A long time ago in a series of Galaxie Journals far, far away...

...there was a gem of a product called 'Theological Journals' that was updated annually. It usually came out about Christmas and was a nice prezzy to dig through over the holidays.

It struggled the last two years with major delays to get published, but it got there in the end, usually about June of the following year.

So, unless I have missed something, there has not been the usual pre pub for this year's instalment in August/September.

Anyone on here know about it? I fear that given the last two years that we are seeing this product die a quiet slow death.

Shame. It was a star and a gem of recent theological thinking that you would have to wait some time to read about in monographs and commentaries. Sad

Things do change and move on. It would be nice to find out what the story is though.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Donovan R. Palmer

bump! One last chance... this isn't looking good folks. Going...going...

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554938#Comment_554938

I'd like to see a TJL Vol. 16 in Pre-Pub. How about it Logos?

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554948#Comment_554948

I'd like to see a TJL Vol. 16 in Pre-Pub. How about it Logos?

[Y] Please ....

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554949#Comment_554949

I just sent an email to Galaxie to see if there's any update from their end. I'll post back as and when there's any reply.

mike

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554950#Comment_554950

I think the question this Christmas should be "would there be a sale soon for Theological Journal 1-15?" [<:o)]

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554952#Comment_554952

I had an almost immediate response from Galaxie, which included the following statement:

No, Logos decided they didn't need me any more. They decided to go directly to the journal editors and try to get the content from each journal editor and create their own journal library. I know many of the editors don't like this and are not going to work directly with Logos, so some of the journals in my "Theological Journal Library" will be available in Logos in the future, and some will not.

Disappointing for those of us who value TJL so much...

Whyndell Grizzard

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554965#Comment_554965

I had an almost immediate response from Galaxie, which included the following statement:

No, Logos decided they didn't need me any more. They decided to go directly to the journal editors and try to get the content from each journal editor and create their own journal library. I know many of the editors don't like this and are not going to work directly with Logos, so some of the journals in my "Theological Journal Library" will be available in Logos in the future, and some will not.

Disappointing for those of us who value TJL so much...

I was hoping this was not the case still- but alas he has started working with WS who just introduced their Journals package, if he updates with them every year may just get theirs. Right they have in their set 857 volumes of 35 different journals, may buy the master volume then do the yearly updates there from now on.

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554965#Comment_554965

I had an almost immediate response from Galaxie, which included the following statement:

No, Logos decided they didn't need me any more. They decided to go directly to the journal editors and try to get the content from each journal editor and create their own journal library. I know many of the editors don't like this and are not going to work directly with Logos, so some of the journals in my "Theological Journal Library" will be available in Logos in the future, and some will not.

Disappointing for those of us who value TJL so much...

Oh dear, oh dear... I was afraid of this. [:(]

Is this a win for journal users? My fear is that we will pay much more for a varied schedule of release and it will be interesting to find out who is disappearing from Logos for good. The Galaxie annual offering was like clockwork, was very good value for money and was extremely useful. I am sure there is more information to be considered in what is going on, but why break something that was working? It seems that this situation got worse and worse, to the point that we are seeing the inevitable happen.

We have seen BAR leave Logos as well.

Well, I have campaigned for the past couple of years for journals. I am glad to see some new entries added in pre pub (sometimes at great expense), but I am sad to see some of the old mainstays that I rely on get the axe. Time to move on I guess...

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554965#Comment_554965

I had an almost immediate response from Galaxie, which included the following statement:

No, Logos decided they didn't need me any more. They decided to go directly to the journal editors and try to get the content from each journal editor and create their own journal library. I know many of the editors don't like this and are not going to work directly with Logos, so some of the journals in my "Theological Journal Library" will be available in Logos in the future, and some will not.

Disappointing for those of us who value TJL so much...

This is a major disappointment - what were Logos thinking - I may now be using WS more often if this is the way I have to get access to this collection of journals.

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554985#Comment_554985

Logos 5 is a great program. But I have always felt the most valuable resource in the program were the theological journals produced by Galaxie. It is a huge blow to see this end. Why touch a good thing that worked well?

