Incentive to Optimize Value of LN Lost

With the advent of the annual payment plan and the elimination of the monthly option the incentive for innovating at a regular rate has been affected. The possibility of loss of monthly subscribers was inducement to keep the pipeline regularly primed with features and previews that held the subscribers interest.

I know its early in the year yet but my concern is borne out since the introduction of the change in the annual plan and its effect on the preview items. I am concerned that future features will suffer a like reduction in quality.To be fair and encourage diligence FL should offer a refund if subscribers are dissatisfied with the quality of Logos Now offerings over time during the term of the subscription.

Concerned subscriber

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

PetahChristian

FL reversed course for the time being and LN monthly subscriptions are still available for now. I imagine they'll eventually disappear again.

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/878865#Comment_878865

FL reversed course for the time being and LN monthly subscriptions are still available for now. I imagine they'll eventually disappear again.

Thanks for the info PC. Have they offered an opt out for the yearly subscribers?

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/878869#Comment_878869

Have they offered an opt out for the yearly subscribers?

I don't recall any posts about that. You would probably have to email or call Customer Service and ask. Please let us know what you find out.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/878869#Comment_878869

Beloved, just guessing, but delivering monthly somethings would be a tall-order for any software group. And worse, as you deliver the low-hanging fruit, you need more garaffes available. The equation is self-limiting without major coding expense.

And on the other side of the coin, folks are going to notice they're hooked (fish-wise) ... they don't own their whole Now rent-sequence, as it struggles to deliver progressively less of value.

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/878871#Comment_878871

Beloved, just guessing, but delivering monthly somethings would be a tall-order for any software group

They did a pretty good job of delivering new regular functionality during the 6.0 timeframe - as per https://www.logos.com/now-timeline - it's too early to tell, I suggest, for the 7.0 deliverables..

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/878871#Comment_878871

as it struggles to deliver progressively less of value.

So surprising to hear this coming from you as it implies what is currently available does not need modifications of great value [:P] I actually agree with you that this eventually becomes the case but don't think we're there yet ... at least for historical and liturgical churches.

Michael McLane

The possibility of loss of monthly subscribers was inducement to keep the pipeline regularly primed with features and previews that held the subscribers interest.

I have been wondering about this. Only two preview features in six months? Value would be a concern whether monthly or a yearly subscription.

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883586#Comment_883586

I have been wondering about this. Only two preview features in six months? Value would be a concern whether monthly or a yearly subscription.

Agree. This concern would translate into monthly subscribers opting out. Realizing this FL would be more inclined to respond with increased value. This annual model holds the customer captive.

John Kight

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883759#Comment_883759

I have been wondering about this. Only two preview features in six months? Value would be a concern whether monthly or a yearly subscription.

Agree. This concern would translate into monthly subscribers opting out. Realizing this FL would be more inclined to respond with increased value. This annual model holds the customer captive.

Yes, I, like many others, feel like we have wasted $89 (or more) and are now lock captive to an unknown future. New features every 6 weeks (again) would be nice!

Colin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883764#Comment_883764

New features every 6 weeks (again) would be nice!

Maybe you're more of a power user than me John but I disagree. I think that Logos employees' time would be better spent improving the features we have. I want to get better at using the features I have, and for the features themselves to get better.

For example, recently the NT use of the OT interactive was improved - this made a big difference to something which was minimalistic to say the least.

I don't know if this qualifies as new or an improvement but requests have made to add a systematic theology section to the Factbook. For me, this is a common-sense and surely quite easily implemented feature and I don't understand why we have to even vote on it.

In terms of the value of Logos Now, for me it has brought (overall) a huge discount to my base package purchases. Since I prioritise and save up for those, and buy across denominations for resources I want, Logos Now has paid for itself several times over.

Colin

Timothy Brown

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883764#Comment_883764

Yes, I, like many others, feel like we have wasted $89 (or more) and are now lock captive to an unknown future.

Since a Logos Now subscription is cheaper than buying the Full Feature Set and also has given me extra discounts on libraries, for me it is a bargain, not a waste. I suppose that if I had bought the Full Feature Set, I would feel differently.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883837#Comment_883837

Agreed, definetly not wasted Logos Now is so much more than new feature releases.

Yes, I, like many others, feel like we have wasted $89 (or more) and are now lock captive to an unknown future.

Since a Logos Now subscription is cheaper than buying the Full Feature Set and also has given me extra discounts on libraries, for me it is a bargain, not a waste. I suppose that if I had bought the Full Feature Set, I would feel differently.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/878927#Comment_878927

as it struggles to deliver progressively less of value.

So surprising to hear this coming from you as it implies what is currently available does not need modifications of great value I actually agree with you that this eventually becomes the case but don't think we're there yet ... at least for historical and liturgical churches.

I definitely agree with you ... your last phrase. I know nothing in that area, but it just seems like Logos would really hit the spot there.

But I was speaking to 'normal' users ... who are hard pressed to use existing Logos gee-whiz. I think some recent features hit this target group ... easily collecting word usage across books(s) and connecting resources. NT in the OT type features. The rest is like looking for forest mushrooms.

