It has been a decade since the first aggregator journal packages began to become available at academic and public libraries throughout the United States of America. During these 10 years, the library and information science community has published numerous articles on the pros and cons of this method of delivery and these collections, more than any publisher package or big deal, have generally been the shining example of all that is bad with access versus ownership of content: no stability of content, lack of true holdings information, interface problems, and the like. However, 10 years out and librarians continue to purchase access to these electronic resources and provide access to content through aggregator collections. The interfaces and delivery mechanisms to aggregated journal collections have improved vastly in 10 years' time and, in some cases, librarians have come to find aggregator collections to be more stable and the metadata better maintained than publisher platforms and third-party journal-hosting sites. In some cases, providing access via an aggregator collection is both easier and more consistent in comparison to a publisher or third-party hosting site. This article takes another look at electronic journal aggregation and discusses how aggregated journal collections have found a niche in today's libraries, and how librarians have found that aggregators are no longer as aggravating as once thought.