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555030#Comment_555030

This is awful news. I am dreadfully disappointed [:'(] WS here I come [U]

Kevin Maples

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555166#Comment_555166

So will the theological journals already in Logos remain available?

https://www.logos.com/product/33619/theological-journal-library-vols-1-15

Beloved Amodeo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555216#Comment_555216

So will the theological journals already in Logos remain available?

No guarantee [:(]

David Bailey

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554977#Comment_554977

The Galaxie annual offering was like clockwork, was very good value for money and was extremely useful. I am sure there is more information to be considered in what is going on, but why break something that was working?

Indeed, this is disappointing news. I also value the journals highly. It has been good value, I agree. Since Logos is a business, perhaps it was not that great in value for them on sales. Glad to know there are alternatives outside of Logos.

David

Jacob Hantla

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554985#Comment_554985

I had an almost immediate response from Galaxie, which included the following statement:

Disappointing for those of us who value TJL so much...

Tragic

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555234#Comment_555234

Tragic

That sums it up well.

What would have been nice is an announcement from Logos that this happening and what their vision is for the future for journals.

Tom Reynolds

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555234#Comment_555234

The Grinch who stole Christmas has returned ?!? I thought he had reformed his ways.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555239#Comment_555239

What would have been nice is an announcement from Logos that this happening

When L4 was released Logos made clear their intent to not use 3rd party content but to pull it all in-house. Their reasoning included quality and update with tagging for new features ... so why the sudden concern 4 years (?) later. And I would take a wait and see approach on the final response of the journal publishers .... academic journal publishing is in such a state of flux currently that I believe next to nothing as true beyond 3 months.[:^)]

So I'm going to enjoy Christmas and not worry about journals until well past the holidays.[:#]

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554952#Comment_554952

I think the question this Christmas should be "would there be a sale soon for Theological Journal 1-15?"

This was on my Christmas wish list too.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555247#Comment_555247

I would take a wait and see approach on the final response of the journal publishers

Me too. I choose to remain optimistic.

So I'm going to enjoy Christmas and not worry about journals until well past the holidays.

Good strategy.

Jerry Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555030#Comment_555030

Logos 5 is a great program. But I have always felt the most valuable resource in the program were the theological journals produced by Galaxie. It is a huge blow to see this end. Why touch a good thing that worked well?

Definitely wait till the New Year and definitely want to see Theological Journals regularly updated as they're essential for study! Would also definitely like to see the Journals coverage expanded with additional offerings!

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555247#Comment_555247

Their reasoning included quality and update with tagging for new features ... so why the sudden concern 4 years (?) later.

OK... well in short response, the multiple threads that have been posted on this subject over the last couple of years raising questions about the future of this product have certainly not been sudden. To my knowledge there has been no definitive answer to these regular (and annual) questions, even in private emails. If at any point anyone wanted to communicate what was going on with TJL or the future of journals in light company strategy, there was ample time to do so. (I may have missed something, but even that has not been part of the response)

So, knowing that there has been a following which was even promoted by Logos at one point, what would have been the harm in saying 'after a good run, we're calling it quits... thanks everyone!'? Product starts and discontinuations are part and parcel with the industry - and quite often there are associated announcements. Until this thread there was no clear information that this product was being discontinued.

Anyhow, is this really issue of sudden interest? I guess I have a different view. Merry Christmas. [:)]

Charlene

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555315#Comment_555315

I'm disappointed too [:(] ...certainly not the Christmas present I wanted.

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555247#Comment_555247

When L4 was released Logos made clear their intent to not use 3rd party content but to pull it all in-house.

My recollection was that it was made clear after L4 was released. It was a great marketing tool for sure to have a program (Libronix) where many publishers can participate...then after building up a base...pull the plug on them all and the customers who liked that approach and go solo.

The theological journals were without doubt the reason for my signing into logos in the first place. And if the only way to get them in the future would be to go to a different program, then for me it is certainly worth the value to do so, even if it means switching between logos and the new program.

