Here is a slightly more concise explanation.


Let's say there are two inputs:


1) the original inputs, meaning asymmetric information, and asymmetric friction/access/leaning ability, and

2) expertise to build those inputs into an output - with which you buy more inputs, and create surplus value.


I say, you are swelling number 2, to compensate for a vacuum of number 1. Meaning, as it is today, it is easier for a shop to spend money and purchase number 2 outright. So, for every unit of number 1 you can't buy - and because your process results in number 1 dissipating and becoming symmetric as fast as you can take it in - you substitute two units of number 2.


There is more friction to another firm hiring your experts, than to them simply enjoying your information, implicit in the prices at which clients-in-common are willing to transact. So you maximize your accumulated investment in the high point or concentration that flows downhill less easily - meaning expertise or flesh.


So you let number 1 go, when I say you could reestablish friction. At the same time, because of this, I say the total quantity of number 1 in the system - symmetric or asymmetric - is going down. Meaning, because it creates little advantage, you don't pull the coordination information into the system in the first place. So you sort of have this information communism where, unpaid, nobody is producing any at the source. And that which is produced is at the maximum labor cost. Moreover, that high cost is only covered because the first incremental units of anything are way out front of the diminishing-marginal-returns frontier.


So, you have to bust this information communism - this free-flow of quotes - and you'll and up with more information for your experts to work with. Meaning, the whole process should be geared towards incentivizing clients to put more asymmetric information in the hands of your experts, cheaper. And this can be accomplished through better, automated private-property controls and exchange mechanisms in information, both between firms and clients, and even between parties within firms.


As it is, you are constructing something asymmetric, to buy something symmetric. You're not recyling your outputs into more inputs as efficiently as you could, so you keep having to, like, go to the well, and replenish. And I can hardly expect you to disagree with me, when I speak in such broad, abstract, generalities! Heck, it's so general, you just might agree with me end-to-end!


eLROY