You don't match up your best players in a bracket sport such as tennis, bowling or whatever.
The idea is to seed things so we have an exciting finish of AIG vs Peanut Guys or whoever makes the cut.

So even if AIG weren't partly responsible for the massive financial collapse, I consider insurance companies in general to be only a mere few rungs lower on the ladder of evil than Hitler and Satan; far worse than anything Walmart or Target could ever do unless they decide to start murdering babies in their stores.

@ceilingFANBOY: they're all rated by how many people nominated them.

@volenti non fit injuria: Nah, I voted for AIG for the shitty way they treated my roommate about five years ago when she had her auto insurance with them. Target hasn't ever pissed either of us off to the level that AIG got us up to. It wasn't even my car and I was frothing at the mouth for the way they were treating her.

So, that's why I'm in that 1% I guess. :)

@volenti non fit injuria: The problem is that if we didn't bail them out, they would have gone bankrupt, not paid claims, putting additional pressure on banks that bought insurance from them. So, their impact on teh general economy without the bailout would still qualify them for the Final 4 in my mind.

AIG: FTFTW!

I voted A.I.G. because they were working to circumvent rules set up to try to make sure banks don't collapse, which in turn collapsed banks. Did all of the A.I.G. do this? No, however it was the base of their company.

Until you can prove to me that Target made actions that would knowingly destabilize a world power for the purpose of profit, they have nothing on A.I.G.

AIG is to blame for what happened to their company. But, they are not to blame for what they did with the bailout money.

Now, the gov't wants to know where the money went. There was no stipulation when the bailout was given to keep track of the money.

So I have $10 dollars and you give me $10 more. I now have $20. I use some of the money and you ask me, "what did you buy with the $10?" How the f- am I supposed to know? You did not tell me you wanted to know what I did with the money. Now the Obama administration is going back on their word and can't do anything about it.

BUT lesson learned for the next time they hand out billions of dollars.

Still, this is shaping up to be a runaway to the Final Four, just like last year. You'd think we could come up with 32 companies that are on more or less the same level of suck.

I know they had shady business practices and normally a company would just declare bankruptcy. BUT, has a major insurance company every declared bankruptcy? What would that do to the individual policies? The ramifications of a bankruptcy declaration would have been so widespread.

And so the gov't swooped (sorry, just saw the bat car on jalopnik) on in and gave em a bailout.

Although I voted in your poll for Tarbutt for the worst company I was NOT surprised at the result. You should have paired Tarbutt up with another RETAIL company not those bone heads at AIG.
You want info on Target then take a look at: www.targetfiling.blogspot.com

@volenti non fit injuria:
Is this where I point out that these people weren't children?

Just because you can get away with something you know is wrong, you do it?

The government deserves blame as well, but the mess AIG is in is entirely of their own making

@volenti non fit injuria: But this is the "Worst Company in America", not "Worst Government" contest. AIG ran itself into insolvency. That's a sure sign of a bad business. That it bribed and cajoled government officials into going along with its ploy does not absolve it of its poor business practices.

AIG is not to blame. It is the government. Would you give your child $20 and say don't buy shoes with it only find out that they bought sandals? Weird analogy, I admit.

But-
the government capped executive salaries at $250K, but said nothing about bonuses. Now, you sign a contract and it stipulates that in x years if you meet your benchmark, then you get x dollars. That's what happened. It's the government's fault for not clearly delineating what can and cannot be done with the money. Now they know for future bailouts....

Furthermore, I think the amount of praise AG Cuomo is receiving for this situation is ridiculous. Also, I am not entirely sure why the execs would return the money if it was contractually owed to them.

@ARP: #1: This is the same Congress that voted for this bail-out boondoggle during the last administration. #2: Bush was living in a Dallas suburb when the protection of the bonuses were put in place.

@ViperBorg - SpaceBat hates Facebook:

@ViperBorg - SpaceBat hates Facebook:

Again, some minor pricing/bundling issues, stories on one specific brooklyn store, several stories on the business not doing as well in the past 6 months--- just like virtually every retailer in the nation. The bottom line to all those stories seems to suggest a decent retailer with some very minor issues.

On the same account, most consumers didn't directly buy the products that caused the downfall of the financial system.

href="#c11605482">bentcorner: That isn't that unreasonable considering that you didn't have a receipt. Was it open? Most places won't accept returns on open CDs and DVDs since people can burn them and return them

@eddie9999: Yeah, there's a lot of Target entitlement in MSP.

@Hank Scorpio: There was a story about the new Red Dwarf movie coming out, and I was like, YES, now I don't have to play SimCity 2K to get my Red Dwarf refrences. Then Porntipsguzzardo and Pirntopsguzzardo popped into my head.

On a side note, there is a contest to choose the "forename" I use everyday. Winners receive a personalized major award(not a leg lamp from Italy) posted on their message page. All you have to do is post your entry on the messages page of my profile [consumerist.com] .

@HiPwr: Much of this started with the previous administration So, there's plenty of blame to go around.

@Project Thanatos: I'm not sure how I'd vote in Wal-Mart v. AIG. I think if you added up the financial damage Wal-Mart has done via tax breaks, health care costs, wages, etc. they've had a pretty big impact on our economy. AIG's impact is just more tangible.

This isn't fair because Target regularly pisses me off with their wrong pricing! The tag on the shelf says one thing but the cash register rings up something entirely different! I still have to go with AIG because they are just horrible.

Way to go AIG!

@ceilingFANBOY: Yeah, but you dont want to put a #1 up against a #2 right off the bat . . ratings folks, for the ratings.

I don't know about you but I grew my own cotton, spun my own polyester, wove the fabric and then after nearly killing myself I went to Target and got them for $2.00.

Hi Jim! This has been computer literacy februarymakeup, computing literately.