Lets hope Logos reconsiders and realizes it is good business to work again with Galaxie..

Everett Headley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555326#Comment_555326

I have sent emails to Bob and Galaxie. Response from Galaxie was talk to Logos, they can't do anything. Bob's responses have been vague and unhelpful. I have not bought the previous version simply because it was on prepub for over six months. IMO it seems this whole situation was a case of not following the "if its not broke, don't fix it" rule.

Into Grace

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555277#Comment_555277

Logos was not making enough profits with Galaxy, so they kicked them to the curb. This happened with Moody. Logos is a monopoly and needs to have a certain percentage of markup to sell a product. That's my opinion.

Bob Pritchett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555336#Comment_555336

Logos was not making enough profits with Galaxy, so they kicked them to the curb. This happened with Moody.

I'm sorry we aren't always able to give a full explanation of why a partnership / royalty / license has changed or ended. I know it's frustrating to users to have something change without explanation, but I don't think it's kind / polite / appropriate to share details of contract negotiations / business terms / disagreements publicly.

I'd suggest that speculation like "not making enough profits... they kicked them to the curb" is just that -- speculation. If you don't know the facts, you're risking libel at the worst, or at least slander and gossip.

Sometimes Logos ends a partnership, sometimes the other party does. I could tell you which was which, but blaming the other party publicly A) reduces the chance we'll be able to work again (many times we've been able to re-start a partnership after a termination), and isn't nice.

I'm sorry I can't (or rather, won't) provide more detail. I do understand that it's frustrating.

-- Bob

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555339#Comment_555339

Thanks for responding Bob. I hope you're enjoying a joyful holiday. I hope that eventually this issue works out to everyone's satisfaction - without a whole lot of misinformation being spread in the meantime.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555339#Comment_555339

Logos was not making enough profits with Galaxy, so they kicked them to the curb. This happened with Moody.

I'm sorry we aren't always able to give a full explanation of why a partnership / royalty / license has changed or ended. I know it's frustrating to users to have something change without explanation, but I don't think it's kind / polite / appropriate to share details of contract negotiations / business terms / disagreements publicly.

I'd suggest that speculation like "not making enough profits... they kicked them to the curb" is just that -- speculation. If you don't know the facts, you're risking libel at the worst, or at least slander and gossip.

Sometimes Logos ends a partnership, sometimes the other party does. I could tell you which was which, but blaming the other party publicly A) reduces the chance we'll be able to work again (many times we've been able to re-start a partnership after a termination), and isn't nice.

I'm sorry I can't (or rather, won't) provide more detail. I do understand that it's frustrating.

-- Bob

As usual, thanks for taking time to remind us all of the principles you outlined here while trying to convey empathy.

Really we have a couple of choices on how we are going to respond. We could choose to become more frustrated, vent and the like or we could choose to simply trust the processes that happen behind the scenes. Personally, I choose the latter. May God give all parties wisdom as you seek to do the best thing.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555315#Comment_555315

Their reasoning included quality and update with tagging for new features ... so why the sudden concern 4 years (?) later.

OK... well in short response, the multiple threads that have been posted on this subject over the last couple of years raising questions about the future of this product have certainly not been sudden. To my knowledge there has been no definitive answer to these regular (and annual) questions, even in private emails. If at any point anyone wanted to communicate what was going on with TJL or the future of journals in light company strategy, there was ample time to do so. (I may have missed something, but even that has not been part of the response)

So, knowing that there has been a following which was even promoted by Logos at one point, what would have been the harm in saying 'after a good run, we're calling it quits... thanks everyone!'? Product starts and discontinuations are part and parcel with the industry - and quite often there are associated announcements. Until this thread there was no clear information that this product was being discontinued.

Anyhow, is this really issue of sudden interest? I guess I have a different view. Merry Christmas.

As I recall, they were perpetually having quality problems with Galaxie... I too own all 15 TJL's and will be disappointed if Logos stops putting these out. Though not so disappointed I leave Logos. I am quite happy with their product.

