backtop


Print 46 comment(s) - last by ebakke.. on Apr 15 at 12:44 PM

This is its second time with the title

Comcast may be the big dog on the cable block, but bigger doesn't always mean better.

According to Consumerist, Comcast was crowned the worst company in America for 2014. It held the same title only four years ago as well.

Comcast was a finalist alongside Monsanto for the 2014 WCIA, but in the end, Comcast received 51.5 percent of votes while Monsanto fell to a close second with 48.5 percent.

Comcast went up against other contestants like Yahoo, Facebook, Verizon and Sea World before facing off in the final round with Monsanto. 

Comcast confirmed its acquisition of Time Warner Cable for $45.2 billion USD in mid-February. It's set to be an all-stock transaction.   


The deal, which should be completed by the end of 2014 (after approval by stockholders and regulators, of course), will give TWC investors 2.875 Comcast stock for each of their shares. TWC shares are valued at $158.82 a piece. 

It was revealed last month that Comcast used its political action committee to pay millions of dollars in lobbying, which paid many lawmakers responsible for overseeing the acquisition. The company even made donations to charities in an effort to put itself in a favorable light.

Comcast reportedly gave 15 of the 18 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee as well as 32 of the 39 members of the House Judiciary Committee some type of compensation or donation.

The acquisition has been met with strong criticism. Some worry that the merger will result in reduced competition, poor customer service, less innovation and higher prices for customers. These worries stem from analyst predictions that Comcast and TWC's combined company would control about one-third of the U.S. broadband market.   

Source: Consumerist



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Should have been Monsanto
By Reclaimer77 on 4/8/2014 5:51:52 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Yes, a company that believes it can patent nature is a necessary evil. Wow.


Obviously I'm not talking about that aspect.

You're truly ignorant on nearly every subject, it's amazing.

Without Monsanto the world would be facing massive food shortages, leading to price spikes, and millions dying from starvation.

quote:
If they disappeared tomorrow we would all be better off.


You're an idiot. We would be starving or facing 200% food price increases across the board!

quote:
Monsanto isn't putting food on your plate


Again, idiot. Like 90% of the food we eat comes from Monsanto GMO seeds.

Let me be clear, I am NOT defending Monsanto's business practices or legal strategy. I'm simply stating a fact that without Monsanto GMO products, we wouldn't be able to feed the current world population. Certainly not at current food prices. We would have to accept a much lower standard of living, and have to grow our own foodstuffs.


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By Spuke on 4/8/2014 7:00:52 PM , Rating: 1
With no Monsanto, some other company(companies) would step in and fill the void. Hopefully one with larger d&*ks (as opposed to Monsanto's very small one's).


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By Argon18 on 4/9/2014 12:12:07 PM , Rating: 1
"I'm simply stating a fact that without Monsanto GMO products, we wouldn't be able to feed the current world population."

Bullshit. Funny how your idea of "fact" coincides with the dictionary definition of "propaganda". Monsanto is not wanted or needed to feed the world. They're a patent troll that survives on litigation and putting family farms out of business.


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By TSS on 4/9/2014 3:37:13 PM , Rating: 2
You're one to talk about ignorance, lol.

quote:
Obviously I'm not talking about that aspect.

Oh i'm sorry, are we selectively ignoring parts of companies now in this comparison?
quote:
Without Monsanto the world would be facing massive food shortages, leading to price spikes, and millions dying from starvation.

False. Simply would - not - happen. Monsanto has no presence here in holland, atleast not with GMO's. And we're the second largest food exporter in the world - with a country smaller then rhode island. If Monsanto dies tomorrow we're going to be just fine.
quote:
You're an idiot. We would be starving or facing 200% food price increases across the board!

FUD. The only way this could be true at all, is because the US has soo drenched it's soil in Roundup that only Roundup resistant crops grow there. Guess who makes (and advocates the use of) both? Infact, without Monsanto, the ground would be alot richer in minerals, the food would be of better quality and prices would actually come down as you would get more nutricious food for the same price. Well, if the Fed wasn't inflating the dollar like they are.
quote:
Again, idiot. Like 90% of the food we eat comes from Monsanto GMO seeds.

Mainly because once you use roundup ready seeds and the roundup that comes with it, nothing else grows on the ground. No weeds but also, no non-roundup resistant crops. Also, cross-pollenation (i think that was the word?) and then lawsuits from monsanto putting people out of business for illegitematly using their seeds.
quote:
Let me be clear, I am NOT defending Monsanto's business practices or legal strategy. I'm simply stating a fact that without Monsanto GMO products, we wouldn't be able to feed the current world population. Certainly not at current food prices. We would have to accept a much lower standard of living, and have to grow our own foodstuffs.


It's legal and business practices got you into this situation where you wouldn't be able to feed >The USA population<. The rest of the world (atleast the EU) luckely was wiser then you guys, except india where they're still undoing the damage US companies did with herbicides, chemical fertilizers and whatnot.

Know why we don't have any GMO crops in europe? Because most countries passed laws where GMO food would need to be clearly labelled as such, a requirement not needed in the USA. And then the population doesn't want it, to the point where Monsanto even gave up on GMO crops here.

You're the idiot here. I mean i know you've been an idiot before but to blatantly defend *the* company responsible for poisoning US farmland just to gain more worthless paper is a new low even for you. Blows my mind you can claim the things that you do with a straight face.


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By Reclaimer77 on 4/9/2014 6:41:13 PM , Rating: 2
I'm literally shocked at the ignorance here.

I don't think Monsanto is a good company. I'm NOT defending them. I'm NOT advocating for them in any way.

I'm stating facts, and you don't like them.

The world does not have an infinite supply of arable land set aside for farming. With GMO seeds the same area of farmland can produce several times more harvested goods than with traditional methods. They are also drought resistant, disease resistant, etc etc.

Decades ago scientists and experts were predicting famine and starvation on a massive scale. They simply extrapolated the current amount of produce being grown by farmers and compared that with the population growth.

So what changed? GMO seeds allowed farmers to increase yields cost-effectively.

America is a MASSIVE food exporter. Basically we feed the world. And to stand here and tell me that would be possible without Monsanto products is sheer willful ignorance. We would probably still be a net exporter, but certainly not at the level we are today.

I mean Jesus, such vehemence over what? If you want to hate Monsanto, how about the fact that they made chemical weapons that KILLED PEOPLE !!??

Of all the things to flip out over, you pick goddamn seeds?? Get a grip on yourself.


"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki