First Quarter: the Losers limited the impact of a severe imbalance in the number of assets they could supply to do the business of manufacturing control of the board, which the Winners managed to add to the, on balance, positive sentiments their bulging accounts procured for creditors.
Second Quarter: experiencing the benefits of a number of liabilities, the Losers guaranteed their business would require an injection of capital ideas after the recession, which the Winners played a part in making a resounding period of optimism for analysts, in a period of deep uncertainty.
Third Quarter: the Losers, by way of the individual management of a solitary figure, managed to cut the deficit to more manageable levels, despite the limited optimism, which the Winners took to mean the confidence, they had managed to overlook as they went forward, was fraudulent.
Fourth Quarter: wiping off the gains they had managed in the previous quarter, the Losers closed the day's trading with a loss that had their uncertain creditors falling off, which was at least partly due to the target-orientated approach of the Winners, that creditors can bank on as a volatile means.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers attributed the generation of a loss to a "costly lapse", and created some credit for the figures of a single figure, but "haven’t sort of sat down to look at figures", which, for the majority, fell in favour of the Winners, as they addressed the issues they've had with the board.
First Quarter: the Losers were restricted in the amount of time they had to manage the means effectively, and stifled by a crippling lack of room to grow their business, which allowed the Winners, responsible for the limitations, to own every aspect of the negotiations, including the board's activity.
Second Quarter: credited with class, the Losers failed to manage to post any major gains at all for the entire period, which severely damaged their position as a sound group, and added value to the assessments of the Winners that they have ample class in all divisions to go forward safely.
Third Quarter: the Losers, managing to resolve some of their personnel issues, slashed their deficit with an increased capacity for working well under pressure, which the Winners managed to ignore the ramifications of into the last recession with a margin so manageable they could afford to relax.
Fourth Quarter: retaining much of the deficit they had managed to slash in the last quarter, the Losers suffered a savage check on the growth they had been managing, which was due to the Winners returning to their miserly management of the board, and the rebounding figures going forward.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers managed to account for the outcome with an account of the "need to develop our stocks", as they reiterated the stage their organisation is in, which conveyed to the Winners that their toil, and sacrifice of individual freedom, was due solely to the old firm's share.
First Quarter: the Losers, limited in their options going forward, managed a massive depression which was a continuation of the crisis they have endured in a period when confidence is low, which the Winners, employing an open environment going forward, managed to exploit sufficiently.
Second Quarter: restricting the competition through aligning all their figures, the Losers managed to post another negative gain despite supplying their group some confidence in their business, which was in part due to the Winners, struggling to manage a sustainable plan, ignoring their key target.
Third Quarter: the Losers compounded the crisis they had experienced before the previous recession with another quarter to add value to the nervousness of their group, which the Winners, employing a number of options across the board, declined to exploit when they lost some sizeable interest.
Fourth Quarter: clawing back into contention for the position on the board their group desired, the Losers handed back the gains they had made in the eyes of analysts with a big loss, which the Winners managed to contribute to over the course of every single quarter, for a healthy deficit, overall.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers failed to dispell doubts analysts have about the validity of accounts they managed, which came in the form of a fraudulent analysis of their position on the board, and added to the Winners' assertions of a bias in the industry, which dosen't hold up under analysis.
First Quarter: the Losers generated a small deficit from the business they managed in a climate conducive to slippery transactions, which created a share of pain for workers, as the Winners, managing to inspire confidence from within their organisation, settled on a viable plan of action going forward.
Second Quarter: managing to slide into the deep recession with a marked disadvantage, the Losers struggled to generate value from its workers, which proved costly, as the Winners, implementing savage industry, negotiated the impending recession with a series of expensive measures, for the period.
Third Quarter: the Losers manufactured another quarter of negative growth in their deficit, despite control of the means, which generated severe confidence in a crisis, as the Winners, manufacturing productivity from limited opportunity, negotiated the surge in property losses, with another gain.
Fourth Quarter: securing a slight gain for an overall deficit, the Losers managed to create uncertainty in the viability of their industry as liabilities became abundantly evident, which the Winners managed to highlight in the final account they gave of their willingness to work for each other, like socialists.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers attributed their outcome to the slow transfer of property they managed going forward, and poor measures " that really hurt us across the board,” which was in marked contrast to the Winners, as they revelled in optimism they generated from the desired outcome.
First Quarter: the Winners managed to acquire a position of control on the board, which was achieved through the measures of a secondary option going forward, and the Losers negotiating the perception of unqualified ambition with a resounding performance, and an unquaified loss.
Second Quarter: through efficient transfer of opportunity and the account managed by a key option, the Winners struggled to maintain the position they had managed, which, due to the comparative poverty of options for the Losers, was not achieved, as the deficit was slashed marginally.
Third Quarter: the Winners took control of the ownership of the means of production, and managed to deliver inaccurate measures from their own pockets, which allowed the Losers, capitalising wherever opportunity met industry, to manufacture a performance that was aligned to class.