Logos was not making enough profits with Galaxy, so they kicked them to the curb. This happened with Moody.

Not very "grace"full there brother.

I'm sorry we aren't always able to give a full explanation of why a partnership / royalty / license has changed or ended. I know it's frustrating to users to have something change without explanation, but I don't think it's kind / polite / appropriate to share details of contract negotiations / business terms / disagreements publicly.
I'd suggest that speculation like "not making enough profits... they kicked them to the curb" is just that -- speculation. If you don't know the facts, you're risking libel at the worst, or at least slander and gossip.

Sometimes Logos ends a partnership, sometimes the other party does. I could tell you which was which, but blaming the other party publicly A) reduces the chance we'll be able to work again (many times we've been able to re-start a partnership after a termination), and isn't nice.

I'm sorry I can't (or rather, won't) provide more detail. I do understand that it's frustrating.

-- Bob

Merry Christmas Bob! You'll continue to do the best you can, I am not worried.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554977#Comment_554977

I'm not particularly interested in these journals, but I've followed the threads over the years, and this one makes me rather surprised.

My memory is that you spent years complaining about Galaxie's poor quality, but now it's suddenly "why break something that was working?" and "it seems this whole situation was a case of not following the "if its not broke, don't fix it" rule."??

My understanding is that when Galaxie produced these on their own, they shipped early, but full of errors. Logos then got to face all the complaints, and the expectations that they would fix the files without compensation. Naturally, they weren't all that happy about that. Logos then decided to take the quality control into their own hands, hoping that would solve the problem. However, Galaxie still sent them bad source files, forcing them to choose between sending the files back to Galaxie for correction (meaning long delays and many complaints), or doing the corrections themselves (meaning extra costs without compensation). So, since that didn't work either, I guess they have now decided that the only way they can produce these journals with an acceptable quality, in an acceptable time, and at an acceptable cost, is to bypass Galaxie and do the whole work themselves. (Though, naturally, at first this will mean a delay, since all the contracts have to be renegotiated.)

I can't swear to this description, of course, but it fits what I remember of what I've read, including what Logos has said in the past (like this post by Kent).

You all know I'm critical enough of Logos at times, but this time I suspect you're blaming the wrong party. The fact that Galaxie says it's Logos' fault isn't proof that it is Logos' fault. We know Galaxie hasn't been able to produce good quality files in the past. The forums have plenty of complaints about it. We don't know anything that Logos has done wrong in this matter. Why, then, would it all now suddenly be Logos fault? I think they're working to ensure you finally get what you want, not to take it away from you.

Into Grace

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555378#Comment_555378

I was ungracious with my comments. I apologize. Merry Christmas to all!

Jerry Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555326#Comment_555326

When L4 was released Logos made clear their intent to not use 3rd party content but to pull it all in-house.

The theological journals were without doubt the reason for my signing into logos in the first place. And if the only way to get them in the future would be to go to a different program, then for me it is certainly worth the value to do so, even if it means switching between logos and the new program.

Lets hope Logos reconsiders and realizes it is good business to work again with Galaxie..

Agreed!

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555378#Comment_555378

My memory is that you spent years complaining about Galaxie's poor quality, but now it's suddenly "why break something that was working?" and "it seems this whole situation was a case of not following the "if its not broke, don't fix it" rule."??

Depends on the point of view. Yes, there have been some who have criticised the quality of TJL, but a possible implication of your assertion is that all of us in this thread are one and the same. To the contrary, some of us found it suitable for purpose. In fact, it is an extremely useful part of our studies. I was just digging through the journals yesterday for a project I am working on... but that's just me. So I suggest that critique from some about quality does not nullify two issues which have been raised by some of us over the past number of years...

