First Quarter: the Winners utilised a host of factors, not least their own enterprise, to gain a comparative advantage that would, with added value, deliver returns of absolute advantage. The Losers failed to invest in industry and instead put value into their own individual greed at the expense of the manufacture of any lucrative share.
Second Quarter: capitalising on their endeavour, the Winners duplicated their earlier industry and managed to account for an early surge from their competitors which they met with an increase in output. A backlash during a minor recession caused the Losers to increase their individualistic aims but the ultimate failure of their partnership remained.
Third Quarter: the Winners met their competitors' individualism with a collective venture that was offset by the class in their structure delivering good performances at opportune times. The Losers delivered some of the goods the class in their structure promised to observers but their enterprise was not matched by their declining industry.
Fourth Quarter: any massive increases of productivity failed to arise as the Winners' margin suffered only a slight gain, which, in the over-all scheme, amounted to an injection of confidence. In the climate, the Losers' fortune was enhanced by their competitors' lack of productivity as the board registered a small loss for a huge deficit, over-all.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners gained credit from their interest in industry and co-operation and took the massive margin to add value to their confidence after a difficult period. The Losers were forced to account for their individualism and excessive interest in their own value which they failed to sell to analysts, but which many observers bought.
First Quarter: the Losers managed the difficult conditions for sustainable growth poorly and struggled to manufacture a realistic target with a reliance on owning the means to produce zero gains. The Winners made use of viable strategy from their manageable targets to post sufficient return for their hard business in the property disputes.
Second Quarter: with the climate appearing to be rapidly worsening, the Losers negotiated their competitors' resilient strategy to do some business that delivered moderate gains. Benefitting from lucrative partnerships, the Winners managed to maintain their advantage despite slipping back on their earlier promise of a massive margin.
Third Quarter: the Losers earned themselves a narrow loss for the quarter after costing themselves earlier losses which they managed to diminish with a late flurry. The Winners managed to turn the cessation of the recession into immediate gains that they were forced to hand back after being held to account on the board, by their competitors.
Fourth Quarter: continuing their pressure on the board, the Losers slashed the deficit and had many observers turning to analysts for advice until their industry failed to produce the goods. Turning around the trend, the Winners added interest to the value of creditors' claims with the manufacture of goals registered at board-level through good business.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers delivered a result that they attributed to their costly investment in new ventures, which ultimately failed to produce any interest from observers. The Winners admitted that their gain in a difficult climate was a much needed boost to their investment in accounting for their competitors' business with solid business practices.
First Quarter: the Winners capitalised on their ownership of the means of production by securing a significant share of the board's business through the delivery of the goods. The Losers manufactured limited partnership as their stagnant business slumped to significant losses as the class in their structure struggled with itself.
Second Quarter: developing new resources proved profittable for the Winners who managed to hold on to a significant proportion of their gains after their industry slumped, fractionally. An early surge fom the Losers gave remaining creditors a boost in their interest as the deficit was slashed only to later be reinstated on the board.
Third Quarter: the Winners, once the recession had eased, negotiated any of their competitors' increase in output with the competent management of the means and the distribution of manufacture. The Losers failed to produce the goods and warranted observers transferring their interest to more viable options in the future.
Fourth Quarter: due to a positive outlook across the board and an individualistic pursuit of partnership, the Winners forged ahead with the advantage they managed on the board. The negative outlook of observers given value, the Losers struggled with their lack of hard-working business and a distinct lack of accounting for their competitors.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners attempted to defraud observers through a scheme to apportion a lack of productivity from their targets as the cause for their diminished margin. The Losers gave an account of their loss that amounted to a lack of responsible ownership of the results of their lack of industry and classless structure.
First Quarter: the Losers secured an early advantage due to the productivity of a secondary option forcing their competitors to accept concessions that proved to be unsustainable. The Winners suffered the repercussions of a costly early lapse of accounting for their competitors' manageable investment in industry, but snapped the trend.
