Thanks Jason. Nice challenge!

I'm happy to go with sugar analogy, so long as we include the way that industry (sugar/processed foods) has added it whenever and wherever it could (and shouldn't have):

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/diet/9160114/The-bitter-…

But back to the dysfunctional research supply chain...are things getting better? Well the CFA Institute is writing about the situation, so definitely that's a healthy sign!

And in practice? Take the investor debacle over Tesco. All the signs of a preventable surprise and once again, investors rewarding executives for doing the wrong thing. And on this occasion one brave sell side analyst team even stuck their neck out. But to no avail - the noise of the consensus was overwhelming:

http://www.ipe.com/analysis/long-term-matters/long-term-matters-lost-on…

So knowing all we know, with long-term/responsible investors apparently accounting for over 50% of the market, are investment firms learning and getting out in front? For example, supporting unbundling so that we can have rational research markets? You'd think firms that know how to value everything in the corporate world would know how to value research, no?

Well, in the EU, many firms are fighting a rear guard action under the cloak of trade bodies:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/22bc844c-1d74-11e5-aa5a-398b2169cf79.html

And in the US, unbundling is not really on the agenda, presumably because the regulators know what's "possible".

I'd be interested to hear from others too.