1. Bundled Journals as a Product: A regular release of a bundle of journals is very useful to at least a few of us. There may be only be a handful of us... but it was convenient and it became something to include in our study rhythms every year. You didn't have to chase a dozen pre pubs. It was a bundle just like many other products that you can buy from this and many other companies. The push, as forums can be utilised for, was to see if there was enough interest to promote this product to Logos. Trying to be objective here, if forum traffic is any indicator, I am not convinced there are many of us looking for this kind of product anymore. A possible theory is that there are so many other resources now that the value of this yearly bundle is not so noticeable. I am ready to concede that the market has spoken. I am disappointed, but this is not the first time that something I found useful is no longer produced. (i.e. Biblical Archaeology Review, Stuart and Fee's Exegetical Handbooks, etc)

2. Communication: The issue here has been getting someone, somewhere, to make a definitive statement about whether this product was going to be continued or not. As it was noted, there was a shift in Logos policy four years ago. Yet, the Galaxie product carried on. The last two years there were great delays and those threads are still available for review. To my recollection, we were prompting for information rather than it being pushed to us. Even in this instance, I started this thread after waiting some time in hope of finding out what was going on. Now maybe Logos and Galaxie came to this conclusion very recently. No one knows except those directly involved and we can't attribute motive. However, if it was not for this forum thread, those of us who have waited for this product every year would still be watching and wondering if it is going to appear. Would it been better to wait until July next year or even Christmas before asking again? I doubt it. Aside from new information about the future of TJL, the debate has followed a fairly predictable number of positions being taken.

In closing my view is something that was bringing value is broke. In order to achieve something better, this may have been required. Business strategy is always about tradeoffs. It is very possible that it can't be ever fixed again at least in its current form. We as end users don't know. However, if there is a market for something, someone will often figure out how to do it.

Now it is time to close this chapter and move on. At least we now know we can stop waiting for TJL. Something may emerge from the ashes, then again it might not. We will adapt and through other means pursue other sources for this kind of information.

So good night all and on TJL, good bye. [:)]

Whyndell Grizzard

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555415#Comment_555415

Thanks Bob for the explanation of why we do not see the journals coming to Logos.

But to others, if you needed a book and Logos did not have it you would purchase it elsewhere. I would love to see some of you explaining to your prof's or church, "Well I was gonna do that paper or preach that sermon, but it wasn't available in Logos."

WS has started carrying the journals, it is basically the same product Logos has, so until it changes and I need the journals, i'll buy them there. It simple supply and demand, just the consumer exercising their purchasing power.

I will look at what Logos offers as they get individual series of journals- if I believe they are what I need they may have a customer, if not I’ll treat the journals like I do any other product,

I have dealt with Logos and Galaxie (Bible.org as well) for years, have respect for both. Hampton Keathly serves the Christian world in numerous ways, he is faithful, the same can be said for Bob and Logos.

So let’s chill out, let people state their disappointment, allow for a response, then let’s hopefully hear some coming solutions. Heck I’m still waiting for a dynamic sentence diagramming and notes function, it’s been almost 20 yrs [:D]

Michael McLane

What is WS?

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555442#Comment_555442

Michael Paul - WS are the initials of a competitor of Logos. I've never used it, but IIRC someone once said its a glorified Kindle app - IE lets you read, and not much else. Certainly not the tagging and so forth that Logos provides.

Its unfortunate the relationships with the content providers weren't in place prior to the dissolution of Logos relationship with galaxie. Perhaps this was unexpected on both sides.

Further I don't understand how Galaxie can be responsible for "dirty" files. The content for any article I've ever written was delivered to the journal digitally. They then digitally assemble the disparate articles then disseminate the completed journal either digitally or in a more traditional format.

The only thing I can think of is that G was supposed to be tagging the titles and so forth. That may well be the root of the issue here. They may have been negotiating over whose responsibility it is to do the tagging: If its been galaxies responsibility, and Logos feels they have to start taking care of that part, then its reasonable for them to ask for lower prices since at that point G is providing raw content, not a finished product.

If I had to speculate Logos business represented a significant chunk of Galaxies business model up to this point. With a million(?) or so logos users, it may have rivaled, or exceeded the income they had from the disparate bible schools and seminaries that pay monthly for access to the untagged content.

Stephen Paynter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555473#Comment_555473

It is sad news that the TJL is no more. It was an wonderful annual resource, and certainly played its part in attracting me to Logos in the first place. In fact, if I remember correctly, I think I found Logos through the Galaxie site.

