ANACOM’s methodology includes as indirect benefits, to be deducted in order to obtain the final value of CLSU, benefits concerning the corporate reputation and brand enhancement, ubiquity, advertising on public payphones, mailing and regulation fees.
In the scope of the determination of 22.07.2015, on the methodology of calculation of CLSU for 2014, adjustments were made to the calculation of some indirect benefits, and it was also defined how the allocation to each component (FTS and PPP) should take place. As such, it was determined that:
- The “corporate reputation and brand enhancement” indirect benefit should be allocated to the two US components according to the proportion of the number of unprofitable accesses for each of these components, compared to the range of unprofitable accesses.
- The “ubiquity”, “mailing” and “regulation fees” indirect benefits should be fully allocated to the FTS component.
- The “advertising on public payphones” indirect benefit should be fully allocated to the public payphones component.
AXON’s Audit Report
AXON concludes as far as benefits are concerned that the approach followed by MEO complies with the methodology established by ANACOM, not having been identified any irregular situations at the level of the review of calculations and of inputs.
As such, as regards the “corporate reputation and brand enhancement” indirect benefit, AXON found that the calculation was performed according to the methodology defined and that the benefit was differentiated between the FTS and PPP services on the basis of the number of unprofitable accesses for each of these components, having been applied a correction factor as regards the benefit to be allocated to public payphones (98/151 days), due to the date up to which MEO was the USP under the regulatory framework for the period preceding the USP tender designation.
As regards the “ubiquity”, “mailing” and “regulation fees” benefits, AXON confirms that the respective values were correctly determined, having been fully allocated to the FTS component, as determined by ANACOM, and taking into consideration the period in which the offer was ensured by MEO (from 1 January to 31 May 2014).
As far as the “advertising on public payphones” indirect benefit is concerned, auditors conclude that its determination complied with ANACOM’s determinations, as it only took into account the public payphones component, and a 98/151 pro-rata was applied, so as to relate to the period in which the offer was provided (from 1 January to 8 April 2014).
Line taken by ANACOM
In the light of the conclusions presented by AXON on the consistency of the approach followed by MEO with the methodology defined by ANACOM, it is deemed that the process followed complies with ANACOM’s methodology.
