regardless of any technological differences that may exist with these services. For the vast numbers of customers who have migrated to wireless voice, for example, the wireless company that they have chosen offers adequate voice services regardless of the limitation of battery issues and locational (911) accuracy. As Verizon points out, seventy percent of all 911 calls now originate from a cell phone. For the above reasons we decline to adopt the position of the opposing Parties that cable and wireless telephony should be excluded from consideration as a or for basic local exchange service on the basis of safety and reliability “like” “substitute” characteristics. 5. Service Quality and Fiber Deployment a. Positions of the Parties i. Verizon Verizon avers that service quality should be a function of market forces and customer expectations rather than regulatory requirements. Tr. at 37-38. Verizon asserts that opposing Parties have failed to demonstrate that the standards they have submitted into the record to judge performance are meaningful to actual customers in Verizon’s market. Verizon argues that the declining rate of customer complaints indicates today’s that it is meeting customer expectations. Further, Verizon notes that if customers are not satisfied with service, they are free to choose another provider of Verizon’s telecommunications service. Verizon R.B. at 14. Also in rebuttal testimony, and in the context of explaining a reference to the rationale of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Council concerning a similar proceeding, witness parties essentially argue that bundles and Verizon’s stated “other
regardless of any technological differences that may exist with these services. For the vast numbers of customers who have migrated to wireless voice, for example, the wireless company that they have chosen offers adequate voice services regardless of the limitation of battery issues and locational (911) accuracy. As Verizon points out, seventy percent of all 911 calls now originate from a cell phone. For the above reasons we decline to adopt the position of the opposing Parties that cable and wireless telephony should be excluded from consideration as a “like” or “substitute” for basic local exchange service on the basis of safety and reliability characteristics. 5. Service Quality and Fiber Deployment a. Positions of the Parties i. Verizon Verizon avers that service quality should be a function of market forces and customer expectations rather than regulatory requirements. Tr. at 37-38. Verizon asserts that opposing Parties have failed to demonstrate that the standards they have submitted into the record to judge Verizon’s performance are meaningful to actual customers in today’s market. Verizon argues that the declining rate of customer complaints indicates that it is meeting customer expectations. Further, Verizon notes that if customers are not satisfied with Verizon’s service, they are free to choose another provider of telecommunications service. Verizon R.B. at 14. Also in rebuttal testimony, and in the context of explaining a reference to the rationale of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Council concerning a similar proceeding, Verizon’s witness stated “other parties essentially argue that bundles and