Round 1, 2009, Sydney lost to Saint Kilda
First Quarter: the Losers handballed responsibility for achieving their goals at a time when their resources were able to sustain accountability at manageable levels. The Winners took away a significant and unexpected loss after their competitors increased their investment in a sharply contracting environment.
Second Quarter: under a distinct slowing down of trade, the Losers experienced a hypertrophy of their sector but managed to hold on to their overall gain despite their dwindling margin. The Winners invested heavily in their own industry and cut back their deficit due to their increased enterprise, in the slow-down.
Third Quarter: the Losers gave their creditors reason to lose interest when they failed to do anything on the board after the major recession became a crisis in depression. The Winners turned the major recession into a boom for their organisation and held their competitors to account on the board with a margin.
Fourth Quarter: a disorderly contraction in supply for the Losers' key forces was negotiated on the board by a late surge in confidence from their unrealistic targets. After booming confidence subsided, the Winners were forced to negotiate a contraction of their margin despite their creditors gaining interest.
Fifth Quarter: a predicted steep decline in the Losers' productivity gave their creditors many reasons to forecast a period of slowing down, if not a depression. The Winners exhibited socialistic methodologies as they endeavoured to share the products of their industry across the board, in the midst of a depression.
Second Quarter: under a distinct slowing down of trade, the Losers experienced a hypertrophy of their sector but managed to hold on to their overall gain despite their dwindling margin. The Winners invested heavily in their own industry and cut back their deficit due to their increased enterprise, in the slow-down.
Third Quarter: the Losers gave their creditors reason to lose interest when they failed to do anything on the board after the major recession became a crisis in depression. The Winners turned the major recession into a boom for their organisation and held their competitors to account on the board with a margin.
Fourth Quarter: a disorderly contraction in supply for the Losers' key forces was negotiated on the board by a late surge in confidence from their unrealistic targets. After booming confidence subsided, the Winners were forced to negotiate a contraction of their margin despite their creditors gaining interest.
Fifth Quarter: a predicted steep decline in the Losers' productivity gave their creditors many reasons to forecast a period of slowing down, if not a depression. The Winners exhibited socialistic methodologies as they endeavoured to share the products of their industry across the board, in the midst of a depression.
