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 Winners were willing to supply creditors with the goods, despite the figures the board showed to observers which clearly had them managing a deficit, as the Losers, business going to plan, negotiated initial uncertainty on home soil to attain the position on the board they sought.
Second Quarter: reversing the ownership of the deficit, the Winners went into the deep recession trading their labour for the price of a monopoly of the board, which the Losers, guaranteed a nasty depression, managed to turnover as their individual enterprise cost them a share of the board's move.
Third Quarter: the Winners added a second consecutive quarter of growth after the recession ended, which allowed them to build confidence in their abilities despite the taxing effects, as the Losers, going from the last recession into another one, managed to supply a depression for analysts.
Fourth Quarter: securing the outcome they managed due to the position they took on the board, the Winners demanded an increase in levels of trust from creditors going forward, which the Losers, gaining assistance from their poor abilities, added to their mortgage on divisions devoid of class.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners attributed the generation of a deserved outcome to the successful implementation of a plan they had devised to manufacture a favourable return, which the Losers met by accounting for the loss as a by-product of the sub-standard work-ethic they managed to produce.
First Quarter: the Losers consolidated their share with an erroneous account on the board of the true worth of the performance they managed, and a gain, which the Winners, managing a reputation of slowness in early trading, restricted the impact of with the returns they managed to serve.
Second Quarter: a period of inflation of loss of interest marked the Losers' sloppy accounting practices, and a sudden and minor decrease in the deficit they managed for the Winners, which contracted due to the efficient alignment they managed in matching the means to their absolute ends.
Third Quarter: the Losers suffered a severe and savage turnaround of their fortunes in the period, as the deficit they had been managing for the Winners became their sole property, which indicated to the competition that the comparative advantage they inherited was an absolute one.
Fourth Quarter: two consecutive quarters of negative growth signalled to the Losers that a radical restructuring across the board is an absolute necessity, going forward, which the Winners created in the class they expoited going forward, and the figures they manage in their operations.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers took full responsibility for the negative outcome they managed, which they placed the majority share of to their developing resources, and declined to pay credit to the Winners, as they attempted to attribute the outcome to their management of the "slowing down".
First Quarter: the Losers were denied the reward the account they managed to give deserved, which the climate demanded, and generated a manageable deficit, as the Winners, opening their account in the early part of trading, missed capitalising on a comparative advantage, for the rest.
Second Quarter: in a dramatic turnaround, the Winners slashed their confidence going into a deep recession, as the playing field opened up, allowing for more flowing business, which the Losers, generating a surge from the old firm, managed to prosper in, as the deficit deflated marginally.
Third Quarter: the Losers developed a margin from the deficit they had managed to acquire in the previous two quarters, which they relinquished as they looked to the board, which, as the last recession loomed, favoured the position the Winners had managed to align to their performance.
Fourth Quarter: surging with the loss of any expectation of an advantage, the Losers threatened to take control of the board, depsite the level of confidence disallowing such a takeover, which the Winners nervously maintained as they managed to lose confidence in their position, going forward.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers guaranteed themselves credit for the account they managed in assessing the outcome as the by-product of the value placed in risk-taking, which the Winners, despite the result on the table, are ill-equpped to invest in, as they transfer the means across the board.
First Quarter: the Losers generated substantial opportunity from limited assets and numerous liabilities, and managed to record a margin which was diminished by costly measures, as the Winners negotiated the impact of their failure to take control of their own business, with a manageable loss.
Second Quarter: mismanagement of measures brought on by the volatile environment and an account low in confidence resulted in the Losers owning only a minor margin, which the Winners took a lot of interest in owning for themelves as they struggled to manage added confidence, going forward.
Third Quarter: the Losers struggled to manage their business as effectively as prior to the recession, and were forced to slash the margin despite the accuracy of their measures, which saved the Winners from turning their deficit into a surplus of credit, and benefited their boom, by one account.
Fourth Quarter: missing numerous opportunities proved costly for the Losers, as the industry of their business bought them more entries to their account than the Winners, which sells the confidence they're managing short of the real value they managed to produce from their position on the board.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers managed the credit due to the competition by stealing the interest of analysts with an account, which was critical, of the shortfall of industry, and sold the Losers short of the value they generated from an investment, derived from the recession, in enterprise.
