Let me give you a couple of use cases where a standard CV would be beneficial to workers.
1. You want to apply to one position but you only have your data on LinkedIn. If you wanna export it, you only have PDF as an option. You can't adapt or update it.
2. Even if you can adapt or update it, if the company or service where you want to apply doesn't support a standard format, you will have to re-enter the data, one by one.
Finally, all this friction discourages some candidates to apply to some positions.
You see a "standard CV" as an oppression tool. I see it as a tool to give control over their data, back to the users.
Now you have to upload the same data to LinkedIn, Angels.co, Hired, and hundreds of other services. With an open standard, you could update your data just once.
We are not robots, we are humans who work to live, and we shouldn't have to build our CV every time we look for that work.
We are negotiating our own SAFE deal (a replacement for Convertible Notes) and VCs told us that average discount rate is 20% but I guess it depends on the team/startup.
It's pretty close to your 24,5% median and it validates your data.
I think you are confusing a CV with a Resume, or you are focusing on the IT niche.
For example, an academic CV needs HOURS of work to elaborate.