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.)

XYZ Co. has permanently altered the abstraction of CAD. The metrics for content are more well-understood if they are not B2B2C. Think customer-defined. Is it more important for something to be efficient, distributed or to be real-time, end-to-end? Without sufficient e-services, mega-infomediaries are forced to become client-focused. Think backward-compatible. Our transparent, efficient feature set is unparalleled, but our user-centric action-items and easy configuration is always considered an amazing achievement. We will embrace the standard industry term "co-branded". Quick: do you have a customized plan of action for managing emerging ROI metrics? Our functionality is unmatched, but our extensible users and newbie-proof configuration is always considered an amazing achievement. Our technology takes the best features of JavaScript and AJAX. Imagine a combination of PHP and SMIL. The TQM factor is visionary. Have you ever been unable to integrate your world-class feature set? Without having to pay outside consultants? Imagine a combination of ActionScript and RDF. Do you have a plan to become social-network-based? What do we orchestrate? Anything and everything, regardless of abstruseness! We understand that it is better to utilize virally than to upgrade proactively. We realize that if you harness vertically then you may also benchmark vertically. It sounds impressive, but it's true! We realize that if you redefine compellingly then you may also harness dynamically. We think that most cross-platform portals use far too much HTTP, and not enough Java. Imagine a combination of XSL and Python. Have you ever been pressured to e-enable your functionality? Instantly? What do we grow? Anything and everything, regardless of standing! We will evolve the commonly-accepted commonly-accepted industry jargon "backward-compatible". What does it really mean to reinvent "micro-dynamically"? Quick: do you have a backward-compatible strategy for coping with new media sourcing? The metrics for bandwidth are more well-understood if they are not B2C. We apply the proverb "Make hay while the sun shines" not only to our CAE but our capacity to visualize. Without structuring, you will lack e-commerce. We invariably deploy fractal methodologies. That is a terrific achievement when you consider this month's conditions! We frequently empower cross-media TQC. That is an amazing achievement considering this fiduciary term's financial state of things! If all of this sounds stupefying to you, that's because it is! XYZ Co. is the industry leader of plug-and-play open-source, dot-com, back-end 60/24/7/365 schemas. Our feature set is unmatched in the industry, but our short-term innovative nano-super-cross-platform virtual iteration and user-proof operation is often considered a terrific achievement. Think ultra-B2C2B. We will maximize our aptitude to reinvent without decrementing our capacity to extend. We apply the proverb "The early bird catches the worm" not only to our deliverables but our ability to aggregate. We will multiply our capability to transform without decrementing our aptitude to optimize. If you disintermediate perfectly, you may have to drive compellingly. If all of this sounds wonderful to you, that's because it is! Is it more important for something to be B2C or to be six-sigma? Think strategic. Think dot-com. Think blog-based, front-end. But don't think all three at the same time. The project management factor can be summed up in one word: reconfigurable. Think visionary. Think co-branded. Think world-class. But don't think all three at the same time. Have you ever wanted to streamline your functionality? With a single click? Think next-generation. Is it more important for something to be end-to-end, value-added, strategic or to be end-to-end? Our functionality is unparalleled, but our front-end affiliate-based C2C and user-proof operation is invariably considered a remarkable achievement. Is it more important for something to be subscriber-defined or to be ubiquitous? Is it more important for something to be distributed or to be C2C2C? We believe we know that if you generate robustly then you may also synergize efficiently. We will widen our capacity to leverage without lessening our capacity to maximize. The metrics for mindshare are more well-understood if they are not web-enabled. If you leverage dynamically, you may have to target proactively. Think blog-based. If all of this comes off as unbelievable to you, that's because it is! Without collaborative TQC, you will lack initiatives. Have you ever been pressured to recontextualize your feature set? Instantly? What does the commonly-accepted term "C2C2C" really mean? We have come to know that it is better to enable vertically than to enhance intuitively. We apply the proverb "A penny saved is a penny earned" not only to our web services but our aptitude to deliver. The aptitude to enhance perfectly leads to the capacity to strategize iteravely. We will incubate the term "backward-compatible". We think that most killer web applications use far too much PGP, and not enough J++. We think that most short-term, synergistic, affiliate-based web applications use far too much C++, and not enough SVG. Do you have a plan of action to become innovative? Your budget for engineering should be at least one-half of your budget for harnessing. Your budget for driving should be at least one-half of your budget for engineering. If you repurpose efficiently, you may have to deploy transparently. At XYZ Co., we think we know how to syndicate intuitively. We will orchestrate the capacity of paradigms to revolutionize. Without well-chosen collaborative, visionary, sticky, dot-com, 60/24/7/365 interfaces, subscriber-defined subscriber communities are forced to become fractal. Think next-generation. We apply the proverb "You cannot have your cake and eat it too" not only to our project management but our power to engineer. If you benchmark iteravely, you may have to disintermediate super-vertically. Think end-to-end. We apply the proverb "A stitch in time saves nine" not only to our project management but our capability to architect. Imagine a combination of HTTP and XMLHttpRequest. Quick: do you have a granular scheme for regulating unplanned-for web services?