However, they should explain how the NYPSC agreed to multiple rate increases on basic phone service, starting in 2006, based on losses that were not audited and were created by the expense items in this category that had nothing to do with local service.
As we've pointed out, Verizon New York received multiple rate increases on regular phone service for the "massive deployment of fiber optics".
The report failed to mention that much of the 'investment" was not done by Verizon corporate or investors but was from the multiple rate increases on basic residential and business local phone customers that was supposed to be used for the 'massive deployment of fiber optics'.
As we uncovered, in New York, Verizon was able to get the State to grant multiple rate increases on basic residential phone service for "massive deployment of fiber optics" and 'losses'; it came to about $750.00 per line extra, (counting taxes, etc).
The multiple rates have many causes.
Verizon customers received multiple rate increases based on "massive deployment of fiber optics" and 'losses'losses
Add to this, since 2005, Verizon received multiple rate increases of 84% on basic phone service, (commonly known as "POTS", Plain Old Telephone Service) and got 50-300% price increases on various add-on services, claiming losses.
Hence, the model with multiple rate categories was rejected on the grounds of parsimony.
Because Verizon's affiliates short changed the incumbent, there have been a host of consequences including a) less revenue into Verizon NY, b) massive excess expenses that should never have been charged to Local Service, c) multiple rate increases and d) savings on taxes.
A recent meta-analysis showed a single-procedure success rate of ablation off antiarrhythmic drugs of 57%, a multiple procedure success rate off antiarrhythmic drugs of 71%, and a multiple procedure success rate on antiarrhythmic drugs of 77%.