I wonder if they're related to the people that didn't vote for, say Babe Ruth to get into the Hall of Fame. Because some people are just jerks.

Personally, I'm tired of all the AIG angst. Too many people are grandstanding over AIG that it's getting a little old.

I once worked for a big company that fired the CEO after 18 months. He got a $26.3 severance package. He was an awful CEO that made a lot of bone headed decisions. They couldn't just give him $10 million or even $26 million. They had to kick in the extra 300,000 grand. Like a straight $26 million wouldn't have cut it.

After seeing that, nothing surprises me.

Dear Madame Speaker:

I know that there is considerable outrage in the House of Representatives, as there is throughout the [kitchen], about the bonuses awarded to employees of [Target's Merchandise Return] division at a time when the company is reliant on significant [bulls-eye logos]. The President shares that outrage, and so do I.

I am writing to outline the steps taken by the Department of the Treasury to date, to update you on the actions we are taking to recoup the retention payments just made, and to deal with future payments of executive compensation by [Target].

I registered my strong objections to Mr. [Bob Ulrich], the CEO of [Target], last week when I was first informed by my staff about the pending payment obligations.

Mr. [Ulrich] told me that a tranche of $165 million in [red dresses dresses] was contractually committed and payable by March 15 to employees within the [women's clothing] division - the very division most culpable for the rapid deterioration of [Target]. Mr. Ulrich, who took the reins of the firm after the [dresses] were negotiated in April of 2008, said [Target]'s lawyers had concluded that the [affordable prices] were legally binding. I asked for a written explanation and legal analysis to support that claim, including the legal liabilities that would arise if the [affordable prices] were breached, and turned it over to Treasury's own lawyers to review.

Our lawyers agreed, in consultation with outside counsel, that it would be legally difficult to prevent these contractually-mandated [prices]. Even the new executive compensation restrictions recently passed in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) allow for [every day great deals] signed before the act went into effect.

...

As you know, the President has asked me to fully review all additional measures at my disposal to recoup these [dresses] and to recover [style] on behalf of taxpayers.

We are presently working with the Department of Justice to determine what avenues are available by which we can recoup the retention awards that have been paid.

...

I know that much of the public ire has fallen on Mr. Ulrich, which is understandable, since it is his name on the [bulls-eye]. But it also is unjustified. Mr. Ulrich was put in place as the CEO of [Target] last year at the request of the U.S. government to help rehabilitate the company['s commercials] and repay taxpayer funds. He inherited a difficult situation, including these [Home Furnishings], which were entered prior to his or the government's involvement in [Target]. As long as he is there, we will work with him on measures to wind down [Target] in an orderly way and protect the American taxpayer.

I look forward to working with Congress to modernize our [shopping experience] in way that protects the American taxpayer, meets the challenges of [unathorized returns] and reduces the chance that we will face a [sale] of this magnitude in the future.

Sincerely,

Timothy F. Geithner

@JeanStork: Yes please do explain your reasoning or rather, please check your political opinion at the door.

@GuinevereRucker: I'd vote Congress. I like how they voted to protect the bonuses and then were full of sanctimonious outrage when AIG granted them. Of course with our new "transperent" government, Congress could say that they didn't have time to read the legislation, but I don't think you'll find many of them admitting that they voted for a bill and didn't know what the hell was in it.

I have WILLINGLY given Target my dollars; I had no choice in the AIG matter!

@ElizabethD: Maybe 3% (last time I checked) of voters are using faulty computer mice and/or are legally blind and accidentally clicked on the wrong button; or maybe it's Internet spiders/bots clicking through webpages or something...

This is a classic 1 vs. 16 seed -- Target having come in 10th in their league to win the conf. tourney only to play UNC in the first round.

I honestly don't see how AIG loses in this thing- even to the Peanut Corp(ses).

treat their distribution employees like shit is one reason.

No brainer. Today we rank target at #313, and AIG at #5364.

Knowledge is power.

@Skankingmike: Actually, AIG made piss-poor business decisions, Congress is to blame for spending our tax dollars to bail them out.

@GuinevereRucker: That showdown would test my powers of reasoning.

But honestly, Congress would win. Hands down.

I guess AIG lets their employees vote on the internet. Only explanation for the 3%

@tc4b:

i was just about to post AIG vs. AIDS would make more sense. :)

Fire marshals recovered the charred parts of the toasters and I brought them back to Target. The customer service representative said they would not take them back because I did not have the original packaging.

Ok that's all a lie, I voted for AIG, but seriously the above story is the only possible way someone could vote for Target instead of AIG.

I think i take things too personally.

Is there something I don't know?

Never, ever had a problem with Target. Almost shop exclusively with them...

@Jim Topoleski: Its like playing a video game with Cheat mode on... in this case... AIG mode on. All will fall beneath the hoven foot that is AIG.

Hahhahaha

@philmin: we've had some crazy return stories but they are far and away relatively nothing close to scale of AIG's assbaggery.

@Jim Topoleski:

(Looking from afar)...

-It's a battle... No a massacre!!!

*Prince Ashitaka in "Princes Mononoke"

@noone1569: Cause you know... no one saw this coming.

I really like target... Now if walmart was up there, i think we'd actually have a fight on our hands!!

@Skankingmike: What is so bad about their return policy? I like the fact that if you bought something with a credit card, you can return them within 90 days without a receipt. It's very convenient, actually.

Economy crippling evil insurance company or the place where I go in to buy paper towels and end up spending $60 hmmm... that is a tough choice

This match isn't fair. It should be two financial/insurance companies or two retail stores against each other.

Is Target really known for being anti-consumer? I haven't seen much beyond some minor pricing issues.

AIG is costing the American tax payer untold billions.

hmmmm....

and where do you think we bought those things?

Easiest. Win. Ever.