First Quarter: the Losers incorporated productivity into their stagnant business in the difficult climate, which made turnover at board-level a difficult prospect, managing to restrict the Winners from returns that creditors could appreciate with interest, in passing themselves off as analysts.
Second Quarter: aligning their performance to the conditions, the Losers went into the recession, following two consecutive quarters, with a deficit to negotiate, which accounted for the margin the Winners had acquired through the discrepancies the board indicated to observers and analysts.
Third Quarter: the Losers generated interest from analysts with a turnaround after the recession, which delivered their organisation sizeable and unsustainable gains, as the Winners managed some sizeably sustainable stagnation in productivity, and then declined with interest in gloomy conditions, as forecast.
Fourth Quarter: as forecast by analysts, the Losers managed a decline in productivity which the board indicated was costly to the operations of their business, and guaranteed the Winners a reverse of the previous quarter's results, which managed to expel, in the short-term, negative forecasts.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers attempted to sell fraudulent creditors inaccurate accounts of the operations of their business going forward, which paid off, in the short-term, as the Winners attempted to attribute ownership of their acquisition to their core values of leadership and focus, and managed.
First Quarter: the Losers contributed to the deficit they generated in an environment that made the industrial revolution they have manufactured redundant, as the Winners produced a number of industrial measures to curtail the competition, and delivered substantial rewards for creditors.
Second Quarter: in a period of rapid stagnation, the Losers managed to reverse some of the pressure their business had been under despite registering only a slight contraction of the margin, as the Winners negotiated the slashing of their margin through the individual enterprise of an unsustainable target.
Third Quarter: the Losers virtually guaranteed an optimistic outlook for the interest of positive creditors, after managing to increase the size of their margin, as the Losers closed off their options with a third consecutive quarter which managed to send creditors into ownership of a pessimistic outlook.
Fourth Quarter: in a recurrency of stagnation, the Losers managed to generate insignificant impact on their substantial deficit as the margin contracted slightly, due to the Winners, deserving the ownership of the credit for their margin, negotiating their declining interest with adequate measures.
Fifth Quarter: the Losers credited their failure to capitalise on their failure to capitalise at critical times, and refused to add value to the assessment of fraudulent creditors, which reinforced the interest the Winners managed to generate in attributing the margin to their "focus" and "committment".
First Quarter: the Winners managed the operation of their business through the discipline of their organisation and a structure which allowed their class to capitalise on the Losers' failure to develop an effective strategy going forward for managing the rapidly expanding deficit, after a period of early trading gave observers signs of interest in credit.
Second Quarter: aligning performance with figures, the Winners manufactured maximum productivity for their industry on the board through accurately measuring the means against their goals and the Losers' dwindling supply, which declined dramatically due to an excessive lack of accounting for their competitors' organisation and their own shortfall.
Third Quarter: the Winners' explosively accelerating gains were stalled by the major recession which allowed them to assess the collective benefits of their partnership which had the effect of allowing the Losers to increase the dividends from their mediocre performance, which had the net effect of delaying the decline of interest in some quarters.
Fourth Quarter: generating significant additional gains, the Winners profitted from their application to their organisation, which is built on the distribution of manufacture through reachable targets, which had the impact of driving the Losers into a near-depression after counting the cost of a structure made redundant through their lack of class.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners attributed their massive margin to the turnover their board generated through accurate measures and the pressure their organisation placed on the Losers, who supplied analysts with alarming reports about their dwindling industry which amounts to a loss of confidence in their organisation and sustainable expectations.
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 Winners posted a set of numbers that indicated that their uncertainty in the current climate created the conditions that made it difficult for them to open their account. The Losers achieved much better numbers than expected due to the performance of their efficient structure which enabled them to more than hit their targets.
Second Quarter: continuing their lack of productivity at the board level, the Winners discovered enough enterprise in developing resources which enabled them to break even. The Losers also registered the same result after the acquisition of a significant margin which they had to relinquish after a sudden downturn in their fortunes.