It was always a fascinating library, with "evangelical" journals from all sorts of quarters of the evangelical world - many of which I would never have bought individually, but which I have referenced occasionally to find out an "opposing" viewpoint. It has also contained some top notch academic journals which have been priceless.

In an ideal world, Logos would renegotiate with Galaxie - perhaps gaining access to even more journals, such as the ones that have slipped out of the Galaxie library over the years (especially, the Trinity Journal), and adding the academic journals some of us have been clambering for, especially, JBL, NTS, JNTS, JOTS.

As a minimum Logos should construct a TJL-lite, which contains the best scholarly and Reformed journals, particularly, JETS, WTJ and TynBul.

Please please please keep regular updates of these journals in Logos. It is important to keep Logos the best tool for doing academic Bible study.

In mean time, I guess I better try to work out what WS stands for ....

GregW

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555492#Comment_555492

None of us actually knows what Logos is planning on the Journals front. Although these collections of journals are useful, I'd much rather have something like a search of the ATLA database built into Logos itself, which would give me access to up-to-date copies of the journals built into the product available on subscription. Whether Logos has something like that in mind I don't know, and I have no special information, but I do suggest we hold fire on criticising the company before we actually know what they are planning - we might even get a pleasant surprise!

Bob Pritchett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555499#Comment_555499

None of us actually knows what Logos is planning on the Journals front.

Journals are very important to us, and we're working to get more of them into the system. Over the years we've been enhancing our special support for journals (adding the ability to correctly cite a specific article within a volume, for example, at copy and paste -- if the article is correctly tagged with our latest metadata standards, adding the biblio data type, which lets us tag bibliographic entries long before the destination is available, and which will work once it is, etc.).

I would love to offer access to ATLA's ATLAS content; much of that was licensed exclusively to ATLA, and at the moment appears to only be available through institutional licenses to libraries, etc. I hope we'll either be able to hook into that -- connecting you directly through your institution's license -- or to convince them to offer access direct-to-consumer through Logos.

Stephen Paynter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555506#Comment_555506

None of us actually knows what Logos is planning on the Journals front.

Journals are very important to us, and we're working to get more of them into the system. Over the years we've been enhancing our special support for journals (adding the ability to correctly cite a specific article within a volume, for example, at copy and paste -- if the article is correctly tagged with our latest metadata standards, adding the biblio data type, which lets us tag bibliographic entries long before the destination is available, and which will work once it is, etc.).

This is great to hear ... both the importance of journals and the tagging of entries before the destination is available. I have long been advocating the need for this on these forums ... Logos really is a listening responsive company/product. I look back over various suggestions I have made over the years, and many many of them are now realities (like having philosophical resources available).

I would love to offer access to ATLA's ATLAS content; much of that was licensed exclusively to ATLA, and at the moment appears to only be available through institutional licenses to libraries, etc. I hope we'll either be able to hook into that -- connecting you directly through your institution's license -- or to convince them to offer access direct-to-consumer through Logos.

This is very exciting. I would love to own permanently the journal contents ... but an ongoing subscription via Logos would be fine. My PhD is slowly winding on, and I can see the day when I won't any longer have access through my university library on-line subscriptions, so continuing it through Logos would be a good long term solution for my ongoing academic needs. (I also use the ATHENS subscription journal library - not sure if or how this differs from ATLA, and if they might be more amenable to working with Logos.

Danny Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555506#Comment_555506

I am hesitate to reply in these threads that can become very unkind and unuseful. However, I do have some opinions that I feel compelled to share. Having managed in a large corporation for over 20 years before pastoring I understand the business side of a company. If you don't make a profit you cannot stay in business - this is not evil. I have also been in a company that changed its business model in a way that gradually moved it from a premier service company to merely another declining company - may this never happen to LOGOS (I do not suggest that it has). The challenge is difficult and always about maintaining balance.

