They will have a year once they are charged.
So 365 days after it shows up on their credit card statement.
They will have a year once they are charged.
So 365 days after it shows up on their credit card statement.
The way I understand it is that you will continue get all the improvements
Thanks Nate - this is honestly much more generous than I expected. Let me try to restate this in bullet points to make sure I got it right.
Quite frankly, to me this is not ending legacy pricing, but just making people ask for it. I think this a very reasonable way to handle this transition to more consistent pricing.
One suggestion I would have, as I think some of what causes tension regarding the legacy pricing is that there is this âspecial statusâ that new subscribers donât have a way to join. If the 15% discount was available to all âlong termâ subscribers, say people who have subscribed continuously for 3-5 years, I think that would be more equitable. Legacy pricing subscribers could get this pricing âearlyâ, but it would be open to all subscribers based on subscription length. Not sure if this makes business sense, but it sounds nice
This is meant to be sarcastic and not to be taken seriously
Nate could always step down as CEO and have a monkey take over to raise prices, bc the legacy pricing âagreementâ was as long as he is CEO.
Then all the non-legacy pricing people will be just as unhappy as the legacy pricing people and everyone would be on the same price.
Thus Nate is able to stay true to his word and also make more money for TR so they can develop features faster so everyone wins
This whole thread is wild to me when you figure that the cost differential between standard legacy pricing and current new user pricing is about the same as a decent cassette and a years subscription to the product cost about half of the pie plate monstrosity on my mtb.
Hard for me to imagine being willing to put in the hours to get value out of the product and having ~100usd be a deal breaker.
Edited to say that I havenât always had an extra $100 and can respectfully sympathize with anyone struggling to make ends meet while enjoying the sport. My point is that cycling is an expensive hobby in terms of time and money and TR at either price point is something that I see as a good value.
I am thick in the head and at times have trouble following along.
So what I am understanding is that I can pay the legacy pricing forever. I can opt in or opt out and I will always have the same trainer road experience as everyone else. My experience will never be nerfed.
OR
I can choose to pay more because I want to pay more for the sake of paying more and Its the right think to do?
I believe I am missing something⌠What am I opting out of? Am I just opting out of a price increase or am I opting out of FUTURE features and a price increase?
If I am opting out of a price increase but also feel that I can afford to pay more but not the amount for the opt in would I be allowed to pay more? For instance I mentioned over 1000 messages ago $129.00 a year or $177.27 CAD.
Here are my issues.
This is a matter for legacy members. Not newer members and not wahoo or zwift members. Great to get opinions on what people should do when its not their money and not their business. For instance I have never asked anything about members that started with trainer road in say 2011 and got legacy pricing then. This whole thread should have been dealt with privately. This created situations of envy and of targeting. I am offended that I was placed in a position that I FEEL that I have to defend what I pay for TR⌠IT WAS NOT my idea for legacy forever pricing! However it was my CHOICE to FEEL that I have to defend what I pay for TR.
I am confused.
The USA is not the be all and end all of the cycling world. This pricing change is affecting your some of your âAthletesâ in many different ways. In 2011 the CAD exchange rate was 1.011. Now its 1.37442. That is a huge difference. For American users that donât get it. This means Canadians are now paying 28% more for ALL of the exact same goods you are because of the 49th parallel. Not TRâs issue or anyone elseâs. But this applies to the rest of the world. So that $5.00 a month is now $7.80 a month for an Aussie. This is not for just TR this is for everything that we consume to survive.
In the end TR and myself will make the best decision for ourselves. I believe Nate is trying to make the best choice/compromise for TR and its structure. I do respect Nate and how he has communicated on this issue. This is a difficult topic to discuss especially in an open forum where so many people have a stake or think they have a stake in the final outcome. Everyone has an opinion and pretty much everyone is wrong and many people may be unhappy.
At the end of our days it just wont matter!
I am not trying to offend anyone. I just have less of a filter than a lot of people.
