Subscription is not justified just because it costs Logos, say, $X/year to maintain the features
Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:The part of our model that we think needs to change is that many of the features are actually "services". Let's take "Lemma in Passage" as an example. It uses a database that we host and maintain, and need to keep updated with new resources. We could monetize it by making all new resources slightly more expensive (to cover the cost of inserting them into the database, but penalizing people who haven't also bought the Lemma in Passage "feature") but in my mind it just makes more sense to sell access to it as a subscription and pay for its ongoing expense via recurring subscription revenue.
Hi Bradley,
Thanks for raising interesting questions in your original post. It really helps identify the key issues. I want to focus on just one issue you raised above. Otherwise it gets lost in the voluminous thread where the same issues are rehashed over and over again.
Let me debunk this idea that just because a feature costs Logos $X/year to maintain, it can only be offered through subscription that is priced at ($X+Profit)/year.
I'll use a finance analogy to make my point, but by raising a question:
Is it reasonable to make a 1-time deposit to a bank but expect the bank to pay out $X/year for ever in perpetuity?
Let that question sink before you read to find the answer.
The above question is akin to you asking: is it reasonable for customers to make a 1-time payment to Logos for a feature set that costs Logos $X/year to maintain? Thus, first lets settle on the fact that my finance analogy is reasonable.
Next, the answer to my finance question above is a resounding "YES."
Let me make it concrete. Let's say that you would like the bank to pay you $5,000 a year forever into the future. The bank would happily pay you $5,000/year forever if you make a 1-time deposit of $100,000 assuming interest rate is 5% per year (5% of $100,000 = $5,000). This is not complicated finance. Thus, Logos can easily estimate a 1-time price to charge for features even if the features cost $X/year to maintain. This 1-time equivalent purchase price can also be solved when the costs are expected to increase every year due to inflation or other factors. The point is that there is always a 1-time equivalent price to a monthly or yearly subscription price. This is taught in Finance 101 all over the world to anyone who wants a degree from a business school.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
Comments
-
Are you asking for us to purchase the "perpetual" use of Logos as an annuity with unknowable future costs? Have you ever worked as an actuary to understand what would be involved in the calculation of the price? It is not a simple current value of calculation where it is a fixed timeframe with known cost benefits. If you think I'd be foolish enough at 80 to pay the same price as a 25 year old seminary student, I'd be insulted.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
1Cor10 31 said:
Let me debunk this idea that just because a feature costs Logos $X/year to maintain, it can only be offered through subscription that is priced at ($X+Profit)/year.
What I wrote was:
1Cor10 31 said:Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:in my mind it just makes more sense to sell access to it as a subscription
I didn't say subscription was the only way to monetize it, just that it makes more sense to me to do it that way.
1Cor10 31 said:The point is that there is always a 1-time equivalent price to a monthly or yearly subscription price.
Sure, a simple model is "take the annual subscription price, multiply it by 50 (for "lifetime" access), then discount it (due to PV of getting the money up front)". Is that going to be received well, or would it be met with cries of "that's outrageous", "this is daylight robbery", "you're just overpricing this to force us to subscription"?
(Actually... maybe that's a good way to solve this whole problem! Let's say the subscription price is $250/yr. "Simply" open a high-interest savings account that pays 5% interest, deposit $5,000, and pay the Logos subscription from the interest paid on your savings. And best of all, if you ever cancel the subscription, you can get the full $5,000 back! 😀)
When you say we can "easily estimate a 1-time price" (and give an interest-bearing bank account as an example), it sounds like you're proposing a simple annuity-style calculation. While I agree that that would be simple, I think the actual financial modeling of the maintenance cost of software over decades (including support for as-yet-undeveloped hardware and software platforms) would be significantly more complicated, and would likely result in a much higher price than most customers would expect to pay.
0 -
Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:
Sure, a simple model is "take the annual subscription price, multiply it by 50 (for "lifetime" access), then discount it (due to PV of getting the money up front)". Is that going to be received well, or would it be met with cries of "that's outrageous", "this is daylight robbery", "you're just overpricing this to force us to subscription"?