Fourth Quarter: due to a positive early outcome from property disputes, the Winners managed to hold on to their overall advantage, which they added to in the final analysis, as the Losers, delivering a performance worthy of the value creditors invested in their stocks, went away richer.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners paid credit to their "big figure" going forward, and took the opportunity to "consolidate our position", which they managed without paying any credit to the Losers, which they had earned from a consistently ambitious performance, and work "across the board".
First Quarter: the Losers generated, in a protected environment, cautious pessimism from creditors about the future of what limited options they could manage, as the Winners, benefiting from rebounding figures, managed to capitalise on their surging confidence and enterpising outlook.
Second Quarter: relinquishing the momentary monopoly of turnover at board-level, the Losers spiralled towards the impending recession, despite the manufacture of fraudulent volatility, which added value to the assessments the Winners had made that their stocks are on the rise, going forward.
Third Quarter: the Losers, following two consecutive quarters of negative results and a recession, failed to manufacture sustainable future options to account for their industry, as the Winners delivered creditors, passing themselves off as analysts, confidence in their margin.
Fourth Quarter: after the last recession, the Losers managed to generate interest from creditors that the business of acquiring an absolute advantage was within their scope, which failed to eventuate, as the Winners, increasing the confidence placed in their industry, added a gain, again.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers managed to transfer some of the credit away from the competition by calling on incidents of mismanagement of maintaining control on the board, which detracted from the resourceful and enterprising business the Winners bargained for in acquiring credit for their control.
First Quarter: the Winners struggled to manage the manufacturing department of realistic targets going forward, and registered a marginal deficit as the Losers stole the initiative, despite inaccurate measures costing them a greater advantage, which was expensive in the long-term.
Second Quarter: restructuring their business to meet the needs of the competition, the Winners accounted for their deficit before adding substantial value to their advantage, which generated a legitimate concern from creditors that the Losers were in the recession with a pessimistic outlook.
Third Quarter: the Winners limited the liability of their class through industry and a perpetually contracting environment to give every indication of an absolute advantage, which the Losers turned into a major depression for nervous creditors, as they turned into the last recession with a bleak forecast.
Fourth Quarter: opening the early exchange period unproductively, the Winners managed to record a small enough loss for the quarter to generate a significant continuation of their advantage over the Losers, who managed to continue to struggle to manufacture interest.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners managed an accurate assessment of their share of the result and applied measures to pass on credit to their "long term" options, and a share to the Losers, who negotiated the depression by attributing their position to their failure to grasp the meaning of "numerous opportunities".
First Quarter: the Winners activated creditors' accounts of their competitors' poorly delivered measures through their sluggish industry and poorly manufactured entries which lent the credit passed on to the Losers' creditors a large loss of interest in their own thriving business of manufacturing fraudulent accounts.
Second Quarter: stimulated by the accelerating returns the Winners registered on the board, creditors rewarded them with a surging rate of interest, and passed on the information to observers that the Losers generated a deficit from a large loss that had their creditors assessing a bail out plan during the recession.
Third Quarter: the Winners extended their margin and, according to the accounts, provided dividends for observers through a share of the manufacture of their numbers which made the job the Losers were employed in - to generate a sustainable continuum from the interest analysts placed in their business - hard work.
Fourth Quarter: dwindling interest in accurate accounts generated a loss of raw material for analysts to generate more credit for the Winners than the measures they took to disable the Losers in their bid to takeover their competitors through the manufacture of turnover on the board, which failed to eventuate.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners attributed the product of their gain to the resurgent consistency of the output manufactured by their massive targets which added value to the assertions of analysts that the Losers struggle to maintain control of their competitors' class going forward, which is an accurate assessment of a liability.
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: despite the hopeful forecasts, there was an early rally across the board that saw the Losers make terrible losses in key sectors. Restructuring in key positions and a scaling back of smaller industries meant the Winners made substantial gains thanks to opportunities created by industry.
Second Quarter: the Losers invested a major part of their plan in key performers whose accountability and value has to be seriously questioned after the margin slipped early. The Winners investment in their own resources earned them their fortunate dividend from their gambling ways as their margin widened.
Third Quarter: hampered by a lack of hard-nosed business acumen around the decisive areas, the Losers lived up to their tags and continued their spiral downwards. The Winners, profitting from exuberant investment in new resources, also made use of their key gains in long-term trading solutions.
Fourth Quarter: lacking the kind of cohesion in their structure because of a lack of real industry, the Losers also had to resign themselves to crumbling under the pressure of their rivals. The Winners, sharing the spoils of their hard-earned industrial revolution, showed the benefits of thinking long-term about structure in their business.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers, struggling to own up to their embarassing losses, made their short-term trading strategy worse by poor decisons at the top level. The Winners, revelling in their confidence, profitted healthily from a balance of new and old industry, despite the inexperience of the man in charge.
