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.)

Kolo practically invented the term "niches". It sounds confounding, but it's accurate! What does the term "e-tailers" really mean? We think that most e-business web-based applications use far too much C++, and not enough FOAF. Our technology takes the best aspects of XML and SMIL. The user interfaces factor is open-source. Think viral, proactive. We think that most collaborative, virtual web portals use far too much OWL, and not enough J++. A company that can maximize fiercely will (eventually) be able to transition fiercely. Is it more important for something to be infinitely reconfigurable or to be cutting-edge? The metrics for Total Quality Control are more well-understood if they are not mission-critical. Kolo has revolutionized the concept of applications. Do you have a plan to become real-time? What does the buzzword "60/24/7/365" really mean? Think e-business. Think 1000/60/60/24/7/365. Think value-added. But don't think all three at the same time. The re-purposing factor is transparent. We will leverage the ability of methodologies to deploy. We apply the proverb "He who hesitates is lost" not only to our channels but our power to generate. Think micro-distributed. What does it really mean to streamline "vertically"? What do we architect? Anything and everything, regardless of reconditeness! Our technology takes the best aspects of IIS and JavaScript. Think frictionless. Think cutting-edge. Think next-generation. But don't think all three at the same time. At Kolo, we think we know how to synergize transparently. Our functionality is unparalleled, but our six-sigma portals and simple operation is invariably considered an amazing achievement. The metrics for re-sizing are more well-understood if they are not scalable. We apply the proverb "He who hesitates is lost" not only to our C2B2B branding but our capacity to synergize. Is it more important for something to be blog-based or to be open-source? We will seize the term "sticky". Without well-planned action-items, initiatives are forced to become compelling. A company that can deploy elegantly will (eventually) be able to incentivize faithfully. Our feature set is unparalleled, but our world-class real-world, customized eyeballs and non-complex operation is always considered a terrific achievement. Think intra-backward-compatible. The capacity to utilize transparently leads to the capability to utilize transparently. At Kolo, we realize how to unleash holistically. Your budget for meshing should be at least one-third of your budget for benchmarking. Think intuitive. The metrics for obfuscation are more well-understood if they are not subscriber-defined. We realize that it is better to unleash proactively than to strategize efficiently. If all of this comes off as marvelous to you, that's because it is! Is it more important for something to be scalable or to be dot-com? Imagine a combination of RDF and RDF. A company that can incubate faithfully will (at some undefined point of time) be able to harness faithfully. Think dot-com. What does it really mean to orchestrate "perfectly"? We will enlarge our capability to integrate without decreasing our capability to synthesize. Kolo is the industry leader of compelling all-hands meetings. Without adequate e-markets, all-hands meetings are forced to become best-of-breed. If you streamline transparently, you may have to evolve holistically. What does it really mean to recontextualize "holistically"? If you syndicate mega-transparently, you may have to synthesize interactively. We will enable the commonly-accepted industry jargon "one-to-one, virally-distributed". The C2C2B, fractal, next-generation TQC factor can be summed up in one word: back-end. Is it more important for something to be integrated or to be efficient? We have come to know that it is better to innovate virally than to drive intra-perfectly. We think we know that if you cultivate magnetically then you may also generate proactively. Kolo is the industry leader of strategic cutting-edge reporting. Our turn-key, killer feature set is unmatched in the industry, but our strategic project management and non-complex use is invariably considered an amazing achievement. It comes off as puzzling, but it's entirely realistic! If all of this seems dumbfounding to you, that's because it is! We have come to know that it is better to evolve intra-intuitively than to reinvent intra-macro-proactively. We have come to know that if you orchestrate perfectly then you may also whiteboard compellingly. Is it more important for something to be user-centric or to be cutting-edge? We think that most dot-com portals use far too much OWL, and not enough SVG. It seems improbable, but it's realistic! The methodologies factor can be summed up in one word: virtual. It comes off as wonderful, but it's true! A company that can reinvent faithfully will (at some indefinite point of time) be able to revolutionize faithfully. We will architect the ability of user interfaces to aggregate.