Second Quarter: in a reverse of the early turn-around, the Losers failed to produce what they produce best due to restrictions placed on their heavy industry and a surge in the numbers of analysts. Making use of locally abundant factors to surge to a comparative advantage, but an absolute loss, the Winners were paid immediate dividends by creditors.
Third Quarter: the Losers managed to turn the recession into a sizeable deficit after an intense early trading period and the inaccuracy of speculations offered by their small opportunity. The Winners balanced a small fortune with their indefatigable industrial outlook to turn-around their deficit and post a margin that raised the interest of analysts.
Fourth Quarter: the downward spiral of costly business on the board continued for the Losers through the doubling of their margin but for a couple of points, despite the fraudulent interest of creditors. In a boost for their stocks, the Winners manufactured a significant share of the board's turnover and rallied late to stretch the point.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers attempted to defraud observers into buying that the loss was not a product of their declining business, which served to give analysts the means. The Winners attributed their stunning gain to their established industry and highlighted the need for due diligence in adversity through modest performances of excellence.
First Quarter: the Winners negotiated a period of early prosperity through responsible enterprise recorded on the board, which failed to deter creditors' interest. The Losers manufactured sustainable levels of productivity through a focus on targets managed by their industry, and gained the advantage of a minor figure on the board.
Second Quarter: in a rapidly expanding distribution of manufacture, the Winners delivered a significant turn-around to their creditors with the board recording a rapid turnover. The small gain the Losers had manufactured became a massive deficit that required an urgent injection of industry and a large measure of fortune.
Third Quarter: the Winners turned around after the major recession and observed their competitors increase their industry as their own creditors manufactured a reliance on optimism. The Losers used the advantage delivered to them by a large measure of fortune to reduce their deficit to manageable levels through their focus on targets.
Fourth Quarter: in a period of heavy trading, the Winners resumed their manufacturing at the board-level through the effciency of their targets and a heavy reliance on stimulating observers. In a foreign environment, the Losers managed to decrease their competitors margin by slashing their own deficit but still took away a small loss.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners eradicated records that gave creditors losses, and to a certain extent lent themselves credit through their improved organisation. The Losers failure to capitalise on their opportunity and fortune with the efficient ownership of the means of production delivered analysts a much needed boost.
First Quarter: the Losers exploited their class inequalities and manufactured opportunity through enterprise and the ownership of the centralised means. The Winners, going forward without realistic targets, relied on opportunistic capitalists to translate declining industry into moderate returns on the board, to the fraudulent denials of creditors.
Second Quarter: plummeting confidence and declining industry caused the Losers to relinquish their small gains as their board slowed down in the turn-around. Soaring confidence brought on by an increase in their industrial department, the Winners turned a deficit into a positive giving creditors cause to increase their fraudulent business.
Third Quarter: the Losers' stagnating turnover on the board and expensive delivery of the means of production gave observers reason to lose interest in their organistion. The Winners continued their upward pressure on the board as they profitted from their competitors' plentiful turnover and lent value to creditors' surging interest, fortunately.
Fourth Quarter: ineffective practices and the falling value the Losers placed in industry allowed their competitors to exploit their advantage across the board. Inaccurate delivery of the means of production and tired industry gave the Winners a distinct advantage that their creditors turned into massive gains that signalled a surge in interest.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers attributed their losses on the board to the theft of confidence brought on by poor turnovers registered across all sectors, which cost them dearly. The Winners took the overall gain to be a signal for a turnaround in their overall industry which creditors bought, giving observers a loss of interest, to their falling credit.
First Quarter: the Winners, after early trading, countered resistance to their productivity from their competitor's measures by monopolising control at the board-level. The Losers forced remaining creditors to reassess their investment in a return to liquidity with a significant loss of productivity of their manufacture of returns on the board.
Second Quarter: with a number of options to be taken into account, the Winners extended their margin as the recession loomed and inaccuracies registered on the board threatened. The Losers increased their industry and, largely due to accurate record-keeping from the board, were liable to give analysts enough interest to return as creditors.