To be blunt, you're exaggerating again in this counter-argument rather than taking the time to seriously consider the rationale. You cannot take the annual subscription price as a base, because a subscription will include much more than just non-AI features that will be able to be packaged in a purchasable set. So first off you would need to calculate the value of the features which are packaged in the set. Next, you would need to calculate the annual cost of maintenance relating to said features. Finally, you would need to determine a multiple for how many years you expect the average customer to use said features before upgrading again to a newer feature set (it will certainly be less than 50). Multiply this number times the annual cost of maintenance and add that to the price of the feature set. Add a premium to make sure that Logos comes away with a profit, and put it up for sale. The numbers may need to be adjusted over time as you learn more about your "average customer's" behavior. I'm sure I missed quite a bit in this quick write up, but at least I took the time to give serious consideration to the rationale presented.
0 -
Aaron Hamilton said:Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:
Sure, a simple model is "take the annual subscription price, multiply it by 50 (for "lifetime" access), then discount it (due to PV of getting the money up front)". Is that going to be received well, or would it be met with cries of "that's outrageous", "this is daylight robbery", "you're just overpricing this to force us to subscription"?
To be blunt, you're exaggerating again in this counter-argument rather than taking the time to seriously consider the rationale. You cannot take the annual subscription price as a base, because a subscription will include much more than just non-AI features that will be able to be packaged in a purchasable set. So first off you would need to calculate the value of the features which are packaged in the set. Next, you would need to calculate the annual cost of maintenance relating to said features. Finally, you would need to determine a multiple for how many years you expect the average customer to use said features before upgrading again to a newer feature set (it will certainly be less than 50). Multiply this number times the annual cost of maintenance and add that to the price of the feature set. Add a premium to make sure that Logos comes away with a profit, and put it up for sale. The numbers may need to be adjusted over time as you learn more about your "average customer's" behavior. I'm sure I missed quite a bit in this quick write up, but at least I took the time to give serious consideration to the rationale presented.
Aaron,
This gross exaggeration and misrepresentation from a Logos employee here and in response to my posts in the other thread is reason enough for me to wash my hands of this company.... I wonder if the PE Firm is aware of how customers of its investment are being treated in the forums - I may contact them and let them know....
The disrespectful nature of the irrational examples and gross misrepresentation of users is amazing.... All the more irritating about the responses is I took the time to message Bradley with my phone number... If he really wanted to know with clarity, that it seems he didn't have in my views - he could have called but he chose to come back to misrepresenting a customer just to push the Subscription Model....
I am grateful that you also noticed the nature in some of the responses - at least it wasn't just me...
Logos 10 - OpenSuse Tumbleweed, Windows 11, Android 16 & Android 14
0 -
Frank, I understand your frustration, but try to give the man some grace. At least he's communicating. This isn't an easy topic to navigate gracefully. I wish you the best and hope I still have the privilege of seeing your name pop up in these forums from time to time in the future.
0 -
And the Finances 101 Crash Course just came crashing down! (No pun intended…alright, yes, pun was intended) 😂😂😂
DAL
0 -
Aaron Hamilton said:
To be blunt, you're exaggerating again in this counter-argument rather than taking the time to seriously consider the rationale.
Maybe I misunderstood the OP. It seemed like he was saying that calculating a 1-time purchase price can be done easily based on modeling outflows over a time period (so I assumed a standard annuity or PV calculation). My response was meant to indicate that this simplistic calculation seemed insufficient. I didn't mean for it to be an exaggeration.
Aaron Hamilton said:So first off you would need to calculate the value of the features which are packaged in the set. Next, you would need to calculate the annual cost of maintenance relating to said features. Finally, you would need to determine a multiple for how many years you expect the average customer to use said features before upgrading again to a newer feature set (it will certainly be less than 50). Multiply this number times the annual cost of maintenance and add that to the price of the feature set.
I don't think it would be that simple. To "calculate the annual cost of maintenance" we've got to predict software developer salaries over a long time period, plus model cloud computing costs, then throw in inflation, etc. We do have to consider the user's total lifetime usage of the feature, because it's a "forever" license. The interval to the next upgrade is irrelevant because they're not paying again for the same features in that upgrade, they're paying for the new features that the new feature set includes. (This is dynamic pricing.)
