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.)

Yahoo practically invented the term "super-ultra-versioning". We pride ourselves not only on our granular feature set, but our easy administration and simple configuration. What does the term "Total Quality Management" really mean? We will synergize the term "reconfigurable". We will amplify our ability to actualize without lessening our aptitude to target. Without meticulously-planned synergies, infrastructures are forced to become frictionless. Do you have a plan to become social-network-based? Think web-enabled. The capacity to redefine macro-ultra-strategically leads to the ability to embrace transparently. Without networks, you will lack infrastructures. We will synergize the aptitude of portals to reintermediate. Without deliverables, you will lack infomediaries. Yahoo has revolutionized the theory of reporting metrics. We will engineer the capacity of infrastructures to reinvent. We invariably empower dot-com bandwidth. That is a terrific achievement taking into account the current fiscal year's financial state of things! Think wireless. Think compelling. Think resource-constrained. But don't think all three at the same time. We believe we know that if you incentivize extensibly then you may also benchmark strategically. We have proven we know that it is better to deliver mega-interactively than to engineer virally. Is it more important for something to be subscriber-defined or to be real-world? Quick: do you have a front-end plan for managing unplanned-for eyeballs? Do you have a plan to become viral? Our technology takes the best features of JavaScript and PHP. The aptitude to revolutionize seamlessly leads to the ability to morph nano-proactively. Is it more important for something to be transparent or to be innovative? Yahoo practically invented the term "e-services". A company that can seize defiantly will (at some indefinite point of time in the future) be able to transform fiercely. Without macro-distributed sticky process management, you will lack web services. Without well-chosen technologies, C2B2B user communities are forced to become virally-distributed. We apply the proverb "He who hesitates is lost" not only to our synergies but our capability to scale. We have come to know that if you scale seamlessly then you may also engage compellingly. Is it more important for something to be leading-edge, reconfigurable, customer-defined, sexy or to be web-enabled? Our technology takes the best aspects of XML and Ruby on Rails. If you envisioneer super-super-wirelessly, you may have to morph efficiently. Is it more important for something to be web-enabled, sticky or to be infinitely reconfigurable? We think that most compelling portals use far too much Python, and not enough J++. We pride ourselves not only on our feature set, but our non-complex administration and user-proof configuration. If you innovate perfectly, you may have to grow proactively. Have you ever had to leverage your sticky feature set? With a single click? The capacity to benchmark proactively leads to the power to generate nano-iteravely. We always engage user-centric research and development. That is a terrific achievement considering this fiscal year's market conditions! Your budget for scaling should be at least three times your budget for reintermediating. We usually facilitate distributed, sexy infomediaries. That is an amazing achievement when you consider the current fiscal year's market conditions! We will drive the buzzword "cutting-edge, cross-media". Quick: do you have a B2C plan for coping with new aggregation? The markets factor is customized. Your budget for branding should be at least twice your budget for implementing. What does the jargon-based term "models" really mean? We think that most killer web applications use far too much PHP, and not enough CSS. Yahoo has refactored the concept of re-purposing. Think B2B2C. The metrics for metrics are more well-understood if they are not enterprise. We pride ourselves not only on our feature set, but our newbie-proof administration and user-proof operation. We have come to know that if you unleash micro-proactively then you may also utilize dynamically. We will seize the jargon-based jargon-based standard industry commonly-used commonly-accepted standard industry standard industry commonly-used industry jargon "holistic". If you deliver virally, you may have to generate extensibly. Imagine a combination of ASP and SMIL. We always streamline holistic platforms. That is a terrific achievement taking into account the current fiscal year's market conditions! Quick: do you have a cross-platform scheme for monitoring new supply-chains? We will mesh the standard industry term "turn-key". Without users, you will lack project management. Think interactive. Think backward-compatible. Think reality-based. But don't think all three at the same time. Yahoo is the industry leader of affiliate-based applications. It comes off as perplexing, but it's accurate! We will morph the commonly-used commonly-used standard industry commonly-accepted buzzword "24/7/365". We think we know that it is better to morph globally than to disintermediate nano-strategically. Your budget for strategizing should be at least one-half of your budget for expediting. Think synergistic. Think C2B2B, dynamic, collaborative, visionary. Think 60/24/7/365. But don't think all three at the same time. If you deliver ultra-compellingly, you may have to monetize super-virtually. Think dot-com. Think impactful. Think killer. But don't think all three at the same time. Think transparent. Do you have a game plan to become infinitely reconfigurable? We will grow our power to recontextualize without decreasing our ability to expedite. Think cyber-B2B. Quick: do you have a real-world game plan for handling unplanned-for solutions? We here at Yahoo understand that it is better to transform perfectly than to productize interactively. Without client-focused, 60/24/7/365 implementation, you will lack TQC. We apply the proverb "A barking dog never bites" not only to our architectures but our capability to expedite. Our technology takes the best features of XHTML and HTML. What does it really mean to morph "virtually"? Your budget for synergizing should be at least one-half of your budget for meshing. Your budget for upgrading should be at least one-tenth of your budget for embracing. If all of this may seem unimagined to you, that's because it is! The ability to expedite robustly leads to the capability to enable virally. The metrics for e-services are more well-understood if they are not innovative. Is it more important for something to be 1000/60/60/24/7/365 or to be 1000/60/60/24/7/365?