I agree. Normally its not always an issue.
I was attacked by a dog at work. It bit my dick and did a fair bit of damage. Then I was attacked at my work for getting bit on the dick, I was humiliated, shamed and ridiculed. Management did not investigate, file a workers comp claim or do any paperwork. I have a statement from the dog owener stating exactly what happened! Now my work is denying that I even got bit as they need to cover their asses and need to find a fall guy. Well the fall guy is me. Because of the situation I have been placed on long term disability and in total I am bringing in 63.70 a day or $1900 a month to provide for a family of 3 in our house and I have 2 girls away at University. My wife who has a great job has long covid with no benefits so she is making nothing. Our income is less than 1/3rd of normal.
Its a bit of a shitty situation that I did nothing to bring upon myself other than I turned my head on a client and their dog. But as crappy as it is things could always be much worse.
I am fortunate that I worked hard and saved when I was younger. Right now we are subsidizing with our savings.
I am also fortunate that this situation will hopefully be temporary! Many others are having much bigger issues and struggles.
I also see TR as a good value⌠But I see having enough money to buy plane tickets to get my girls home for 2-3 weeks at Xmas as a much better value. Without that this sport ainât wort a shit.
Going to leave now. In the end this whole topic is stupid and I am kind of ashamed that I have spent this amount of time on it. I think I have been fighting so much for my rights at work I have lost a little bit of a connection to reality. Reality sucks!
@Nate_Pearson would be interesting to know what percentage of users are still on the legacy pricing (totally understand if you donât want to share that though), I hope the company has been looking at the numbers at least.
Personally I think switching everyone to a discount percentage would be a much better model than the legacy thing. I donât think itâs fair to be crucified over it if you did change your mind on that, but totally up to you.
The whole reason the legacy pricing debate keeps coming up though is because we donât know how many users it is. If itâs 50% of the user base then it is most certainly affecting prices for new users, which arguably will be slowing growth / youâve got an artificially overpriced product on the market. If itâs 10% of users then itâs not probably not really having a big impact on the price.
You could argue that 100% of users are on legacy pricing as currently everyone is protected from future price rises. The day prices rise then 100% of current users will be benefited, but even now there is a budgeting benefit from knowing price is fixed.
@Nate_Pearson is saying there is no separation of their product based on price and that you will have three choices for price - each of which will give you all current and future functionality
I believe the middle option is closest to your request - although not a direct match
Whatâs not clear to me is what a person gets now and in the future for each of these pricing models.
Iâll just quote myself - although if @Nate_Pearson wants to chime in to confirm it might help
So you get all functionality now and in the future regardless of which of those three you pick
I donât understand what is confusing. Some Legacy users have said they would be willing to give TR more money. Nate has said he has 2 options for them to do that (pay current rate or pay current rate minus a discount) if they want to. He has also said if you donât want to give more, you donât have to.
Thatâs it. Thatâs the whole thing.
Or as the kids these days say, âThats the tweetâ or whatever.
I guess I didnât read every post in the thread so I donât know when/where Nate laid that out. Partial messaging is whatâs confusing. when people quote part of a post and the full picture is not laid out.
So to be clear, the options offered are focusing on how Legacy users can choose to support TR through three different fee structures, but there is no differentiation on what features/capabilities they receive regardless of their choice on payment level?
This is a big one:
Itâs in Nateâs post from yesterday that Chad linked below.
Correct
Remember when Radiohead allowed you to pay whatever you wanted for In Rainbows?
Not exactly the same, but kind of a similar deal.
OK, so I finally decided the scroll through this thread since it was reinvigorated two weeks ago. I had been avoiding it since pricing changes tend to elicit emotional response and ⌠I wasnât disappointed, unfortunately. Is there a TLDR version of how prices are (may be) changing for existing users? The TR website just has $190 USD/year or $20 USD/month as the two options. (Iâm just looking for facts - no opinions.) Thanks.