(If we could make our perpetual users pay every two years for the same features, then all this becomes a lot simpler, because we can just charge for, say, two years of usage at a time, and expect that they'll buy an upgrade if they want to keep using it. But we don't do that, because dynamic pricing reduces the cost of future Feature Set upgrades, and because the core engine is available for free download.)
Even if we did all that (IMO extremely complex) financial modeling, I still think we'd come up with a perpetual price that would be sticker shock for a lot of customers.
0 -
Frank Sauer said:
The disrespectful nature of the irrational examples and gross misrepresentation of users is amazing
I apologise for being hasty in my communication and coming across as disrespectful or misrepresenting your words. That wasn't my intent, but nevertheless, my choice to be informal in communicating here sent the wrong impression. I'll aim to be more courteous in future responses. Thanks for your patience.
0 -
Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:
We do have to consider the user's total lifetime usage of the feature, because it's a "forever" license. The interval to the next upgrade is irrelevant because they're not paying again for the same features in that upgrade, they're paying for the new features that the new feature set includes.
I knew I would miss several points in my quick reply. Thanks for identifying my error here.
0 -
Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:Frank Sauer said:
The disrespectful nature of the irrational examples and gross misrepresentation of users is amazing
I apologise for being hasty in my communication and coming across as disrespectful or misrepresenting your words. That wasn't my intent, but nevertheless, my choice to be informal in communicating here sent the wrong impression. I'll aim to be more courteous in future responses. Thanks for your patience.
We are good Bradley!
I'd also like to post that Bradley did personally contact me, which is greatly appreciated and I hope it brought more clarity on my position and on his. As I have posted multiple times Bradley and Phil are the two remaining Logos employees that reminded of the old days - while today may have started a little rough - the same stands true!
Thank again for the time Bradley!
Logos 10 - OpenSuse Tumbleweed, Windows 11, Android 16 & Android 14
0 -
I'm sorry I'm not able to respond. I'm travelling and most likely respond only on Tuesday. Suffice to say that valuation in finance is all about taking into account future cash flows, which by definition are always uncertain. So, please, don't tell me that uncertain future costs prevent estimation of 1-time purchase price.
More in a future post. In the meantime, MJ and DAL can go read some Finance 101 on the web. Even music majors who take Finance 101 will tell you how to value uncertain future cash flows.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
1Cor10 31 said:
I'm sorry I'm not able to respond. I'm travelling and most likely respond only on Tuesday. Suffice to say that valuation in finance is all about taking into account future cash flows, which by definition are always uncertain. So, please, don't tell me that uncertain future costs prevent estimation of 1-time purchase price.
More in a future post. In the meantime, MJ and DAL can go read some Finance 101 on the web. Even music majors who take Finance 101 will tell you how to value uncertain future cash flows.
Bradley (also relevant for MJ, DAL etc.): Please ask your private equity boss how they arrived at the value of Logos so as to buy out the founders? Did they know the future cash flows of Logos for sure? Of course not. But still they estimated the value of Logos, didn't they? This is not rocket science.
So please ask your boss and they'll tell you how to arrive at a 1-time price given uncertain future costs.
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
1Cor10 31 said:
More in a future post. In the meantime, MJ and DAL can go read some Finance 101 on the web
Be careful who you insult the intelligence/knowledge of. I did my senior thesis on model theory applied to international interest rates and my first job out of college was as an actuary trainee. And I suspect that I've done more costing out the anticipated expenses of software over its anticipated lifetime than you; Bradley probably has done so as well. Yes, when I started graduate school I applied my interest in model theory in yet another direction. When I found my career path was IT and legal consulting, my interest in model theory went yet another direction. But with a brother as a researcher in electronics, a brother who went from business school administration to chief financial officer at a university, a sister who was a librarian and educational software proofreader, a cousin the federal expert on salmonella, a Dad who was known nationwide as a cattle breeder, a father-in-law who was an artist, a sister-in-law who was a detective specializing in bring children in custody battles back from abroad, etc. etc. it is safe to assume that I have broader knowledge than many if only from around the dinner table. Give me two weeks and I can teach Finance 101 (and higher). Okay, that is a bit arrogant and would not be said if I didn't genuinely feel insulted.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
I'm not sure where to post on this topic as it's being discussed in a few threads now, hopefully this is a good spot.