As a LOGOS user that precedes current ownership (think CDWORD/DTS), the product has been vital to my ministry and personal life. I have invested thousands of dollars, and have gained a good return. I recommend it to others when I have opportunities. I do desire the product continue to be a competitive tool into the future. These are my thoughts based on my limited understanding.

Thoughts:

1. I am concerned that gradually we are seeing mainstream evangelical publishers beginning to disappear from LOGOS. Are these aberrations or indicators? I believe the mainstream pastoral/lay leadership community is the heart of a Bible Software company. It is very important to provide the type of resources this community desires. If not they will go to competitors. I cannot pretend to know all the issues (obviously financial is one of the main drivers). New/creative options may well be needed to resolve these for the future. This is critically important - this is the core business of LOGOS.

2. Enhanced text searching and capabilities that increase the cost of book production is a two edged sword. Yes, there is the potential for more powerful searches. However, with the greater complexity, the cost of initial preparation and on-going maintenance increases. The life cycle cost of a software product is most extensive in maintenance. Plus if the profit margins are eaten up because of the requirement for much man time on the frontend, does this create a difficulty in remaining cost competitive for individual products. The end result can be the loss of products that are useful to the consumer, but not cost effective to the producer. Also, as searches become more complex, the fewer the number of users that will actually take advantage of them. The risk could be to have a premier but very expensive product that is just not worth it to the average user. This becomes very critical as the field expands with low cost competitors. Amazon represents a large threat as does WS. Both may have less extensive capabilities, but in many cases, these capabilities may not be worth an increased cost or lack of availability of high demand books.

3. In efforts to produce highly cost effective and profitable products (think public domain, other niche markets), do the cutting edge products (books) that are in high demand slip to the back burner (ex., NESTLE 28 with apparatus). The end result could be a product that has massive numbers of books that the major consumer does not really need, while not having the most current resources that are necessary for students, researchers, pastors. Of course, producing some level of high profit margin resources are important to remaining in business as well.

Conclusions

The current state of affairs is not bad. LOGOS remains the top product on the market, especially for the pastoral user.

Obviously, one of my concerns is LOGOS' tendency (obviously this is merely my perception) to increase long-term costs and complexity, putting more financial pressure on their business relationships and the ability to provide low cost products.

There also seems to be a tendency to emphasize volume of books for quality of books. This also assumes (perhaps incorrectly) that limited resources are applied to the public domain resources rather than the more current resources.

Could there be VYRSO-like options for more of the products (journals?) to ensure that they exist at some level in LOGOS (this assumes that cost of production is critical to the loss of some of the products, which may or may not be the case)?

If LOGOS could gain a reputation of becoming one of the first electronic publishers of current, in-demand books this would be a major marketing advantage. Is the current delay financial, complexity of development, resource availability?

Sometimes choosing to cut profit margins or even endure a loss on a particular item, can be vital to overcome competition (think large box stores that send out ads to lure people in or Amazon electronic book pricing at times). Users embrace LOGOS for the core book capability - they then splurge spend for the high profit margin books (think public domain, sales, etc.).

I still think a carved down, but useful entry level offering would be a great offering for pastors and/or seminary students.

These are my random thoughts for what it is worth.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555538#Comment_555538

I would buy all of my text books in Logos if I could. But I can't. Most semesters I'm happy with 2-3 of 10-12. Sometimes I could have bought more, but they were available as part of a cost prohibitive set; my greek texts for instance - half of the ones I need for first and second semester greek are available but bundled with hebrew titles that we wont be using using. This puts me in the position of choosing between spending 300$ on the books in print, or 270$ for the books in an alternative (dumb) format, or nearly 800$ in Logos - and then still have to spend an additional 100$ on books in print or e-books from an alternate source.

The ATLA thing would be amazing though...

For your other product lines(noet), something similar with EBSCO might be a good idea as well...

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555538#Comment_555538

Obviously, one of my concerns is LOGOS' tendency (obviously this is merely my perception) to increase long-term costs and complexity, putting more financial pressure on their business relationships and the ability to provide low cost products.

