May I ask which specific results lead you to that conclusion?
I'm also curious and somewhat skeptical about arbitration business being truly impartial or even favoring consumers. In case of banking, it's the big banks that mandate the use of arbitration, and the banks pay for their services -- i.e. the banks are de facto customers of the arbitration business. Then what incentives do any arbitrators have to rule against the side that pays their bills? If there are such hidden incentives, then why JAMS would have more of them than AAA?