Third Quarter: booming confidence and a dramatic turn-around in productivity combined to give the Winners the leading figures they required to succeed at board level. Any gains the Losers had made were wiped off with the losses they suffered in a climate that made it difficult to hit targets and maintain their hold on their possessions.
Fourth Quarter: despite their unsustainable organisation and unable to meet their goals, the Winners secured a valuable gain after negotiating to maintain a slight margin. Whatever deficit they had to negotiate and in unfavourable conditions for their industry, the Losers managed to gain confidence in their productivity, in the balance.
Fifth Quarter: the Winners showed the benefits of capitalising on opportunity and keeping their costs to a minimum when their competitors experience a surge in confidence. The Losers enhanced their standing in the industry as lacking in the resources to do the business when their competitors get the running of their business right.
The Clatters, nosey as a stinky-book, have swayed the Costers by all but one hungry pants; the harpless Costers, angelic as saturn, started bratly then shod their true callouses.
They rang around like a hand with its chicken cut up for the rust, and were salient as the Clatters, amourous and lewd, steamed up together to piss the bile; a monk's themselves.
They all grotted in on the icked - and rumped away, seemingly at their own laser but it's harder than hat; the Costers, a poetic punch of potty-poos, were too skanky to munch it.
They've rarely had a bad sneezing - palpably the wart's in their arsery and defiantly one to dismember; the Clatters, obversely making a rot of nurses, have famished off the pest's rot.
The Clatters, panging around inside my shed, rustle with their ole vowels in the Santas, woo; for the Costers, the prose of this seer has been fart to eye, and that's a snot, for shower.
The Gawkers, I shoot you not, get jumped from the forced, hurt back and then rump over the tip of the Costers, canning the crossed, to the tune of severing goats, in front of the fannies.
The Costers, dying as well as a stooge-perfumer, went for the merci rule but no-one was loosening. The Gawkers went for the jocular vain, and the blondes pashed and spluttered, choking.
The Gawkers, a real throat for the big grinner, are gland that they have the pants in the bag, as the Costers, culpable on their own bitch, went wank at the news and lapped to the loin.
The Costers, once were worriers and now lapless psychopants, have had a yawn to forget; while the Gawkers have had one to put in the crapbook, and there's still moo to go!
The Gawkers, herpes high, go into the unction with a chants to give the Boobies a loosen; the Costers, in a smellier boot, bound over for the Coots to slop a stickier on them, and laugh.
Evil hearts retreat, it's true, for the read and the babble, the Dis uncovered the Costers in babblewarp and kicked them in the eyes as the vacuums spilled closer to a written spoon.
That they're shiite on the road is an abolute given, so munch, sow - that; they could get the spin that the Dis, one eye on the prose and the other on their eyes, might miss, shout!
Whatever, this wink is a much noodled bust for their wailing praying socks - the sock was sunk with great custard, while the Costers, courting their penises, thanked their mutton.
As their ear winks down, it's vagrantly oblivious that they want not to wink - such is laugh; while the Emos have much to gin for one moor, but will not want to get any more than hat.
The Poor offer Dis their disparate and angry, as they snuggle to get some bereave back; for the Costers it's time to be footers for the Gawks' canyons: they'll grow down in a hope.
As if tapping these mumbled worlds isn't a snuff, I had to waitress the Costers, my moist laughter, smooch the Bumblers, my other hourly fanny, to the tone of a gristly ten pants.
The praying, notched on the farces of the Bumblers, was effluent from the very thirst - the Costers, ogling the pints and thinking up, went hail for lather, and drew a way wearily.
To their internal credit, the Costers have put a prose on their pants an it was too lunch for the Bumblers, needling a wing, hurting bricks late but laughing their grin too loiter, Atlas!
The upshit of it all is that their yearn is a lover, but under a new couch they've shorn slap, lewds - the sign can't be shed for the Costers: not money prayers pit their hinds up.
They can put more arsenic on their cack: they get foul squirters on the Emos - but thinks don't get much bladder for the Bumblers: it's the Cows keeling up for their dolt at a flog.
Add Comments
Comments (11)