No NEW Journals - why not?

Page 28 of 36 (701 items) « First ... < Previous 26 27 28 29 30 Next > ... Last »
This post has 700 Replies | 24 Followers

Posts 376
Danny Parker | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 8:36 AM

Let's see.Confused  What to pick? What to pick? I can get journals without extensive tags. Or .... I don't get journals at all.  I know! Let's get journals without extensive tags. No brainer.

Posts 9964
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 8:41 AM

Randy W. Sims:

Correct. Full text search would still work, but no special tagging that would bring it up in guides, etc. I'm in the minority with you. I want the journals complete with tagging and on time without the prepub process and discount. It just needs to be done. It just doesn't seem like it's good for FL or anyone for it not to be made available, timely, whatever the cost. 

Ditto.  Though apparently there's 2 different groups. Plus, if you don't tag, the next 30 years of single issue sales are in question.

My recommend would be:

- Crank the prepub price up, but split the offerings (more affordable). 

- Early tag, if the above stablizes demand.

If not, I assume ATLAS is the answer.


Posts 508
Bobby Terhune | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 10:06 AM

Phil,

I want complete tagging in ALL my journals, so all my features work as expected. I don't want two tiers of Journals, tagged and untagged. Galaxie had problems with their "Pearl" scripts, and using Galaxie files we would lose Subject and Author tagging, as well as integration into the sermon guide. 

Logos tagging is what make Logos stand head and shoulders above the others. But I would like to add that in every business there are some products that are sold at a lower profit margin. Profit is not a dirty work, but in the case of journals can we have a rethink on the part of the Logos team about this issue? I remember days when Logos produced certain title's just because they should be produced. maybe getting the costs covered by base packaging the journals would work like it does for some other slow moving prepubs that should be produced.

A number of people got addicted to the pricing model that Galaxie created, and I don't have a solution for that. And Increasing the quality has impacted significantly the cost involved. Journals were popular or so I believed, but every go round on the journal offerings has been a slow drag to completion. Is there just not enough interest in it? 

Once we got the Galaxie backlog tagged will the pricing model be more affordable and sustainable?

Posts 619
Michael S. | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 10:48 AM

Denise:
If not, I assume ATLAS is the answer.

Can you explain this?  What is ATLAS?

Posts 619
Michael S. | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 10:57 AM

Danny Parker:

Let's see.Confused  What to pick? What to pick? I can get journals without extensive tags. Or .... I don't get journals at all.  I know! Let's get journals without extensive tags. No brainer.

I agree... I am tired to having outdated journals when I get them.  But beside this, how much of a price difference is there between current offerings (with full tagging) and if they release them without the tagging?

Posts 9964
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 12:35 PM

Michael S.:

Denise:
If not, I assume ATLAS is the answer.

Can you explain this?  What is ATLAS?

Easiest to see it relative to Logos:

https://www.google.com/search?q=site:community.logos.com%20atlas%20journals 


Posts 4744
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 1:30 PM

Danny Parker:
No brainer.

This phrase has always tickled me.

"You keep using that phrase...I do not think it means what you think it means."

Posts 13212
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 1:48 PM

Phil Gons (Faithlife):

Mark Smith:
Agreed, but that didn't seem to be the case for Galaxie. What's the difference?

Cost. Galaxie produced their journals mainly using scripts to convert Word documents into Logos resources. We spend significantly more building and tagging our journals, which is what enables richer functionality with the journal labeling markup for label searching and the Journals guide section.

We've discussed delivering the Galaxie journals at a lower standard of tagging and functionality, which would mean they wouldn't work with the Journals guide section and label searching (in addition to other features enabled by advanced tagging). If we did that, we'd probably have sufficient funding to ship them now, though I'd have to double-check to be sure. Would you prefer that to waiting for funding to be reached to produce full Logos editions?

I think a big part of the problem here is that Faithlife have gone for quantity over quality. A large number of the journals offered are not especially valuable academically — but the weaker journals cost the same to produce as the good ones. The solution to a slow pre-pub is therefore not to reduce the quality even further (by automating the tagging) but to reduce the quantity by eliminating the journals that few have heard of and are rarely cited.

