LOL way to lay on the guilt trip by calling monthly customers freeloaders.
#SurvivorOfMovingMultiMillionDollarCustomersFromPerpetualLicensesToSubscriptionInAnotherIndustry
Given my user name in the forum, I thought “Freeloading Scum” was comedy gold. But I often amuse myself 
Dagnabit I missed that, kinda lost the plot after the first two movies. You know I love good punny comedic references. Sad panda.
This chart will look less drastic with a Y axis origin at $0. I prefer 0 axis for comparison purposes typically.
Changing the axis may shift the looks of the graph, but the data and related results is exactly the same regardless of how it looks. This version (that is somewhat like a “zoomed in” view) makes it easier to quickly cross reference the lines to the data of the cost / % Legacy users,
Based on that easy of actual use aspect (getting real numbers not just views), I think that is better than how it would look at a 0 baseline.
I guess it’s just a preference. Yes, the actual math doesn’t change, but if people don’t look at the axis, you see a graph dropping to nearly the bottom. In reality, it’s closer to a more than half.
I think it’s generally agreed graphs should start at zero in most cases.
… they shouldn’t be commenting on or making conclusions based on the data that drives it. 
More evidence for Loyalty Program 
.
Even Darth’s Freeloading Scum could eventually build up to five or ten years of loyalty given enough random months 
.
This related more to Monthly vs Annual pricing options initially, but if my math is right (no guarantee 
), I am surprised to see the “better for the annual” crossover to be above 9 months continuous use.
If the intent is to incentivize the annual choice, I’d almost expect that crossover to be closer to the 6-8 month mark. That could lead right into the Legacy case I guess, in that people might be more likely to maintain a continuous subscription, but requires lump sum payment vs smaller monthly ones, so I get that doesn’t work well for everyone.
But perhaps the annual pricing is set more from what they need on the minimum income side of things with the monthly set in another way, maybe market specific? I have no idea and most of this is well over my head as I am no expert in finance beyond handling a few of my own accounts
Anyone have any idea how many users TR has? And more importantly when are we organising an annual TR Gala? 
You mean #WWDD?
Not replying to anyone in particular but I’ve been a legacy subscriber since, I can’t even remember when, possibly approaching a decade.
In that time, we’ve had 3 kids and I have gone through long periods of not using TR at all, or using it very minimally. But, largely because of the legacy pricing, I’ve maintained my subscription throughout it all because I value the long term relationship: TR offers legacy pricing, I like their product, so I continue to pay for their service regardless of whether I am actually using it or not.
It’s been a two way street: some years TR is a bargain because of the legacy pricing; some years I am paying for a service I don’t use enough to justify on a pure $ basis. TR has probably benefitted more from the relationship over the time I’ve subscribed but I’m using it enough now that the benefit is more in my favour.
I don’t feel like that makes me an entitled customer, or that I have any special rights. If TR changed their policy on legacy pricing there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. They need to charge a price that allows them to be profitable. There wouldn’t be any hard feelings on my part, I just wouldn’t be as committed a paying customer as I have been: basically I’d let my subscription lapse and renew as my time allows.
And this is why companies do legacy pricing….it keeps their core customers engaged. Financially, @liamodea would have been better off long ago to follow the strategy above. It is a quick math exercise to see where the breakeven point lies.
But people stay on Legacy pricing because it makes them feel special….I think I mentioned earlier that I was a “Plank” member at the local training center when it first opened. I was forever locked in at $99 / month. Member ship eventually got as high as $159/ month….but I also never used the facilities in the summer months, but I kept paying $99 every month to maintain my “plank” membership. Even at $159, I would have been far better off paying just for the months I actually used the facilities and paying nothing in between.
I can only speak for myself here but, I don’t feel special. TR take my money monthly and the threshold workouts still hurt.
In all honestly, TR is probably now (due to life changes), one of my worst cycling expenses. I use it twice, sometimes three times a week for 45 minute sessions. I don’t use the plans or AI because my current situation is so erratic, there simply is no point.
Common sense tells me that I should call it a day. I could set a stopwatch and knock out a self-styled threshold or VO2 session. I know what I need, what I enjoy and what keeps me motivated.
Obviously all of the above is personal to me. That said, legacy or not, I don’t feel special.
I struggled with the phrasing of that…it was not meant as a pejorative and why I included my own experience with Legacy pricing and why I kept paying it when the reality was it was financially beneficial for me to lose that status.
Why should anyone worry about what others are paying? The price is stated. You can join at anytime. The time you join does determine your price going forward. Whenever a changed has been announced we have had time to adjust and not miss out. Why is there really an issue?
One thought shared is that if we were all on the same pricing level, we might all be paying a price that is lower than the current level.
- In theory, the people on legacy pricing are paying less for the same product/service as those who joined at the current pricing. That is true despite potentially being an equal strain on the TR system and therefore related cost to TR.
- So the speculation is that if we all payed the same amount, it would be lower which is a benefit to those users that are not on reduced legacy pricing.
Separate, but partly parallel is that if people all paid the current rate, TR would have more revenue that might lead to more employees or whatever else they need to help roll out more new features and at a faster rate.
Those are the two that spring to mind from my reading, but there are probably more I am missing. There is a third that relates to fairness, but I think that fails in my eyes because in the purest sense, the service is either worth what you pay for it or it’s not. Simple value consideration with respect to the person, their needs and budget considerations.
Dont think you meant this as you wrote it. Unlikely that a grandfathered rate of $99 or $129 would be higher then a new rate.
Your points while all valid still have me saying…why should someone care what a long term subscriber is paying. Fairness in whose eyes? Those that have spent say $700 for subscriptions for past years or the one just signing up now who gets the rewards from the development that occurred due to prior subscribers.
- I probably have my wording wrong. Trying another way…
If you wipe the slate clean and set a price for the TR service that met all the requirements they need, it might be a price for everyone that is lower than the current, regular rate of $20/mo $189/yr. None of us knows what that could be, but people with this view speculate it would be something less than the current rate.
- So it might be a lower price compared to anyone NOT on legacy pricing now, and probably higher price for everyone on legacy pricing now. Does that make more sense?
As to a deeper exploration into any one of these views, I will leave that to those that have them. I just tried to summarize what I see as their viewpoint to quickly answer your question. You are free to read the 1100+ posts above here that dive into this all with plenty of discussion. I think just about every angle has been covered at least once.
Or… playing devil’s advocate…if legacy pricing was ditched, then many legacy subscribers would not pay year round but only for (say) 6 months of the year, causing overall revenue to drop/be more volatile and causing TR to inflate prices for all.
Many legacy subscribers act as a steady constant annual source of income for TR which is what all businesses crave.