Sentence Correction

I am having problems identifying the correct pattern of comparatives. To top it all the ellipsis is making it more difficult. In some cases the comparison is considered illogical and demands that we state the proper verbs and pronouns to demarcate the comparison between the quantities and in some cases, the verb is omitted for concision.

Please help
-identify the patterns there are , if any, to comparatives
-case where ellipsis is valid.

Consider the following example for ellipsis

The Dancing Doll Line sold slightly more than $3.5 million worth of toys last year, forty percent more than the Teeny Toys and nearly three times more than the Basic Blocks line.

This sentence is missing a verb (did/sold) which is claimed to be understood.
However, I believe the lack of the verb creates the possibility of an illogical comparison ( where Dancing line sold more toys than the teeny toys and basic toys.
Please point out why this is not so,Is it because The scond part forms a modifier and the toys companies have the definate article "the" before them.


Another one. Q93. O.G12
Heating oil prices are expected to be higher this year than last.

What is the ellipsis here - just the word (year) or than..(they were)..last (year).

In the above sentence we do not complain about any clarity issues.

Look at this sentence
Balding is more common among X than among Y.

here if we omit the second preposition, then the sentence is said to have an illogical comparison
Balding is more common among X than Y.
-Here the justification is that we comparing the incidence of both balding and y in X which was not intended.

SO my question is WHY DOESN'T THE SAME PROBLEM ARISE IN ELLIPSIS?

Is there pattern to the comparatives which decides whether we need to mention the verb etc.

Eg.
type 1.
They generally employ more employees than DO other businesses.

Noun verb noun -comparative- verb noun.

In the above case if we do not mention the comparison we may have portend the wrong meaning that "they" employ more workers than they employ other businesses.

DOES the ambiguity arise when the logic is not flouted in both meanings? ( however this is not so in the balding example)

type 2.
Balding is more common among X than among Y
noun verb -comparative- prep noun1 and prep noun2

Some employees are more concerned about X than about Y.

type 3.
The productivity of x is higher than that of y.
noun(attribute etc.) prep of noun1 than Pronoun attribute of y.

Protein in rice is higher than that in wheat.

In 1982, the median income for married couples families with a wage earning wife was $ 900 more than that of families in which on the husband was employeed.

The above sentence again forms the pattern3.

Last year, Land values in most part of pinelands rose almost as fast as, and in some parts even faster than, those outside pineland.

Land values (att) in (prep) pinelands (noun) -comparative- those(pronoun) outside(prep) pineland(noun)



However look at the following two sentences, their comparisons are hard to tell while selecting

Telephone companies would enable customers to receive internet data over regular telephone lines at speeds much higher than are currently possible
-this does not seem parallel, though it is correct.


INCORRECT-
In Holland, a larger percentage of the gross national product is spent on defense of their coasts from rising
seas than is spent on military defense in the United States.
OE states-A states confusedly that Holland spends a percentage of its
gross national product on military defense in the United States
Correct-
Holland spends a larger percentage of its gross national product on defending its coasts from rising
seas than the United States does on military defense.

Summarizing the above in simple terms my doubt it -

How do we tell when there is a illogical meaning being portrayed, and when do we tell than ellipsis is correct or required?


One last thing
Og 12 Pg 718 Q66. The official Explanation says : "as big as" is idiomatically incorrect, however it frequently uses the construction "as many as". Please explain this contradiction.