I had a feeling this would come up soon (and it's not the first time).
Here are my thoughts on "concise" lexicons (or other abridged, shorter, etc. type resources):
1. These two in particular (Danker and Holladay), and others like them are very widely used in schools because they are portable, get to the most commonly (if that's a good word) needed information more easily, and are less expensive. These are great features. I used the predecessor by Gingrich for 3 years in college, and became very acquainted with it, and agree it's superior to anything of its size. In seminary, Holladay was required, but I had HALOT in Accordance (and indeed almost every class the prof would ask me what HALOT said since no one else had it electronically, nor carried the 6 vols. to class).
2. Size is obviously not a constraint for electronic resources. Concise information about the passage you are working in is easily attainable with no additional effort via amplify with context. The price for these is relatively low considering the BDAG/HALOT bundle, academic discounts, and the frequently occurring 25% off pick a product sale. And, eventually, anyone who purchases one of these concise editions will purchase BDAG/HALOT. So, why invest in both? (I know some will disagree, and that's fine, too).
And from a development perspective, is it worthwhile to invest our resources in acquiring and developing them? It's tough to answer, and historically we have answered that "no." And, we have had relatively few requests in recent years as well.
That said, it's more probable that we can get Danker, and if others make the call to acquire it, I will not say no to develop it.
I hope that helps…thanks for the feedback.