@Mitch Any mistakes on them will damage the Universities' Reputation and thence Financial position. Much more so that Merriam-Webster.

@GeorgeNtoulos Much more so than MW? I don't see how one is more likely to be swayed by perceived quality than the other. Anyway, that's idle speculation, and I've already told you that the actual reputation of M-W is much better than the Cambridge dictionary.

@Mitch I am talking about the incentives to be diligent and carefull. MW only publishes reference books and dictionaries. It is a smaller company(even if the particular dictionary is more reputable has better reputation). Cambridge has much more at stake. If MW screws up with its dictionaries it will not harm them as much financially as it will harm Cambridge University. You can be sure that the employeer the boss of the lexicographers will affect the dictionary. Not just the lexicographers.

@Mitch if Cambridge or Oxford screw up with their dictionaries it will affect the Universities as a whole.

@GeorgeNtoulos OK fine, let's debate (since you won't accept my statement at face value). MW is -only- a dictionary company so their reputation lies -entirely- on the quality of their definitions, whereas Cambridge -and- Oxford have the quality of their dictionaries diluted by the rest of their non-dictionary enterprises.

@Mitch So MW is a smaller company that depends more on its dictionaries. Oxford and Cambridge have the size to distribute the larger blow. Like the way pressure is divided by the area the prepenticular force is applied to. The effect(the damage incurred in case of a mistake) should be a ratio.