Posts 9043
Forum MVP
Mark Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 2:06 PM

Mark Barnes:
but to reduce the quantity by eliminating the journals that few have heard of and are rarely cited.

With that I agree. How FL determines which ones to cut is another question. My flower is your weed, but we'd probably agree on a number of them. Perhaps a search of the Logos catalog for citations would reveal the candidates to cut.

I've been content with those in the Theology Journal bundle but have decided to order the pre-pub for the Galaxie title of the same name. JETS is there and what is in Logos' Theology Journal bundle, so I'm content. My price is $63.  If FL can completely tag those journals for that price you can put me down for an annual subscription.

We need timely and well-tagged journals, but not all the journals FL currently offers.

Pastor, North Park Baptist Church

Bridgeport, CT USA

Posts 4744
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 3:17 PM

Mark Smith:

Mark Barnes:
but to reduce the quantity by eliminating the journals that few have heard of and are rarely cited.

With that I agree. How FL determines which ones to cut is another question. My flower is your weed, but we'd probably agree on a number of them. Perhaps a search of the Logos catalog for citations would reveal the candidates to cut.

I second (third?) this point. And I have championed using Logos references/citations as the measuring stick for years (with no influence, as far as I can tell). The journals I keep banging the drum for are on my list precisely because I keep encountering them over and over again.

I get it...the least requested and useful journals are probably the ones most easy to acquire. They are also practically worthless. Of the Galaxie titles, perhaps 4-5 have legit utility, but they come as package. I get it. But with all the rest, being more picky and making room for FREQUENTLY CITED journals is the way to go.

Posts 1922
Mark | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 3:46 PM

Phil and Ben

You have a number of brainstormed ideas in this thread these past few days.  Can we get a reaction? Are you listening?  Would it help to set up a video call with some on this thread who you believe have offered some good solutions to help move things along?  It seems to me, there are ways forward.  What it not apparent to me is that there is an interest in moving forward on the part of FL. 

Posts 1908
Nathan Parker | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 5:30 PM

Michael S.:

Nathan Parker:
The tagging/guide access is an OK plus, but honestly, I don't heavily use them with the journals. I've gotten to the point where I run my own custom searches against the journals using the stock Logos search operators (since I was doing that before you offered the tagging/guide access), and I can personally just as easily find what I need using those searches than I can with the guides or special tagging (in some instances, I can find what I need faster using this approach anyway).

Hey Nathan, I have questions about this. By "tagging" does that mean if I do a Search in "All Resources" or "Journal Collection", if it is not "tagged", I wont get search results?

On the specific tagging, this allowed the journals to appear in the Journals section in the guides, as well as use the {Label: Journal Article} search operators in Logos.

Since I jumped on the Galaxie TJL in Logos bandwagon before the new journal bundles came along (I have the latest bundles as well), I already setup my own "workflow" with working with journals before the specific tagging came along. I honestly seldom use the Journals section of the guides or the {Label: Journal Article} tag, since I can generally find what I need with the existing search syntax and features in Logos.

Here's how I work with journals in Logos:

1. I generally run a heading:searchtermhere OR largetext:searchtermhere when I need to locate a major subject.

Example: heading:"spiritual death" OR largetext:"spiritual death"

2. I generally run a <Bible = Verse Reference> or a <Bible ~ Verse Reference> to locate a Bible passage, although I generally combine either <Bible = Verse Reference> or <Bible ~ Verse Reference> with NEAR searchtermhere. If NEAR doesn't work well, I can use WITHIN x WORDS to be more precise.

Example: <Bible = Genesis 2:17> NEAR death

3. I also created a collection of all my journals (everything in my library with type:Journal. If there are some resources you want that contain articles but aren't using the type:Journal, you can tag them as Journal and include AND mytag:Journal). I added the ability for this collection to be searched in the guides, so it still allows me to search journals from the guides, even without the additional tagging.

 

Nathan Parker

Posts 1908
Nathan Parker | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 5:31 PM

Mark:

Thank you, Phil, for your response.

Phil Gons (Faithlife):
We don't have a dedicated team for journals. The team who handles journals is the same team that managing our Community Pricing, Pre-Publication, and Pre-Order programs. This is just one small area that fits into the Logos line of business.

This is an interesting response

According to this forum thread, on August 15, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Ben wrote the following:

Ben Amundgaard (Faithlife):
We are still working on this project. I'm sorry it keeps getting pushed back. However, we now have one person who will own the project going forward, which means it won't have to fight for the attention of multiple stakeholders.


This would seem to indicate that someone has been assigned by you and Ben to own the project.  I guess from your post, that is no longer the case?

Everything that has been written seems to indicate that this project is dead and FL does not have any interest in it unless it receives pre-pub funds to move forward.

My last question which I think has been alluded to already by others...why does this project have to be part of the pre-pub process?  Not everything passes through the pre-pub process.  Why is this project going that route? 

This concerns me as well.

Nathan Parker

Posts 20
David Bailey | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 9:11 PM

Hey Faithlife,

Take a straw poll with your customers on what grade of journals they want - fully tagged (the works) or semi-tagged (good o'l Galaxie quest days), or no special tagging (Ebook standard), or no tagging at all.  What do each of the categories mean really?

Stick out tongue  

Posts 292
Charlene | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 11:27 PM

Mark Barnes:
I think a big part of the problem here is that Faithlife have gone for quantity over quality. A large number of the journals offered are not especially valuable academically — but the weaker journals cost the same to produce as the good ones. The solution to a slow pre-pub is therefore not to reduce the quality even further (by automating the tagging) but to reduce the quantity by eliminating the journals that few have heard of and are rarely cited.

Bravo, Mark! That is such a crucial point! I totally agree!

Posts 1788
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 11:28 PM

Thanks to all of you for your feedback and passion for Logos and journals. We're far from giving up on journals. Costs are our biggest obstacle, and we're exploring some ways to make them more manageable. Journals are especially challenging, because they're dense, long, technical, and require special tagging. Yet they're also the lowest priced category of resource we sell, by a long shot. The average journal resource (which is often 3 or 4 journal issues) can be 800–1,000 pages. Yet the average price per journal resource is $.50/$1 (depending on which bundle you buy)! As you can see, these factors add up to make producing journals a challenge:

  • a massive category with a nearly limitless number of journals
  • significant diversity of needs and desires from customers
  • one of our most expensive categories of resources to produce
  • among the longest, densest, and most technical resources we produce
  • the lowest price per resource and per page of any resources we produce
  • a smaller niche audience compared to other categories

The easiest way to make things work is through volume, and right now we're not driving enough volume for the numbers to pencil out. So we need to get creative and experiment with pulling some different levers.

We definitely want to keep working, in conversation with you all, to find the right solutions that offer

  • the right set of journals
  • in the right configurations
  • with the right level of tagging and functionality
  • at the right price points
  • available via the right options (purchase vs. ownership subscription vs. access subscription)
  • at the right frequency
  • in a timely manner
  • at a cost that's manageable
  • with financial backing that's sustainable

Many of these ideals are in tension with each other, so we'll have to continue to experiment to find the right set of compromises that work for the most people.

What I'd like to ask is that you give us at least few weeks to engage more fully in this conversation. We're in an exceptionally busy season right now, and several of us will be out of the office soon for ETS/SBL and then be out for Thanksgiving. So the soonest we could give this issue any serious consideration would be the final week of November.

I'm open to hosting a video chat with those who wish you participate in late November or early December. Can we agree on that as a good next step?

Posts 292
Charlene | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 11:36 PM

Thanks, Phil. I think it is a step in the right direction, since something has to be done. We appreciate you listening, and look forward to the "hopefully soon" solution. May the Lord bless you in your work and give you all strength, especially in the next few weeks, as it is so busy.

Posts 1788
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Oct 24 2018 11:48 PM

Mark:

Thank you, Phil, for your response.

Phil Gons (Faithlife):
We don't have a dedicated team for journals. The team who handles journals is the same team that managing our Community Pricing, Pre-Publication, and Pre-Order programs. This is just one small area that fits into the Logos line of business.

This is an interesting response

According to this forum thread, on August 15, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Ben wrote the following:

Ben Amundgaard (Faithlife):
We are still working on this project. I'm sorry it keeps getting pushed back. However, we now have one person who will own the project going forward, which means it won't have to fight for the attention of multiple stakeholders.


This would seem to indicate that someone has been assigned by you and Ben to own the project.  I guess from your post, that is no longer the case?

Everything that has been written seems to indicate that this project is dead and FL does not have any interest in it unless it receives pre-pub funds to move forward.

My last question which I think has been alluded to already by others...why does this project have to be part of the pre-pub process?  Not everything passes through the pre-pub process.  Why is this project going that route? 

Ben's point is that when we're actively working on researching, posting, shipping journal bundles, there's a single person who takes the lead and is the expert. But that person works on many other things between posting and shipping the journal bundles.

My point is that we don't have a dedicated team (or even person) whose full-time job is to manage our journal products. It's one of his many responsibilities, and there are often periods of inactivity while we wait for pre-orders or production or acquisition.

Mark:
why does this project have to be part of the pre-pub process?  Not everything passes through the pre-pub process.  Why is this project going that route?

Pre-Pub was designed to help us stay profitable, and staying profitable is how we stay in business and serve you all. It eliminates most of the risks with the traditional publishing model of publishing, marketing, and hoping for the best.

We're doing more projects outside of the Pre-Pub system these days. Our original content from Lexham and Mobile Ed doesn't secure funding before the content is commissioned, created, and produced. But this is more predictable and lower risk, since most of these projects are fairly similar in audience, size, and cost. We're also doing more through our Pre-Order program, where we're not waiting for funding. But in each of these cases, we move ahead because we're relatively confident in our ability to project a return on investment in the near future, which is easier to do since each of these projects is significantly smaller than our journal bundles.

We were hoping to be able to take this same approach with journals. In fact, the last journal bundles we shipped we did treat as pre-orders and put them into production before they were funded. But the gap between our costs and the total funding was significant enough to where we didn't consider it wise to repeat that.

Posts 13212
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Oct 25 2018 12:13 AM

Hi Phil,

Better understanding between Faithlife and customers would be a great next step. If you ask us in isolation we’re likely to say that we want it all, now, and preferably for free! But if that’s not realistic, talking to us about what our priorities really are could be s big help (though obviously you’ll get lots of different answers to that question).

Posts 482
John Duffy | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Oct 25 2018 1:05 AM

Phil Gons (Faithlife):

We definitely want to keep working, in conversation with you all, to find the right solutions that offer

  • the right set of journals
  • in the right configurations
  • with the right level of tagging and functionality
  • at the right price points
  • available via the right options (purchase vs. ownership subscription vs. access subscription)
  • at the right frequency
  • in a timely manner
  • at a cost that's manageable
  • with financial backing that's sustainable

Many of these ideals are in tension with each other, so we'll have to continue to experiment to find the right set of compromises that work for the most people.

Phil Gons (Faithlife):
We were hoping to be able to take this same approach with journals. In fact, the last journal bundles we shipped we did treat as pre-orders and put them into production before they were funded. But the gap between our costs and the total funding was significant enough to where we didn't consider it wise to repeat that.

Hi Phil, thanks for your feedback which helps us understand the situation better.

Mark's suggestion of providing a subset of the most cited journals would gather sufficient financial backing to quickly make it through the pre-pub process. Other journals could also be offered for pre-pub in groups depending on how often they are cited. That would result in the most popular journals making it through they system more quickly and make most people mostly happy.

But for those journals that don't make it through the pre-pub process, either in a timely manner (or not at all over time), it seems undesirable for them to never be made available. To address that, how about a two-tier process? That is, have all journals released without tagging (or a bare minimum of tagging) at a reduced cost, as soon as they are available, possibly on a subscription basis? At the same time, put them into the pre-pub process for full tagging, prioritised as Mark has suggested? That would provide the basic content of journals quickly, while allowing time for the pre-pub process to run its normal course for the more expensive full tagging. 

Page 28 of 36 (701 items) « First ... < Previous 26 27 28 29 30 Next > ... Last » | RSS