It's time for a horizontal base package comparison

With an increasing number of base packages, it's time for a 'horizontal' comparison, in addition to the current 'vertical' one. By this I mean we need to be able to compare all the Gold Packages, rather than just all the Baptist, or all the Reformed packages. In fact, a horizontal comparison is now probably more useful than a vertical one, because many people will know their budget, but won't necessarily know which package is best.

The labels obviously help, but if you're a reformed baptist in an Anglican church, they don't help much ;-). And the packages are so different from one another that I'm sure many people will end up buying a package that's outside their own tradition simply because it has a few key volumes they want.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Lynden O. Williams

Are you thinking about the way we compare Logos base packages? https://www.logos.com/basepackages#compare

Bruce Dunning

With an increasing number of base packages, it's time for a 'horizontal' comparison, in addition to the current 'vertical' one.

That would be helpful.

Graham Owen

With an increasing number of base packages, it's time for a 'horizontal' comparison,

This is a great point Mark, the new structure of base packages gives the new customer a great range of choice but you are correct that the denominational labels do not guarantee the right package.

Another thing that would be useful would be a base package tag so we can filter our library when showing others what Logos is capable of. After nearly 20 years, and a lot of money, my full library is not really a great way of showing people what they might get. Ideally I would like to be able to show people what they could get and how it might work based on all of the collections that my library is a superset of. So in my case that would be the standard base package up to and including Portfolio and now the Pentecostal and Charismatic up to and including Silver. The tags should reflect what is currently available i.e. exclude the resources that I have that Logos no longer include in the package.

Being able to do this would make demonstrating Logos to others a lot easier avoiding the need to explain that "you would not get all of this" which is a pretty negative sales message.

With the release of the Pentecostal and Charismatic base packages this will be more of an issue for me as when I am facilitating at our training centre it would be really nice to say here is Logos, it is great, it has a package that is designed for us and this is what it looks like!

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617669#Comment_617669

Are you thinking about the way we compare Logos base packages? https://www.logos.com/basepackages#compare

Yes. Exactly the same mechanic, but the comparison would be between all the 'gold' packages (for example), rather than all the 'baptist' packages.

Toby Steele (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617713#Comment_617713

Mark, I've passed your suggestion along to the developers. Thanks!

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617805#Comment_617805

I would like to see this too Similar to the omnibus page on the spreadsheet thats community maintained. Except with only L5 offerings.

Phil Gons (Logos)

We're working on a comparison engine that should allow you to compare (just about) any group of products you want. We're not prepared to give a time frame for when it will be ready, but it's definitely something we'd like to bring to the site now that we have so many different families of packages.

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617689#Comment_617689

So in my case that would be the standard base package up to and including Portfolio and now the Pentecostal and Charismatic up to and including Silver. The tags should reflect what is currently available

Phil, any chance of putting Graham idea into practice.

Open my library ( and Logos gives me the option to sort via base package) and not a collection that I have put together.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617828#Comment_617828

Phil, any chance of putting Graham idea into practice.

This could be done relatively easily through community tags. Perhaps an intern could write a script which added the tags as appropriate.

Phil Gons (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617830#Comment_617830

I've got the team looking into creating Logos collection files for every collection we sell. We'd probably use a Faithlife group to deliver them to people who are interested in having them. It should be something we can automate and generate from the collection resource IDs.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617834#Comment_617834

Thats a great idea thanks Phil!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617834#Comment_617834

We'd probably use a Faithlife group to deliver them

Then please consider doing this at the same time: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/88092/617819.aspx#617819

Phil Gons (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/617867#Comment_617867

We'd probably use a Faithlife group to deliver them

Then please consider doing this at the same time: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/88092/617819.aspx#617819

Thanks for the suggestion. We'll consider it. It fits pretty well with some of the things we have planned.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/619908#Comment_619908

If you do a horizontal base package comparison, you'll have to 'fess up to having Verbum packages ... it's already an annoyance to have the Eastern Rites (similar to Orthodox) and the Anglican Usage (similar to Anglican) and the wish-there-was-a-Lutheran-usage (similar to high Lutheran) materials segregated.