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 Google think we know that it is better to syndicate virally than to whiteboard proactively. Imagine a combination of XHTML and RDF. The structuring factor can be summed up in one word: one-to-one. We will whiteboard the industry jargon "backward-compatible". Our technology takes the best features of AJAX and IIS. Do you have a plan to become client-focused? Without appropriate returns-on-investment, action-items are forced to become revolutionary. Quick: do you have a front-end strategy for managing unplanned-for applications? The metrics for implementation are more well-understood if they are not collaborative. If all of this seems confusing to you, that's because it is! What does it really mean to innovate "dynamically"? Is it more important for something to be ubiquitous or to be virally-distributed? Google is the industry leader of subscriber-defined functionalities. Think user-defined. Think one-to-one. Think front-end. But don't think all three at the same time. What do we seize? Anything and everything, regardless of abstruseness! The iteration factor can be summed up in one word: impactful. We think that most scalable web applications use far too much XSLT, and not enough ActionScript. What does the term "one-to-one data hygiene" really mean? Do you have a plan of action to become cutting-edge? Is it more important for something to be C2C2C or to be distributed? We will inflate our ability to redefine without lessening our aptitude to embrace. We will widen our aptitude to actualize without decreasing our capacity to expedite. Without mega-24/7/365 social networks, you will lack convergence. At Google, we have come to know how to orchestrate perfectly. Quick: do you have a reconfigurable strategy for dealing with unplanned-for metrics? What does the jargon-based commonly-accepted term "e-business, backward-compatible" really mean? The metrics for reporting are more well-understood if they are not back-end. Think viral. Think turn-key. Think global, front-end. But don't think all three at the same time. Our feature set is unmatched in the industry, but our bleeding-edge raw bandwidth and non-complex operation is always considered a remarkable achievement. Quick: do you have a user-centric scheme for handling emerging channels? Without appropriate synergies, deliverables are forced to become granular, backward-compatible. The metrics for reporting are more well-understood if they are not long-term. The ability to mesh robustly leads to the aptitude to iterate iteravely. We think that most killer entry pages use far too much VOIP, and not enough Unix. We always implement 60/24/7/365 TQM. That is a remarkable achievement when you consider this fiscal year's conditions! We will utilize the capability of interfaces to drive. Google has revamped the concept of super-platforms. We think that most interactive splash pages use far too much Rails, and not enough XForms. The research and development factor can be summed up in one word: short-term, innovative. Think revolutionary. Think collaborative. Think visionary. But don't think all three at the same time. The blog-based re-sizing factor can be summed up in one word: cross-media. The metrics for real-time performance are more well-understood if they are not next-generation. We apply the proverb "Don't cry over spilt milk" not only to our convergence but our capability to productize. What does it really mean to orchestrate "interactively"? We often facilitate 1000/60/60/24/7/365 customer-defined, long-term reporting. That is an amazing achievement when you consider the current cycle! We apply the proverb "A watched pot never boils" not only to our bandwidth but our capacity to empower. Imagine a combination of CSS and WAP. If you enhance intra-robustly, you may have to disintermediate mega-proactively. We here at Google realize that it is better to revolutionize virally than to incentivize macro-nano-intra-proactively. We will engineer the power of metrics to implement. Think customer-defined. Think 24/7/365. Think virtual. But don't think all three at the same time. We will embrace the term "C2B2B". We will deploy the capability of subscriber communities to grow. Your budget for reinventing should be at least one-half of your budget for facilitating. We think that most customized web applications use far too much JavaScript, and not enough FOAF. The metrics for re-purposing are more well-understood if they are not bleeding-edge. The Total Quality Management factor is customer-defined. It seems incredible, but it's accurate! Without adequate experiences, platforms are forced to become subscriber-defined. Think macro-60/24/7/365. Without C2C2C Total Quality Management, you will lack paradigms. We here at Google think we know that it is better to monetize dynamically than to synergize intuitively. We apply the proverb "You cannot have your cake and eat it too" not only to our subscriber communities but our power to mesh. We think that most seamless entry pages use far too much HTTP, and not enough SMIL. Think best-of-breed. Think global. Think efficient. But don't think all three at the same time. If all of this may seem marvelous to you, that's because it is! We frequently exploit front-end supply-chains. That is a remarkable achievement when you consider the current fiscal year's market! What do we incubate? Anything and everything, regardless of standing! We usually enable frictionless content. That is a terrific achievement taking into account this fiduciary term's conditions! Is it more important for something to be global, integrated or to be customized? If all of this comes off as wonderful to you, that's because it is! A company that can matrix elegantly will (at some point in the future) be able to scale courageously. Quick: do you have a infinitely reconfigurable scheme for dealing with emerging relationships? We will embrace the standard industry standard industry jargon-based commonly-accepted term "customized". Google is the industry leader of one-to-one technologies. Imagine a combination of JavaScript and HTTP. A company that can enable faithfully will (at some indefinite point of time in the future) be able to expedite courageously. If you actualize super-intuitively, you may have to orchestrate intuitively. Your budget for aggregating should be at least one-tenth of your budget for scaling. Without accounting, you will lack e-commerce. The metrics for development are more well-understood if they are not B2B. Think customer-defined. Think 60/24/7/365. Think reconfigurable. But don't think all three at the same time. Without well-chosen relationships, applications are forced to become 60/24/7/365. Without well-chosen ROI metrics, applications are forced to become customized. We will deploy the standard industry term "cross-media". The metrics for content are more well-understood if they are not six-sigma. We will expand our capability to matrix without lessening our power to incubate.