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

I may be completely alone in this...
By quiksilvr on 4/8/2014 4:14:30 PM , Rating: 2
But despite my hate for mergers and charging streaming sites for higher tiered internet speeds, Comcast Internet has been nothing but perfect for me. It maintains the speed advertised and the three people in my household can easily stream HD videos simultaneously without incident.

Maybe my neighborhood doesn't use as much internet or maybe I'm in that one area that just works, but as far as I'm concerned I'm a happy customer.




RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By Etsp on 4/8/2014 4:57:12 PM , Rating: 2
What speeds to do pay for, and how much?


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By Cheesew1z69 on 4/8/2014 5:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
I have basic digital TV and 50/10 for 80 a month from them. And it's been rock solid.


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By Adonlude on 4/9/2014 12:51:46 PM , Rating: 2
I have COX cable internet. Its $65/mo for "up to" 15mb/s and I'm stoked when a download hits 1Mb/s. Guess im just a big COX sucker :(


By ipay on 4/11/2014 1:40:32 AM , Rating: 2
I'm on the other side of that scale apparently 65Mb/s is common for me with Cox.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/3431782972.png


By Cheesew1z69 on 4/11/2014 9:41:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Guess im just a big COX sucker :(
Don't be such a COX sucker! ;)


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By inighthawki on 4/8/2014 5:18:23 PM , Rating: 2
And where does he live. Highly populated areas are going to be way worse on a shared connection like cable than the middle of some small town in the middle of nowhere.


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By quiksilvr on 4/8/2014 7:29:32 PM , Rating: 2
I live in Montgomery County in Maryland. We pay $50 a month for 50 Mbps down / 10 Mbps up. It includes cable TV but we don't use it. To be fair this is a promotion price and it will increase to $60 a month at the end of the year.


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By Cheesew1z69 on 4/8/2014 7:34:56 PM , Rating: 2
It's going to be 60, more like 80. That's the package I had and it's 79.99 after promo.


By Cheesew1z69 on 4/8/2014 8:09:37 PM , Rating: 2
Have*


By marvdmartian on 4/9/2014 7:21:10 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, that's not terribly bad. I get a "promo" deal from Time Warner ("renewed" every year or two, after it "expires", and I call them), that gives me 20 megabit per second Roadrunner, for $70 (with all taxes, etc). No cable TV whatsoever.

I dread going to Comcast simply because, when a company gets that large, their customer service is usually the first thing to suffer. Even now, if I have to have TWC come out, it's nearly 2 weeks to schedule a service call.

I'm 2 hours away from both OK City and Dallas/Ft Worth metroplex, but can't get AT&T or Verizon to bring their fiber optic service out this way, even though I live in a city with 100,000 population. If we had that choice, I'd tell the cable companies where to stuff it!


By jimbojimbo on 4/8/2014 5:30:10 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, you're alone. Nyah, I'm sure others are in your situation if they're lucky. However, at my home during about 6-11pm I can't watch anything on Netflix except in a pretty low resolution or with constant buffering. Oh well.


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By kmmatney on 4/8/2014 7:27:44 PM , Rating: 2
I was very happy with Comcast internet, but the price kept going up. I called in to try to get it lowered, and they would only do it with a reduced speed. The price had gone up to near $90/mo for "Blast" internet, and only barely cheaper for "Performance" internet which was much slower. It wasn't until I switched to CenturyLink that they offered me a better deal. CenturyLink is not fun to deal with either, but at least they worked with me (along with DirectTV) to get a price I could deal with.


By StevoLincolnite on 4/8/2014 8:01:18 PM , Rating: 2
Here thankfully if my ISP has to increase prices... All of the old customers are then "Grandfathered" and stay on their old plan.
Only new customers are then placed on the higher priced plans, which is good for keeping around loyal paying customers and reducing churn rate.


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By ebakke on 4/8/2014 8:07:41 PM , Rating: 2
$90! I give Comcast $30 /mo for 25/5. You were getting hosed.

