The failed-sale-leaseback accounting treatment had the following effects on our consolidated results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017: After factoring in the costs to sell the data centers and colocation business, excluding the impact from the failed-sale-leaseback accounting treatment, the sale resulted in a $20 million gain as a result of the aggregate value of the proceeds we received exceeding the carrying value of the assets sold and liabilities assumed. Based on the fair market values of the failed-sale-leaseback assets, the failed-sale-leaseback accounting treatment resulted in a loss of $102 million as a result of the requirement to treat a certain amount of the pre-tax cash proceeds from the sale of the assets as though it were the result of a financing obligation. The combined net loss of $82 million was included in selling, general and administrative expenses in our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2017. Effective November 3, 2016, which is the date we entered into the agreement to sell a portion of our data centers and colocation business, we ceased recording depreciation of the property, plant and equipment to be sold and amortization of the business’s intangible assets in accordance with applicable accounting rules. Otherwise, we estimate that we would have recorded additional depreciation and amortization expense of $67 million from January 1, 2017 through May 1, 2017. Upon adopting ASU 2016-02, accounting for the failed sale leaseback is no longer applicable based on our facts and circumstances, and the real estate assets and corresponding financing obligation were derecognized from our consolidated financial statements. Please see “Leases” (ASU 2016-02) in Note 1— Background and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies for additional information on the impact the new lease standard will have on the accounting for the failed-sale-leaseback. <table> <tbody> <tr><td></td><td>Positive (Negative) Impact to Net Income</td><td></td></tr> <tr><td></td><td>December 31,</td><td></td></tr> <tr><td></td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td></tr> <tr><td></td><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td></td></tr> <tr><td>Increase in revenue</td><td>$74</td><td>49</td></tr> <tr><td>Decrease in cost of sales</td><td>22</td><td>15</td></tr> <tr><td>Increase in loss on sale of business included in selling, general and administrative expense</td><td>—</td><td>(102)</td></tr> <tr><td>Increase in depreciation expense (one-time)</td><td>—</td><td>(44)</td></tr> <tr><td>Increase in depreciation expense (ongoing)</td><td>(69)</td><td>(47)</td></tr> <tr><td>Increase in interest expense</td><td>(55)</td><td>(39)</td></tr> <tr><td>Decrease in income tax expense</td><td>7</td><td>65</td></tr> <tr><td>Decrease in net income</td><td>$(21)</td><td>(103)</td></tr> </tbody> </table>

Question: Which year would have a larger decrease in the cost of sales if the amount for 2017 is $25 million instead?
Answer: 2017

Question: What would the change in the increase in revenue in 2018 from 2017 be if the amount in 2017 is $54 million?
Answer: 20

Question: What would the average increase in revenue across 2017 and 2018 be if the value for 2017 is $54 million instead?
Answer: 64