It seems that this set is slow to move in community pricing.. Wonder why?
http://www.logos.com/product/8522#005
I've been looking forward to it for months. It's a sensational price for a number of commentaries which are incredibly important historically (a couple of them have been influential to the point of formative), and which are still the subject of extensive study today.
Elliott is a particular case in point. I would pay that amount of money for Elliott alone. His work comes in four volumes, and individual volumes cost at least US$30 each as paperback reprints; that's US$120 just for Elliott.
Blair
Since it has moved to Comm. Bids- it will take considerably longer to get into L4- many people will bid low, so it will take a long while to reach the publishing cost.
Just keep the set alive in the general forum encourage everyone to bid.
Blair Since it has moved to Comm. Bids- it will take considerably longer to get into L4- many people will bid low, so it will take a long while to reach the publishing cost. Just keep the set alive in the general forum encourage everyone to bid.
Classic Commentaries and Studies on Revelation (27 vols.)
It is (about) 5% at $50 15% at $100 18% at $160
Want it but cannot afford the price of $160 then bid what you can afford (say $60 $2/vol)
Someone stated that 1 bid at $10,000 or 10,000 bids at $1 would get something into production.
(The cost of production for this set is most likely much higher than that example)
Others have stated that the $160 price is stealing it (sets within it are worth $150 to $300 each)
The current going price of $160 was set by some very high bidders
– want it lower? Than bid lower but bid.
It seems that this set is slow to move in community pricing.. Wonder why? http://www.logos.com/product/8522#005
Probably because these are for the most part, shall I say, "forgotten works"? Most of these are not much referenced in today's scholarship. Bousset is sometimes mentioned (I would like to see his commentary on Revelation, but I know of no English translation and doubt that they will publish it in German). Moses Stuart is also occasionally mentioned, but other than those two they are little regarded.
They're not much regarded in theological studies, but they're very useful for historical studies.
http://community.logos.com/forums/p/30111/222729.aspx#222729
Please see the thread 'Your Bid" - has been talking about the subject of this thread
In the 'other thread' the call has gone out for everyone to drop their bid to $80 - and hope that all the others that want this set will 'come out of the woodwork and bid' and get many many many bids at that level [and YES, the set is 'worth' more but at the higher price too few are willing to pay] [I want this set but 80 is the most my budget can take - sorry]
i bid $10
And if you can't afford $80, or don't think it's worth that much to you, then bid $10 or $20 or $30 or $50. Bid whatever you like. If enough people bid $10, then you'll get it for $10, but if everyone who thinks $160 is far too much gives up in advance and don't bid at all, well, then it'll go for $160, and you lose out.
A thought just struck me when I wrote this: could it be that people who haven't read up on CP believe it works like an auction? That bids only go up and never down? That once it's passed $10 or $50 it's too late to get it at that price? That would certainly explain why so few bother to bid at all if they find the current price too high!
I am in at $50. I refuse to pay exorbitant prices for books that are in public domain. I only pay exorbitant prices for books that are still copyrighted.[:)]
The margin of difference between $160 and $50 is razor thin. [:)] There is hope! Please place your bid at $50. Thanks
I'm still in at $50 but am willing to go LOWER if necessary. [:D]
... been in at $50 for a while ... hoping that a few more people jump on the $50 price. Sets usually go for less than the bidding price anyway, as everyone jumps on during the last few days of bidding.
Its temping to bully someone random on the street to sign up and bid $50 for this set.
I'd rather pay $50 twice to get this set, than $160 once!
Beside, I'm guessing we will get it for $30 about 3 weeks after the low peak takes over and shows the lower price. Lets see if that comes true.
If everyone who is at $50 now doubled their bid to $100, it would go over the top immediately. How do I figure this? The dot at $100 is 40% of cost. All those people who bid $100 or more are also included in the $50 dot, so that means half as much (20%) of the cost would be covered by that many people if they only paid 50. Since the dot at 50 is at 50% now, that means 30% of the cost (the difference between 50 and 20) is covered by the people who bid only $50 but no higher. So if those people doubled their bids to $100, they would cover 60% of the cost (twice 30%) which would make up the difference between the 40% that the current $100 bidders are covering and 100%.
EDIT: Another thought. The dot at 160 is at 55%, which is 15% higher than the dot at 100. So that means 15% more of the cost is being covered by people who are willing to pay $160. If we could get the dot at 100 to go up to more than 55%, then it would be higher than the $160 dot and $100 would be the new price. Much more accessible (though we'd still have work to do). This might be a better goal to try for than getting the dot at 50 to surpass the one at 160.
Here's how to do this easier task. Instead of getting the dot at 100 to go up 60% more (by all of the $50 bidders doubling their bids), if all we have to do is make it go up 15% more, then only a quarter of the bidders who are at $50 need to double their bids. What if a bunch of us tried it now, just temporarily, to see how much we could make the $100 dot move? Can always put it back down to $50 after a week or so if it doesn't seem to have enough of an effect to make a difference.
doubled their bid to $100,
Never gonna happen here... Even at $50, not sure I WANT to afford it.
doubled their bid to $100, Never gonna happen here... Even at $50, not sure I WANT to afford it.
Same here. I moved my bid up $50 so that it can get into production. I will not pay $50 for this set because it is not worth $50.
$30 is the most that I am willing to pay for this set. For me, it is not the page count that so many people are claiming that make this a good deal, but what is written on the pages. Because these are,as George said, "forgotten works," I do not see why people are so willing to pay so much money for so very little content.
Probably because these are for the most part, shall I say, "forgotten works"? Most of these are not much referenced in today's scholarship.
Perhaps none of these are referenced because many of today's scholars are restricting their perspectives to their contemporaies; perhaps to the extent of never reading older commentaries unless they have been referenced recently be someone else ? I would find it much more credible if today's scholars were able to quote from those whom previous generations thought the best scholars, and successfully challenge their comments. Ignoring them does not mean they have been discredited; it merely means they have not be looked at, often bypassed in the name of contemporary expediency.
Revelation spoke well to many earlier generations. It can be a revelation to modern scholars to read how earlier generations who had experienced for themselves the horrors of the Civil War, or World War One or even the earthquake and tsunami that devastated Lisbon subsequently viewed the texts of the Revelation to John. Modern scholars can rarely bring such insights to their work if they ignore the impact of the entirity of works published before they were born.
Review and critique by all means, and reject those that are less than adequate: but totally avoid reading because of the date of publication is less than scholarly in my view.
Elliot is no longer referenced because the prophetic scheme he represents (historicism) is no longer held. But his work on the history of prophetic interpretation, from the early church through the medieval period to his own time, is still relevant, as is his discussion of preterism, millennial views, and the dating of the book (see http://community.logos.com/forums/t/47104.aspx). At the very least, if one wants to understand what was the standard prophetic interpretation of Revelation by Protestants for centuries (from the Reformers to the end of the nineteenth century, then for reasons of historical theology alone this work is very important.
Hort is still very important for his defense of the early date of Revelation. Bousset is still very important for his comparative Ancient Near Eastern approach which is still cited in the literature.
The other writings too may offer insights that have since been lost. Scholarship goes in trajectories, and just because something is old does not necessarily mean it is no longer relevant.