And I'm with the OP. My service is consistently fast, and reliable.


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By MrBlastman on 4/9/2014 3:59:13 PM , Rating: 2
THIS is why people hate Comcast! They are so shady and will squeeze you for all they can while at the same time lying saying they can't do better. The thing you don't know is your neighbor across the street might be getting the same service from them at a non-promotional rate that is half what you are paying.

They are filth. I hate them. I refuse to use their television services again--antenna for me. If I could only get them to lower my internet rate. I'm paying 65.00/mo for 25/5 with Comcast.

What'd you do to get it that low?


By ebakke on 4/15/2014 12:44:33 PM , Rating: 2
Well, to be fair, I'm on a promo. But the short answer to your question is that I threaten to move to CenturyLink and if needed I make good on my threats. I give Comcast every opportunity to find me a lower bill. If they do, I stay. If they don't, I leave. Then coming back, I get new promos again.

But 9 out of 10 times, all it takes is asking and threatening to terminate. But the real key is to specifically ask your rep for a 12 mo promo instead of a 3 or 6 month. I've frequently been offered a 6mo at X, and then I ask "do you have anything with 12 months?" and the come back with 12mo at Y (sometimes still at X).


RE: I may be completely alone in this...
By Cheesew1z69 on 4/8/2014 8:12:19 PM , Rating: 2
Blast is 76.95 a month off promo, so either your billing was wrong or something else is going on.


By stm1185 on 4/9/2014 4:38:02 PM , Rating: 2
It's almost as if Comcast charges rates localized to the market it is in.


By stm1185 on 4/8/2014 10:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
You are not alone. I have never not gotten above advertised speed on Comcast. They have never enforced their data caps on me. They have doubled my speed for free.

Yeah customer service sucks, but I have never had a service outage, ever. So the only time I have dealt with Comcast is when I moved. And yeah the guy was a bit late and kind of dickish, but its like once every few years at most.

And to top it off, They actually improve their service. 10 to 20 to 50 to 100... Where I used to live is still stuck with 6 mbps DSL, WHICH IS ACTUALLY 4! Comcast went from being 4mbps faster to 94mbps faster! AT&T hasn't made any upgrade in that whole neighborhood this century!

Which makes Comcast a hell of alot better then ATT!


Should have been Monsanto
By laviathan05 on 4/8/2014 4:15:09 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, cable and internet are important services we feel strongly about, but Monsanto's grip on the food supply in this country is frightening, and how they go about maintaining that grip is worse. Yes, Comcast sucks, but they are child's play compared to Monsanto.




RE: Should have been Monsanto
By Reclaimer77 on 4/8/14, Rating: -1
RE: Should have been Monsanto
By GulWestfale on 4/8/2014 4:39:34 PM , Rating: 2
does EA feel left out?


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By Mitch101 on 4/8/2014 5:20:50 PM , Rating: 3
EA started against Time Warner had they gone against 90% of that list they would have gone a round or two before getting knocked out.

I agree with the OP Monsanto should have won.


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By AssBall on 4/8/2014 8:04:37 PM , Rating: 2
In my Bracket Bank of America would have beaten out Walmart 10/10 times. BoA suuuuuuuuucks.


By inperfectdarkness on 4/9/2014 3:40:16 PM , Rating: 2
BoA also has legitimate challengers; everyone from Chase to USAA. Wally-world doesn't have that type of competition. So even though I think BoA is the worst banking institution in the USA, it's small potatoes compared to Wal Mart.


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By tayb on 4/8/2014 4:40:58 PM , Rating: 4
Yes, a company that believes it can patent nature is a necessary evil. Wow.

Monsanto isn't putting food on your plate and their outrageous "patent and litigate" strategy is actually costing you money. If they disappeared tomorrow we would all be better off.