Erwin Stull, Sr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883837#Comment_883837

Yes, I, like many others, feel like we have wasted $89 (or more) and are now lock captive to an unknown future.

Since a Logos Now subscription is cheaper than buying the Full Feature Set and also has given me extra discounts on libraries, for me it is a bargain, not a waste. I suppose that if I had bought the Full Feature Set, I would feel differently.

I view Logos Now this way as well. I'm not as much interested in new features every six weeks as I am with learning all of the current features in detail. Besides, at some point, I would think that the new features would run out, and a new UI would have to be introduced. This may already be occurring, since the addition of new features has slowed somewhat.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883853#Comment_883853

FaithLife has been listening substantial improvements to old features in the New Features section of version updates. This makes sense, both since what counts as a new feature is somewhat arbitrary and because often improvements to features increase functionality and utility at least as much or more as the original introduction of a 'new' feature does.

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/883846#Comment_883846

Agreed, definetly not wasted Logos Now is so much more than new feature releases.

Yes, I, like many others, feel like we have wasted $89 (or more) and are now lock captive to an unknown future.

Since a Logos Now subscription is cheaper than buying the Full Feature Set and also has given me extra discounts on libraries, for me it is a bargain, not a waste. I suppose that if I had bought the Full Feature Set, I would feel differently.

While I agree LN has not been a waste, my concern is the manner in which LN was introduced. It was marketed as an early access to new features and preview to resources. Although it retains these features, the value reflected in these areas has diminished. The current approach to offer discounts for base packages while not unwelcome was not what I bargained for when I bought in.

My main criticism is that the removal of a monthly subscription takes the ability of the customer to opt in or out if she/he perceives value is not living up to their expectations. As some have consistently observed, FL needs to communicate its intentions better when it decides it needs to make changes to the features it offers.

Justin Gatlin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/884011#Comment_884011

A monthly model is just not feasible when base package discounts are included. Otherwise, everyone would pay $9, get a $200 discount, then cancel. You have to either pick deep discounts or flexibility.

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/884015#Comment_884015

A monthly model is just not feasible when base package discounts are included. Otherwise, everyone would pay $9, get a $200 discount, then cancel. You have to either pick deep discounts or flexibility.

Justin,

This is all true, but when the change in the plan of payment was presented this was not discussed. This is what I object to. If I was presented with the facts on roll out I may have decided as I am oft to do when FL changes things to wait and see what happens first.

Justin Gatlin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/884023#Comment_884023

A monthly model is just not feasible when base package discounts are included. Otherwise, everyone would pay $9, get a $200 discount, then cancel. You have to either pick deep discounts or flexibility.

Justin,

This is all true, but when the change in the plan of payment was presented this was not discussed. This is what I object to. If I was presented with the facts on roll out I may have decided as I am oft to do when FL changes things to wait and see what happens first.

When L7 came out, some of us were still grandfathered onto monthly plans. They probably did not want to draw attention to this exploit.

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/884025#Comment_884025

When L7 came out, some of us were still grandfathered onto monthly plans. They probably did not want to draw attention to this exploit.

Yes, and I was one of them. If FL wanted to keep people from paying $9 to save $200 they could easily carved that out of the monthly subscription and offered it only to the annual subscribers.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/884011#Comment_884011

While I agree LN has not been a waste, my concern is the manner in which LN was introduced. It was marketed as an early access to new features and preview to resources. Although it retains these features, the value reflected in these areas has diminished. The current approach to offer discounts for base packages while not unwelcome was not what I bargained for when I bought in.

My main criticism is that the removal of a monthly subscription takes the ability of the customer to opt in or out if she/he perceives value is not living up to their expectations. As some have consistently observed, FL needs to communicate its intentions better when it decides it needs to make changes to the features it offers.

All interesting points. From the comments, the value is in the discounts. So, let's say that's true. Mathematically, NOW would be a financial disaster (since packagers would buy packages anyway ... though I do neither). And if not financially odd, the equation benefits from non-packagers loving 'the newest' and skipping the packages .. the original thesis.

Of course, all the above is irrelevant, if the packages have overwhelming margin (lots of public domain). In which case, NOW is actually a gateway to more package sales (features as time permits).

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/884043#Comment_884043

All interesting points. From the comments, the value is in the discounts. So, let's say that's true. Mathematically, NOW would be a financial disaster (since packagers would buy packages anyway ... though I do neither). And if not financially odd, the equation benefits from non-packagers loving 'the newest' and skipping the packages .. the original thesis.

Of course, all the above is irrelevant, if the packages have overwhelming margin (lots of public domain). In which case, NOW is actually a gateway to more package sales (features as time permits).

Denise,

The packaging aspect I have benefited from and not for public domain stuff which was also certainly in the deal. I don't want to belabor the point, but for me, in a Wiersbesque manner, FL please Be Unambiguous. When you intend to alter a deal be transparent and offer the customer the opportunity to make an informed decision on changes in fact before the facts are changed. I would have bought the package I bought with or without LN. But I may have balked at spending my $89 had I known what features would be released to LN subscribers by now (no pun intended) and bought the Full Feature Set instead.