Something I've noticed missing from the conversations that I've read is the lump sum revenue Logos will make each time a new user comes to Logos and buys the software, and then any add-ons as time goes by. The push for a subscription model makes it sound like the only way to have revenue over the 2 years between releases is through a subscription because once current users upgrade, that's it for 2 years.
Under the current model, are new users buying the software on a regular basis, or is there not much interest? I'm pretty new, having come to Logos in January of '23 when I purchased Logos 10. From there I've bought up to Portfolio, purchased legacy packs, an expansion pack, and several individual titles. I can't imagine I'm the only one, or one of only a handful of new users that found the existing model to be a great option, worth the expenditure for ownership rights. It just seems to me that if Logos is offering a product and service of this caliber, there's got to be plenty of new users and sales between edition releases. I don't have access to the data, so I could be way off. Maybe it's not as popular as I thought it was, but I don't believe that's the case with such a fine product.
As an aside, if this had been subscription only in January of 2023, I wouldn't be here right now. I'd have looked for an alternative, even if it wasn't as robust as Logos.
I'm trying to stay positive as I really value Logos as it's a phenomenal study aid, and also because I'm pretty heavily invested in it at this point. I want to see Logos thrive, I really do. But not by completely changing the Logos that so many users bought into. And that buying into aspect is why I believe this has become so heated. People are invested in this emotionally as well as monetarily. Even though it's all digital, there's still a tangible feeling to the ownership of it, at least for me. I own Logos 10 and several books. I'm much more passionate about something I own than something I don't. If I was on a subscription and started to not like what I was seeing, the direction things were going, or any number of things, I'd just cancel my subscription and move on. Nothing there worth fighting for. Not so when ownership rights are involved, at least in my experience. If the only entry point to Logos becomes an easy subscription, it'll also be easy to walk away from. I would think book sales would be harder on a subscription model too. If Logos is the only place I can read the books I purchase, I'm going to think real hard about building any kind of library, because to maintain access, I've now shifted from an easily cancelable monthly subscription to signing on for life.
It seems to me that both licensing options could live side by side in harmony, while allowing Logos to maximize their profits from 2 different groups of people and revenue streams. Those who want to buy and own, and are happy to use the software as delivered for the interim between releases, and those who would prefer a subscription, for whatever reason: lower initial cost, more frequent service additions, the freedom to easily move on, etc.
I would just like to see both options made available moving forward.
0 -
KevinV said:
It seems to me that both licensing options could live side by side in harmony, while allowing Logos to maximize their profits from 2 different groups of people and revenue streams. Those who want to buy and own, and are happy to use the software as delivered for the interim between releases, and those who would prefer a subscription, for whatever reason: lower initial cost, more frequent service additions, the freedom to easily move on, etc.
I would just like to see both options made available moving forward.
Well, first, they're still thinking. And it's not at all clear what's driving the logic.
- Only features are involved. But features can include software fixes too.
- They say it's to allow a more affordable access (though Connect seems pretty affordable)
- They also say features need subscriptions. Selling books can't pay for features.
- And subscriptions are the wave of FL's future.
I'd say most, so far, agree with you. So, FL is still thinking.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
DMB said:
Well, first, they're still thinking.
