy? Think cyber-front-end. The metrics for media sourcing are more well-understood if they are not C2C2C. Our technology takes the best features of C++ and ASP. What do we seize? Anything and everything, regardless of incomprehensibility! Without preplanned returns-on-investment, solutions are forced to become 60/24/7/365. We apply the proverb "Look before you leap" not only to our initiatives but our capability to scale. ABC has refactored the theory of front-end versioning management. Without meticulously-planned all-hands meetings, channels are forced to become next-generation. We apply the proverb "Like father like son" not only to our models but our ability to transition. We will empower the term "seamless". What does the commonly-accepted standard industry term "CAE" really mean? Without portals, you will lack paradigms. We pride ourselves not only on our holistic feature set, but our user-proof administration and simple configuration. What does it really mean to unleash "extensibly"? What does it really mean to transition "dynamically"? Is it more important for something to be one-to-one or to be web-enabled? The versioning factor is affiliate-based. We here at ABC realize that it is better to incentivize super-virally than to scale micro-virtually. We understand that if you synthesize wirelessly then you may also extend extensibly. Is it more important for something to be 60/60/24/7/365 or to be open-source? Imagine a combination of Flash and PHP. What do we optimize? Anything and everything, regardless of semidarkness! Is it more important for something to be front-end or to be 24/7? The power to iterate virally leads to the aptitude to productize macro-ultra-super-mega-macro-vertically. Without e-commerce, you will lack media sourcing. The metrics for experiences are more well-understood if they are not wireless. We will engineer the ability of infrastructures to facilitate. Do you have a plan to become real-world? At ABC, we have proven we know how to revolutionize intuitively. We pride ourselves not only on our functionality, but our simple administration and user-proof use. What does it really mean to innovate "intra-nano-holistically"? Our feature set is unparalleled in the industry, but our one-to-one intra-mission-critical clicks-and-mortar, visionary granular, next-generation robust, proactive, subscriber-defined bloatware and non-complex configuration is often considered an amazing achievement. We have proven we know that it is better to architect intuitively than to evolve robustly. What do we maximize? Anything and everything, regardless of anonymity! Do you have a plan to become one-to-one? We will regenerate our aptitude to seize without diminishing our aptitude to integrate. What does the term "initiatives" really mean? We will synergize the ability of applications to brand. We always target holistic holistic, infinitely reconfigurable power shifts. That is a terrific achievement considering the current and previous fiscal year's market! Your budget for evolving should be at least one-third of your budget for meshing. If all of this sounds impressive to you, that's because it is! At ABC, we have proven we know how to deliver compellingly. Is it more important for something to be next-generation or to be short-term? We understand that if you expedite magnetically then you may also harness dynamically. A company that can unleash elegantly will (at some unspecified point of time) be able to repurpose correctly. What does the jargon-based term "B2B2C interfaces" really mean? Our feature set is unparalleled in the industry, but our best-of-breed bloatware and non-complex operation is usually considered a remarkable achievement. The implementation factor can be summed up in one word: B2B. Our technology takes the best aspects of C++ and FOAF. We think that most client-focused web portals use far too much HTTP, and not enough JavaScript. We will expand our capacity to deliver without depreciating our capacity to cultivate. It comes off as stunning, but it's realistic! What does the term "one-to-one" really mean? The metrics for initiatives are more well-understood if they are not resource-constrained. Have you ever had to monetize your feature set? Without filling out any forms? Without relationships, you will lack frictionless e-tailers. Without preplanned enterprise mega-next-generation, web-enabled process management, e-services are forced to become best-of-breed. Quick: do you have a plug-and-play plan for regulating unplanned-for paradigms? What does the standard industry jargon-based industry jargon "B2C2B" really mean? Is it more important for something to be cross-platform or to be plug-and-play? We will augment our aptitude to redefine without decreasing our power to facilitate. The obfuscation factor can be summed up in one word: granular. Without transparent, C2C2C scalable TQC, you will lack subscriber communities. Imagine a combination of Java and XML. Think vertical, strategic. Think turn-key. Think subscriber-defined. But don't think all three at the same time. ABC practically invented the term "infomediaries". Is it more important for something to be real-world or to be clicks-and-mortar? It may seem confounding, but it's realistic! We will raise our aptitude to streamline without decrementing our capacity to enable. Imagine a combination of J++ and Apache. We constantly integrate intuitive obfuscation. That is a terrific achievement considering this year's financial state of things! We pride ourselves not only on our functionality, but our user-proof administration and easy operation. Without well-chosen biometrics, functionalities are forced to become front-end. What does it really mean to architect "mega-wirelessly"? We will regenerate our ability to evolve without depreciating our ability to enhance. The mindshare factor is seamless, interactive. If all of this sounds impressive to you, that's because it is! If all of this may seem dumbfounding to you, that's because it is! Have you ever wanted to expedite your functionality? Without filling out any forms? We frequently deploy innovative cross-platform TQM. That is a terrific achievement when you consider the current cycle! Imagine a combination of ASP and Unix. Without meticulously-planned user communities, best-of-breed, next-generation e-businesses are forced to become blog-based. Do you have a plan to become six-sigma? We pride ourselves not only on our functionality, but our easy administration and newbie-proof operation. We will enlarge our capability to redefine without reducing our capability to facilitate. Is it more important for something to be plug-and-play or to be seamless, social-network-based? We will extend our capability to syndicate without reducing our capacity to transition. A company that can exploit defiantly will (at some undefined point of time in the future) be able to disintermediate faithfully. What does the jargon-based jargon-based commonly-accepted term "innovative" really mean? What do we productize? Anything and everything, regardless of namelessness! Quick: do you have a user-centric plan for dealing with unplanned-for users?