Presenting The Final Four Contenders For Worst Company In America 2014

2014wciabracketqfinals2Can it be? Has there really been so much bloodshed is so little time? It seems like only yesterday when the field of contenders stood before you at the opening ceremonies, waving their logo flags while proudly sporting their WCIA sweaters that Ralph Lauren’s distant cousin Kevin designed especially for the occasion. Now the industrial grade carpeting of the Worst Company Padded Playroom is stained with… well, you don’t actually want to know what all is in there; don’t worry, our friend Terry got us a good deal on a cleaning service and you’d be surprised what a well-placed area rug can cover. But back to more pressing matters…

The first two contenders in the WCIA Semifinals (aka the Don’t Call It the Final Four Round) were determined yesterday when Comcast pulled out Verizon’s data cap (you don’t want to see the photos; it was… icky) and when Walmart three-time runner-up Bank of America’s shot at a four-peat with an incredibly narrow 51-49 victory.

But we still had two bouts to go to fill out the rest of the bracket:

Time Warner Cable had already pulled off the upset of the year, squeaking out a Round One win against reigning two-time champ EA. Then TWC eked out a second buzzer-beater against Koch Industries to make it through to this morning’s contest. But the cable company’s luck ran out when newcomer Monsanto dumped a Truck Full of Hurtin’ (that’s not a phrase; it’s actually the name of a new, patented genetically modified seed that grows arms and fists so it can beat the crud out of nearby farmers’ crops) on TWC, taking nearly 60% of the vote in the process.

Could the lawsuit-loving, gene-tinkering seed people join the ranks of ofter WCIA rookies like BP and EA and win the Golden Poo? It will have to get through surprisingly strong contender Walmart before we can start asking that question.

seworldchaseSEAWORLD VS. CHASE
Today’s other Quarterfinal fight featured another faceoff between a tournament first-timer and a WCIA vet. And once again the voting showed the old-timer no favors, as SeaWorld handily defeated the last remaining bank in the bracket by an impressive margin.

The big question is whether the loathed theme park will have enough steam to take down this tournament’s one sure thing when it goes up against former champ Comcast. The Kabletown Krew has won more than 80% of the vote in two of three rounds and hasn’t shown even a sign of weakness. Is the little cable company from Philly destined for its second Poo? A huge black and white fish named SeaWorld stands in its way.

Voting will resume tomorrow morning!

Read Comments9

Edit Your Comment

  1. StevenB says:

    Lk ‘v mntnd n thr sctns, ths trnmnt hs bcm ttlly slss nd mnnglss. Thy’r llwng mltpl vts frm th sm prsn t b cst cntlss tms nd nt vryn s gttng t vt n ll th plls. t’s jk. Th trnmnt tbl s grbg.

    [Moderator note: Disemvoweled for cross-posting repeated negative/insulting remarks across multiple threads.]

    • Raekwon says:

      Yet the results seem better than the past few years. It’s also unproven whether or not you can vote multiple times. Yes, the option appears but behind the scenes they can be filtering multiple votes from the same person. Most polls only use IP address anyway so it’s not very hard to vote multiple times if you really wanted to.

    • Cara says:

      I’ve really disliked the large banner at the top of every Consumerist page, asking you to vote – even after you do vote, it remains. It brings back memories of banner ads.

      I’d much rather see something less obtrusive in the future. And definitely a way to deactivate the banner once you vote for the day/round.

      • SingleMaltGeek says:

        The banner kept coming back when I voted, clicked on an article, then went back to the home page. When I finally remembered to vote, then reload, then click on an article, the banner did not come back when I went to the home page.

        I think I’m just going to AdBlock the banners from now on. I prefer the right column voting box anyway.

    • oomingmak says:

      Maybe instead of taking the time to disembowel his complaints Consumerist could have taken the time to help explain the methodologies used in the voting this year because all the complaints I’ve read are completely valid. It really does question the validity of the whole poll and frankly I would expect a lot better transparency from a Website like Consumerist.

  2. Pacer says:

    The voting results seem more rational this time and the bracket pairings make more sense. BUT the methodology was bad: brief windows of time to vote and what seem to be multiple opportunities to vote. Maybe multiple voting isn’t possible, but it appears to be.

    With no explanations from The Consumerist, these two things cast a lot of doubt on the credibility/integrity of this years WCIA.

  3. IrishLad118 says:

    Hmmm…maybe this year’s contest is being run by drones, which could explain the unresponsiveness to complaints.