First of all, least it sounds like I am putting Logos down, let me admit that our administrative computing department in the distant past bet on X-boxes rather than PC's. Logos has a long history of promising more than it can deliver - think of the labeling of sermons which has never caught up with the backload. When it realized its actual commitments, it rectified the situation by dividing books into two separate categories - readers edition and research editions. However, they repeated the problem by over-promising on the Factbook by creating hundreds(?) of thousands of records that still lack even the basic links and for which they had not yet built a satisfactory ontology. An incremental approach would have been a better strategy. It is my opinion, i.e. I lack sufficient evidence to prove it, that at least going into AI they are considering the costs before over-promising us and that they are moving incrementally rather than setting unrealistic expectations. I consider this to be a significant improvement irrespective of my opinion of subscriptions.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
I have a theory. It is only a theory, because none of us have access to Logos’ usage metrics and financial data, that the old model that goes back to the early versions is hitting a plateau. Go back to the Libronix days, to say version 2. Logos was a much simpler programme. It was only on Windows. It was pretty much a souped up e-reader and some tagged books. Now it is on multiple operating systems and the cloud. Extensive data sets and features have been created (and in some cases not fully completed). Love it or not, more intensive computing is coming through AI. Month by month, year by year, Logos’ fixed costs continue to increase to run this machine, just to keep the cloud services on, resources up to date and maintain code on Windows, Android, MacOS, iOS and a web app. (And yes, the Linux crowd will chime in and say what about me? Pick me!)
Now consider the mix of users. On here, we are a small fanatical base who actively use Logos and maybe in some cases spend a greater than average amount on resources when compared to other users. Maybe if everyone was this engaged Logos could continue as they are in the old model.
So who are the other users and what do they spend? I know three other users, so it is not a fair scientific sampling, but it is interesting to note their purchasing habits in that they have not purchased a Logos 10 package or recent feature set, and have no plans to upgrade. Yet they rely on the Logos maintenance and service machine to provide updates and cloud app/syncing, whilst not spending a penny for years at a time. At a missional level, it is awesome they are using the software and studying God’s word, but I would guess that after a certain point after their purchase, that more active purchasing from other users pays for their 'forever use' of the product while increasing costs are incurred month after month to keep them going.
These averages work in any business, so this is not usual. The trouble I can speculate for Logos is that they would like to continue to evolve and grow. I know some of the areas that I would love for them to advance on! But if revenue that would otherwise be used for moving forward is being stretched further through maintaining the increasingly complex machine and waiting every two years to provide ‘value’ through some upgrades of which not everyone will purchase, whilst neglecting fundamentals that in the long run would deeply strengthen the product, I can see why they need to shift to a new model. Logos nor the tech industry is the same that it was 20 years ago. We debated years ago with Bob on these forums if a forever model as it looked then, was sustainable. To be fair, what we see today to have a debate on now is completely different.
When Logos decoupled base software updates from major version numbers, they signalled the end to an era. I don't believe we are going to go back, nor would I propose we should. It is possible that a best win/win scenario in this debate will look something like increasing the consistency of revenue going into Logos through subscriptions whilst maintaining some element of perpetual ownership. If this is indeed the outcome, it looks like the change we wondered about years ago is finally here.
We then as users will have to decide whether to continue to purchase this product or another. There is one premium product left out there which has more of a classic model. They charge for their upgrades of every two years. There is no web app, and they are struggling to deliver on their upgrade promises of almost two years ago. Beyond that, the field becomes much different as you move into the lighter and free use products.
0 -
I have had zero success to date in convincing anyone to buy Logos or even give the free version of Logos a try. I wonder if there will be a subscription level that will be cheap enough that anyone from my church would be interested in trying it out for a while.
I propose that they offer a 30-day free trial period during which everything that is available in the highest level of subscription is available, so you can try it out and decide which level is for you (if anything). The only thing I would disable during that free trial period would be extensive copying/exporting/printing, so that people don't try out the 30-day deal just to export a bunch of books to PDF.
If that seems too generous, then offer the 30-day free trial just for the lowest subscription level, and then from there, once you are a subscriber for at least (say) 2 months, you could try out the next level up for free for 30 days to decide if you want to upgrade to it.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
I have had zero success to date in convincing anyone to buy Logos or even give the free version of Logos a try.
Some years ago, I had Logos make a presentation to the parish staff involved in education. Neither the director of faith formation or the social justice director (who also maintained the web site) showed any interest at all in the program. Logos was a hit with some of the priests including the seminarian doing his practicum. With the phone app, it might go a bit better now but I still suspect lay staff is a hard sell.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:Rosie Perera said:
I have had zero success to date in convincing anyone to buy Logos or even give the free version of Logos a try.
