Let's focus for a moment on the consumers, rather than the producers,
of "standards".  A standard has value to them to the extent that it
helps them create lasting value.  That implies it must be complete,
available, at a reasonable cost, and last for a reasonable length of
time.  If a "standard" is secret, or costly to find out, it's much
less valuable to standards consumers.  If it has great holes that cost
those consumers a lot to fill in, or where they make (different)
guesses, it loses value.  Every time the "standard" changes, the
"standards consumers" must do a lot of expensive work to upgrade their
products.  A "standard" defined, and modified, by your competitor
based on *his* economic interest, is likely to be much less desirable
than one modified only by consensus of its consumers.