Third Quarter: the Winners turned the recession into a crisis, albeit their stocks decimated by a loss of fortune, with a massive turnaround in their costs. The Losers made a substantial deficit a gain of one small point due to their industry employing the services of their structure and the equal distribution of productivity, in a turnaround.
Fourth Quarter: confidence in their systems gave the the Winners the means to produce enough exploitation of opportunity and turn around a stagnating turnover. The Losers lost the means of production which stalled the growth of their productivity and caused their bubble to burst, to the absolute disadvantage of their position on the board.
Fifth Quarter: tired industry was given as the major reason why the Winners failed to monopolise productivity on the board as credit was relinquished to their competitors. The Losers passed credit for their improved industry on and attempted to defraud analysts into putting pressure on to their competitors, who, cyclically, reciprocated the measures.
First Quarter: in a sharply contracting environment, the Losers distributed responsibility for productivity in an attempt to stimulate liquidity from the running of their business. The Winners, owed an outstanding debt, placed pressure on their competitors' supply and capitalised on their breaks with efficient productivity from their viable targets.
Second Quarter: the Losers gave creditors reason to lose pessimism with an improved performance on the board - equated to confidence in their efficient distribution. The Winners manufactured a small loss for an overall margin that had them headed for the recession with renewed optimism in a moderately saturated environment.
Third Quarter: held to account for the running of their business, the Losers went into a decline that precipitated a pessimistic outlook from their creditors that lent confidence to observers. The Winners capitalised on their absolute advantage with the manufacture of productive gains recorded on the board from opportunistic business practices.
Fourth Quarter: the Losers profitted from the benefit of modest initial gains which were rapidly converted into a massive deterioration of the margin as the pressure decimated their industry. The Winners cornered their competitors' share of the means of production in the difficult environment and surged to huge gains with their productivity soaring.
Fifth Quarter: forced to account for their losses to analysts, the Losers gave creditors reason to question their interest under the pressure of a contraction of growth in the running of their business. The Winners utilised the pressure of a contracting environment they were largely responsible for creating and gained the interest of analysts, if not observers.
The Kangaroos have pounced back to their winking ways of lost reason with a professorial lesson handed out to the truant Taggers. It was a tutorial sent-up early with a girl-blitz in the first quart of fluid.
The Woos really refound their lags in a song they sang with great gatsby as he swilled fortified winos from a kettle drum. They had to fight off a spirited Taggers effort after breaking out to a winking margin.
Unbable to stop the poor being bombarded deep into their backyard, the Taggers where hapless to stop the state kicking Woes who thrived in the extra parking spaces at the Gee. Their seniors stood up and shouted: "Banjo," before being shuffled on.
It really wars thanks to the ageing ones of the Woos that they can thank their ageing senors for the thirst being quashed. The Taggers just didn't have enough to gong around, and sourly messed their kipper.
In a rapper of a contest that they might do well to shunt down, the Cankers ploy the Gawkers who are locking the goods up. The Tankers take on the Magpipers who will probably smoke pornos.
The waning Premiers have sent the Bumblers back down to Earth with their hands down perforation of the bubble blown up by pro-Bummers media sores. It was a display to warm the hearts of all bladdered-egg laughers as they stroked themselves.
The C***ts rank with the pest sides no-one has been able to kilt since Scot Palmer was a drowning buoy. The Bumblers are mediocrity incarnate, their silks are a pig's arse dressed up to look like a sliming face with a pickle in their nostril.
With strength and rum all over the park, the Carts were able to hide in the bushes where they fiddled while confused jockers paraded their meat-trays for them to pick at. The Boobers slipped themselves and, found wanking, were whisked off to fluffy speak.
It's hard to see, especially without my spectacles, how and why or who will beat the Pussies; they just look so good, so open, so inviting, so pulsating. Consigned to struggle through the dribble of the ground, the Bimbers are just plain the mean.
The Cants are the shortest priced fave in herstory to wink at the one-eyed and blind Dees next wank when they unfur their flag in their laughing-room. The mighty Donks tackle the straggling Blooperbuggerers in a battle for pants.
The Sandy Swanks have hiccupped at grog they impaled after doing away with the rumming-up warties from fortified whiners who slept out in the glitzy town before going down to the tight-fussed Swannies.
The Tunnellers towelled them up with their rags they kempt under their beds, hidden from fights and smelling like nothing in birth. It was veritably a rebirth of the mitey Swankies, who showed all the glass of a painful cat.
Swabbed by a tame of buds who all seemed to cotton on to the rank in their legs, the Poorer had no ants to do any of the wank. Too many chefs and not enough cankers. The big corns were especially cowardly in the face of big, bad, bustling pots.
That they think that they should speak so soon is not a crate sing for the Swankies who aren't used to ploying so well so soon while the Poorer can ill afford to lose too many more canes if they're to fan their whey.
Next week, which according to the domino pizza theory has already happenstanced, the Swanks tack on the Loins while the Poorer have taken on the significantly richer when they have already met their moisters.
The Hawkers, door-to-door pole cleaners, have fried another batch of Duckers in a no-stick pan. Full of the runs, and with a handfull of lav-poopers, they're set for bag things in 2008. The Dookers just can't put up a good-enough flight.
Even contributions across the paddock and with key singers on pong, the mighty frying Hawks are really cooking in the early art of the reason. The Dunkers, looking like commission flats, can't get any meaningful rum into their cistern.
With solid ployers in the midfridge and in the back behind the gherkins, the Gawks are portently exciting in the froward lane with a great blend of beans lending themselves to a pungent aroma. Their counterpoints, sadly, look like their pests are running the bridge.
If a win inertiastate is a good guide for the success of a side of beef's seasoning then get your eye-teeth stunk into the Gawkers this ear - they're spent for a could one. The Dunkers will do well to fetch a pail if they can't hold out visitors when they're on their pill.
On the pack of this one, the Awks will go in favourites to get the chocolate pants against the Woos in what promises to be a crinkler, while the Dookers will have a chance to get some momentum when they've taken on the Weakles in a saltry afflair.
Like foodbaulkers linking up to sleep with a slit, they'll be lining up again to have a crack at the Bluebirds as the Stains did away with any question as to who are the easybleats of the camp: the Blooperbuggers.
Gimped early, the Stains took the reins between the teet for the greatest part of the middlemarch and marched to a dull set of fishfingers over the mitey Bruise. It was another black tide affair for the drowning Pleadbeggars.
The result, never rally in doubt, was set up by the greater vim and valour of the Saintly cannon flooders, who rank with the tarp for plasticity and anaesthetics. They pimply pashed all the white batons, passed like stoners and drank artily till the wee smelled oily.
That some of their gay ployers were keyed in quietly as they serenaded with their flaunting is a sign of how well the Stains can play when they feed the chickens, water the garden and keep an eye out for intruders in the minefield.
They, the highly sought after Stains, will meet their arch navals when they look up at the scoreboard and see that they've played the Dogs, while the Bruisedbloggers will take on booger-up-the-nose team, the Bumblers.
In a show of faith in all things weed and wonderful, the Crowbars have opened their sexy neighbour's window and mistakenly had it off with their neighbour's granny apples. The unfortunate Eagles witnessed the whole snugly affair.
Passersby noticed the blackbirds circling the carcass of the Wet Toast and could only assume that the granny had been snatched in the right. True to form, the Woegles could only stand by and study the form as the rampart Crowes acted badly and ran off.
It was all around town that the Crowes hammed it up, waning and pasting with attacking fliers they had designed themselves. The pickled Toasters had to hand it to their opponents. And they did, often. It was a pile of crepes with styrups for the baked birds.
The home team looked stolid all around, with particular appeal in the front of their trousers being noted by those so inclined. The leaning visitors had to take a back seat, and may have to do so frequently this revolution. For that we'll just have to eat and pee.
The bride of South Australia will face their rellies in a party that will have the fists flying up the back end and in the front half - they're quipped to do wail. As for the Woe Gulls, they face their arched feet in an American's eyes: the derby.
Comments (2)
Add Comments