Some years ago, I had Logos make a presentation to the parish staff involved in education. Neither the director of faith formation or the social justice director (who also maintained the web site) showed any interest at all in the program. Logos was a hit with some of the priests including the seminarian doing his practicum. With the phone app, it might go a bit better now but I still suspect lay staff is a hard sell.
After seeing the proposed three tiers and who they are geared towards, I suggested a lower level (Logos Foundations/Logos Believers - some entry level name for everyday Christians) that would contain a nice, but minimal selection of Bibles, Commentaries, Encyclopedia, Concordance type books...
In the many presentations I have done, the cost and the excess features are well beyond what many are looking for.... A subscription with solid entry level resources and features for $9.99 or less would likely bring in a large customer pool that otherwise would be turned away by the "expertise" level of Logos in its mature form.
Most have no interest in Sermon Builder, Greek and Hebrew (beyond Strong's), Sentence Diagramming, etc... They'd be happy with a minimal app, a small collection of resources that can be linked and have a nice search feature....
Logos 10 - OpenSuse Tumbleweed, Windows 11, Android 16 & Android 14
0 -
Frank Sauer said:
After seeing the proposed three tiers and who they are geared towards, I suggested a lower level (Logos Foundations/Logos Believers - some entry level name for everyday Christians) that would contain a nice, but minimal selection of Bibles, Commentaries, Encyclopedia, Concoradance type books.
I think this is a really good idea. I would love to see a basic subscription as low as $5/months with just enough features to get regular believers excited about Bible study. This would be an easier package to sell to the masses who have no need or desire for detailed academic study, sermon prep, or even small group leadership. If they want to reach the masses with the tools of Logos they have to offer a price that appeals to the masses. Since they already offer a free option, it seems reasonable that they could offer a starter package with some of the most exciting features for personal Bible study and devotions that would appeal to regular believers at a low price.
An additional thought I had is that they will have to run some sort of valuation for feature package sets in order to offer them for ownership to subscribers at a given number of credits, for example. I don't quite see why they couldn't take that value, add a premium due to extracting it from the subscription (like losing a bundle discount) and offer it for sale as a stand-alone option. Yes, the features would seem expensive. They likely wouldn't appeal to the majority of customers. But the option would be there. They could bury the option on a product page somewhere and carefully explain why they had to price the features so high (forever ownership = forever maintenance).
0 -
I update with logos software and have not impressed me with some of the on line web tools
I am using a top laptop very high end , use it for cad and much more can be used in game development , yet logos bible software has problems , if the existing search features search my resources efficiently why should I pay for searching in AI when you would expect top end Bible software program to be searching outstanding top in the class with crashing and long delays in using the web tools give me a reason why I should purchase AI when I would expect just as much from the investment in the existing search logos software .if I saw more optimization and then utilities and add on tool i have shoud thay be as good as ai ,packages we're streamlined complete as promised before offering another solution may be you want get back some of the other customers if lost along the way due to bad press in launching products and lack of supporting the Promise of the tools and not completing projects and giving up on projects then moving on to something else come on surely you can do better than this
0 -
MJ. Smith said:Rosie Perera said:
I have had zero success to date in convincing anyone to buy Logos or even give the free version of Logos a try.
Some years ago, I had Logos make a presentation to the parish staff involved in education. Neither the director of faith formation or the social justice director (who also maintained the web site) showed any interest at all in the program. Logos was a hit with some of the priests including the seminarian doing his practicum. With the phone app, it might go a bit better now but I still suspect lay staff is a hard sell.
I once arranged for a couple of Logos guys to come up from Bellingham and give a presentation at Regent College in Vancouver, BC. They were offering academic pricing to Regent students. I think 4 or 5 students and one faculty member (who was an avid Accordance user at the time) came to the presentation. Nobody was interested in buying Logos at the end. I gave up trying to be a booster at that point.
0 -
Just saw this on CNBC:
Spotify said it is raising prices so the company can “continue to invest in and innovate on our product features.”
This is the future of Logos. They will start with low subscription prices (to reduce griping) and then keep increasing prices. Why? "to invest and innovate". Haven't we heard this before?