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By jimbojimbo on 4/8/2014 5:33:59 PM , Rating: 2
If you buy some seeds, plant it, then harvest the seeds for later growing when they mature it's perfectly fine. If you buy Monsanto seeds, plant it, then harvest the seeds they will sue your ass! Great company.

They'd sue mother nature itself if they could if any of those seeds just happen to drop onto the ground and grow naturally.


RE: Should have been Monsanto
By sorry dog on 4/10/2014 10:04:17 PM , Rating: 2
It's kinda like arguing over who killed more people, Hitler or Stalin...once you get past a million does it matter any more? They were both evil tyrants that sold their souls for power.


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.


By inperfectdarkness on 4/9/2014 3:41:50 PM , Rating: 2
True. Monsanto should be considered the all-time champion on this list--to the point at which they're retired. You can bundle all of the "Evil" from every other company on the list, and Monsanto is still more evil. Monsanto makes Apple look saintly. THAT'S how bad they are.


Lululemon....
By DPigs on 4/8/2014 4:32:04 PM , Rating: 2
....is Canadian.




RE: Lululemon....
By Murloc on 4/8/2014 4:59:55 PM , Rating: 2
the title says in America, not in the US.

Also even if it really is just the US, maybe the company operates in the US too with a subsidiary.


Here's what surprises me
By inperfectdarkness on 4/9/2014 3:37:20 PM , Rating: 2
-Why is DirecTV on here, instead of Dish?
-How did Apple escape this list entirely?
-What makes Sea World so terrible, let alone worthy of final 4?
-On that note, Six-Flags is WAY worse, how did it escape this list?
-EA made the list and Activision didn't?
-GM is pretty bad, but how did Chrysler miss the list?
-Sprint skated by on this one--despite all the hate?

Overall, list is rather fair, but when limited to the USA...misses gems like RIM.




RE: Here's what surprises me
By iamkyle on 4/10/2014 1:06:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Overall, list is rather fair, but when limited to the USA...misses gems like RIM .


...who?


Finally
By R!TTER on 4/8/2014 4:15:40 PM , Rating: 3
Now can someone break this monopoly into 2 or more(preferably) companies so that it, this lecherous B$ firm, dies an unnatural but timely death?




How are they worse then AT&T?
By stm1185 on 4/8/2014 7:04:33 PM , Rating: 2
At least when they show up late and price gouge me it's for a 100 mbps line not 25!




twc has joined them
By SPOOOK on 4/8/2014 7:13:36 PM , Rating: 2
now twc has joined the worst company twc was second worst
I have them there are crooks with the worst service and overpriced service
2 cable boxes and internet I am paying over 175 dollars they have raised the rates 10 dollars each year for 5 years in a row




Awesome..
By GzyOnline on 4/8/2014 8:54:13 PM , Rating: 2
hahaha... this is hilarious! i love the bracket the most! i am an xfinity comcast customer in the Bay Area.. i hear a lot of people bad mouth them but i've been a customer for 6+ years and i'm quite pleased with the way they've treated me and handled my issues.




Employee of the Comcast
By UsernameX on 4/8/2014 9:57:38 PM , Rating: 2
There are some bad apples in this company, no doubt. Believe me when I say that there is a greater good in this company. Personally, they've treated me better than any other company and strive to do so for our customers. I love working for this company and have helped countless people restore their faith. If you're receiving bad customer service, from the bottom of my heart I apologize. I go to work every day and strive to be the best employee I can. Turn over rate in a call center is awful, because you deal with negativity from callers all the time. (Rightfully so from people that are frustrated!) Just know that we strive to give you the best experience possible. We monitor our calls as much as possible to root out the bad employees (just like any company). Thank you for your service Comcast customers. We will fix this sooner or later.

Sincerely,
A Comcast employee




Not Oracle?
By Sivar on 4/9/2014 12:52:48 AM , Rating: 2
I'd have voted for Oracle, or perhaps Samsung.




"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad

Related Articles













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