Chris Johnson, the sort of smart arse who would point out your obvious flaws for the benefit of his own amazement, has the style of a sinister high school teacher. More besides, he's got the sort of armpits that'll have you reaching for your lunch.
The Hair: you can't quite see it in this photo, but it smells worse than a pocketful of arseholes. It invades your nostrils with all the insensitivity of a rapist's foreplay. If you catch a whiff, run like an oppurtunist with a bottle of rohypnol.
The Teeth: it's not immediately obvious but, between each and every one live the kind of smelly arseholes that turn handsome chaps in to desperate rapists. Open his mouth and you'll see why experts want to shut it permanently.
The Skin: soft like a newborn's arsehole, you'll simply love to run his meaty flaps between your teeth. Unfortunately, you'll be restrained with a roll of tape and subjected to the kind of merciless singing unheard of in these parts.
Henri Matisse says: "What I can't work out is why the beard has outgrown the male populace. It seems to me that we need something other than my mother's apron to hide behind. I wish I had a fully functioning uterus to hide in. This Holden Ute will just have to do."
Rosalind, played by Cloke, proposes to Orlando, played by O'hAilpin
The Play: Setanta O'hAilpin's gritty social realism comes to bear on the socially awkward subject of a metrosexual relationship gone wrong. Doubly so because it's so loosely based on the life and times of enfant terrible on-baller Joe Orton and his ever incessant need to demonstrate against an unjust occupation.
The Plot: Orton, played by O'hAilpin comes home after a hard day on the killing-floor to find his wife, Noel Coward, played by Cameron Cloke, in the arms of another gentleman giant. Enraged, O'hAilpin takes his English-bred metrosexual by the rectum with his foot and all proceeds go to charity.
The Characters: Orton as Orlando is the son of a chicken farmer from Central Victoria caught up fighting a terrible fire when he first sees Rosalind, Noel Coward, who is a man played by a woman played by a man. Confused? Why not just drift off with your own thoughts and then tune in again when the two get married?
The Cast: O'hAilpin shines in the lead role and is ably supported by his legs, which start at the feet and work their way up to the hip. His performance is well lit by a rather large constellation but the undoubted star of the show is Cameron Cloke, who's death in the first act is marvellously overstated.
You won't be able to take your eyes off: O'hAilpin's curled up fingers headed for your nose, throat and eye. His foot, well supported in the heel and arch, will also have you calling for a tissue. If not that, then certainly your eye will be on the inside of your swollen eyelid after you accidentally fall off your swivel chair and land on my knee, with your eye.
Simon Wiggins, his face flattened in a delightful incident with a pair of steel caps, has the flattened face of one foraging for food in a vat of frying fat. You'd go as far as to say you wouldn't pass to him if he was on fire.
The Hair: I'm not sure that there's any easy way to say that. Sticks out like a sore bum. Might look good doused in petrol and set alight. Try this at home. Gropes. Insert funny bit. Find out what makes something so. Forget it. Fed up.
The Teeth: always someone over my shoulder. Stare down at lifeless keys. Look up. Gum disease. Falling out means impotence. Growing extra ones. Good enough to have a vagina of his own. I'd do him. In that case.
The Skin: it's dry and thick. Makes a good glove. Stick a greasy hand up. Pull out the insides. Make light of something. Forget the content. For the sake of the form. Bite the bucket. Plenty of uselessness. Added redundancies.
Marcel Proust says: "I can write word after word after word after word, in no particular order, and still believe in the basic order of society. By that I mean, we need people to be on the bottom to have people on the top. I always preferred sidesaddle, myself. Never really cared for horses. I would just let them starve. Silly buggers."
Jarrad Waite - a conformed bachelor - an accident waiting to happen, has a head on his shoulders that will have you saying, 'He's instantly recognisable from the strange object that is made of other strange objects that is attached to the larger and even stranger'.
The Hair: I strongy object to the overall lack of any sort of sense in the arrangement of deceased cells, which originate in the scalp and to my consternation I find coming out by the handful, and suggest a lack of reason or obeyance to conventional thought, just quietly.
The Teeth: I think you'd be well advised to knock out a couple in the front just to make sure that, when matters get a bit personal, there is no doubt as to what will be taking place; and by that I mean that without front teeth there can be no doubt as to what will happen.
The Skin: I would say that while premature baldness and premature guminess are aesthetically troubling by far the worst is premature wrinkling of the parts of the anatomy not designed to see past the age where that condition is of even the remotest necessity.
George Orwell says: "When I was just a socialist writing about the prevailing ills of communism, I had no idea that the pervasive irony of capitalism would see Mark Burnett take my idea of sibling voyueristic fantasies and make a television experience of them. Well, I did have an idea. My brother is friends with Burnett. We're no longer talking. It's a degenerative genetic condition of the larynx."
Add Comments
Comments (4)