This is precisely my concern, if you justify high prices by the ongoing maintenance costs of a product but do not reserve such historic income for future costs you have the equivalent of a pyramid scheme that will one day come crashing down.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555574#Comment_555574

but do not reserve such historic income for future costs

Remember that we have no knowledge of the amount of income these generated.

you have the equivalent of a pyramid scheme

equivalent in what way? if you simply mean financially unwise ...

Mark Johnson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/554952#Comment_554952

A sale on vol. 1-15 would be wonderful

Deacon Steve

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555538#Comment_555538

I am hesitate to reply in these threads that can become very unkind and unuseful.

Me too. Good point worth emphasizing. Let's consider thinking about this in another way.

Obviously, one of my concerns is LOGOS' tendency (obviously this is merely my perception) to increase long-term costs and complexity, putting more financial pressure on their business relationships and the ability to provide low cost products.

I'm not sure there is a goal to increase costs or complexity. I think costs go up when volume (sales) goes up. More customers -> business grows. Maybe there is a discussion to be had regarding the ratio of customers to employees, but that is a productivity issue. There can be in-flight adjustments made there to the attentive owner.

There also seems to be a tendency to emphasize volume of books for quality of books. This also assumes (perhaps incorrectly) that limited resources are applied to the public domain resources rather than the more current resources.

Older resources are a treasure. It's copyright law and intellectual property rights that causes us to look at, and work with published material differently based on age. This is an important point when thinking about some other downstream conclusions.

If LOGOS could gain a reputation of becoming one of the first electronic publishers of current, in-demand books this would be a major marketing advantage. Is the current delay financial, complexity of development, resource availability?

All publishers are working aggressively to stay in business and make a profit. The landscape has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. Some are better than other ... more nimble, clearer vision, more financial resources, etc. Logos has developed relationships with some of the largest, most influential publishers anywhere. And Logos is providing many current resources. I'm not sure that you can compare volume of resources in the public domain against current publications in a way that correlates to competitiveness, sustainability, and long term growth. You may be able to compare another aspect, but I'm not sure that volume is one of them. I would need to think about that more but I think it may be conflating several things to think this is a problem.

Sometimes choosing to cut profit margins or even endure a loss on a particular item, can be vital to overcome competition (think large box stores that send out ads to lure people in or Amazon electronic book pricing at times).

I always have to remind myself that Amazon does not really publish anything. They provide a service as a front door to many publishers. Yes, they sell an e-reader. But that is not where the money is made. They provide easy access (worldwide) to vast quantities of books in both hardcopy and electronic format. They own the copyright to very little of what they sell.

Logos provides value in that space and, more importantly, as a "system". Their eco-system is a library system that is extremely powerful, and sophisticated, and getting better every release.

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555579#Comment_555579

but do not reserve such historic income for future costs

Remember that we have no knowledge of the amount of income these generated.

We know precisely how much income is generated, what we do not know is the cost and provisioning structure. My concern is that there is probably not a provisioning structure, which is not necessarily wrong but the current business model that is observable does raise concerns.

you have the equivalent of a pyramid scheme

equivalent in what way? if you simply mean financially unwise ...

Any business plan that relies on constant growth to fund future costs incurred as a result of past business will eventually collapse.

If I did not have faith that Logos is a sound company with a future I would not buy its products (and believe me I do), but the emerging cost structure is a concern to me.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555601#Comment_555601

We know precisely how much income is generated,

Where do you find the sales figures? I'd be very interested in them for some other resources.

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/555608#Comment_555608

We know precisely how much income is generated,

Where do you find the sales figures? I'd be very interested in them for some other resources.

I know precisely how much income is generated from each sale, but as you correctly point out this is fairly meaningless as many of the future costs would relate to the title as a whole (i.e. tagging and future revisions) however some costs are linked to each individual sale (i.e. data transfer costs) which are not inconsiderable given the number of times I seem to reinstall my library and will continue to do so for many years to come.

My worry is that I may have to stop buying books given the economic troubles we face, as I am sure may many of their customers, and could Logos survive if sales stagnated given its ongoing cost structure?