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
1Cor10 31 said:
This is the future of Logos. They will start with low subscription prices (to reduce griping) and then keep increasing prices. Why? "to invest and innovate". Haven't we heard this before?
Agreed. It is inevitable to some extent due to inflation and keeping up with expenses. In my opinion, raising prices is far better than the alternative of going out of business. I hope Logos succeeds. And I hope they do it while maintaining their moral compass. I know, I know, that's a lot to ask for, especially with a PE firm at the helm. But one is allowed to hope, right?
0 -
I’m back…Let me try to catch up.
Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:1Cor10 31">
The point is that there is always a 1-time equivalent price to a monthly or yearly subscription price.
Sure, a simple model is "take the annual subscription price, multiply it by 50 (for "lifetime" access), then discount it (due to PV of getting the money up front)".
I’ll ignore the roundabout and approximate way you arrive at the 1-time price. But I see that you understand the finance principle behind computation of 1-time price. And I appreciate that given that you don’t seem to have highlighted any Finance skills in your LinkedIn profile.
I am curious...How did Logos arrive at the price of the Full Feature set of $800 (https://www.logos.com/product/228476/logos-10-full-feature-upgrade) that guarantees full functionality forever in the future?
I believe in a Win-Win-Win God.
0 -
1Cor10 31 said:
I am curious...How did Logos arrive at the price of the Full Feature set of $800 (https://www.logos.com/product/228476/logos-10-full-feature-upgrade) that guarantees full functionality forever in the future?
While you're waiting for Bradley, I took a look at the $800. And asked myself, what would I pay, just looking at what I use or might use. Using their item values, I came up with maybe $250-300 (didn't use a calculator).
Now, over the years, I've paid considerably more than that. So, before one looks at cost recovery and profit models, one must be reminded the customer is paying for much they don't want ... all funding those future expenses.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
A few years ago I tried to get my church pastor to look at the Faithlife TV church wide subscription which fell on deaf ears. If I recall correctly a limited Logos software package came with the subscription and allowed individuals to have Logos login identities.
My realization then was that anything that had a cost wasn't going to be accepted. I also had made my suggestion at the wrong time of year because the new year budget process was completed. Then there was the "How does it benefit us?"
As an aside, I do believe the lack of secondary use license and separate login for a spouse hurts the marketability to family units. I have invested many dollars in Logos, yet when Logos tells me I must buy another license for my wife and duplicate resource purchases, I find it a little much. Don't give me the argument that they already allow it, because a separate login is needed to set up personal note files, etc.
Really Logos is not built for the masses, it is for the professional class of Christians. I don't say that to be disrespectful, but it is my opinion the average church member will find more benefit and ease of use from e-Sword than Logos.
0 -
Years ago, Logos offered starter packs at a small cost. I bought 10 bearing the cost including postage to get them sent to my country, to give away at Church, it was put in the church newsletter, I was able to get one or two takers. But I end up sending the remainder I couldn't give away to someone else who was going to try and give them away. Even when its free it's hard to get people interested. The average church goer struggles to do regular bible reading and devotions and so buying software to study the bible, to even try free software - it's not as easy as it sounds.
Rosie Perera said:I have had zero success to date in convincing anyone to buy Logos or even give the free version of Logos a try. I wonder if there will be a subscription level that will be cheap enough that anyone from my church would be interested in trying it out for a while.
I propose that they offer a 30-day free trial period during which everything that is available in the highest level of subscription is available, so you can try it out and decide which level is for you (if anything). The only thing I would disable during that free trial period would be extensive copying/exporting/printing, so that people don't try out the 30-day deal just to export a bunch of books to PDF.
If that seems too generous, then offer the 30-day free trial just for the lowest subscription level, and then from there, once you are a subscriber for at least (say) 2 months, you could try out the next level up for free for 30 days to decide if you want to upgrade to it.
0 -
Gerald said:
Really Logos is not built for the masses, it is for the professional class of Christians. I don't say that to be disrespectful, but it is my opinion the average church member will find more benefit and ease of use from e-Sword than Logos.
I would say your doing well to get the average church member to use YouVersion. People are content to be feed by someone else rather than learning to feed upon the Word for themselves.
0
