I think it is so cool that Nate comes forward with a clear message about the price increase, and allows legacy subscribers to opt out. This is a perfect example of a high-quality organization that is passionate about what they do, and shows they genuinely care about their customers.
For me, an extra 5 bucks a month is so worth it for this outstanding software and value. If you are like me, and don’t really notice $5 extra per month, please opt in for the increase, which will help TR keep improving.
I applaud the way you approached this. Kind of a voluntary individual value assessment. I have always maintained an annual membership, not month to month, as I felt this is a greater amount of financial support and predictable revenu overall for TR, even though it is slightly less revenue than monthly payments. For Zwift, I turn it off every summer and any month I travel in and only end up paying for a few months per year. Forced to a higher TR cost, I would likely do the same to control my total outlay.
My main concern for going month to monthth is whether or not my data from rides outside of TR would still be collected into TR once turned back on. I like using the TR training plans, but I’m not sure if an interrupted subscription would still use my Strava and Garmin ride data in the training plan. (I’m assuming it does actually use these extra rides in the adaptation reviews) if I turn off my subscription, do I have some form of “Guest Access” so I can review my data that I already paid for?
While I like the evolution of the product over the last year, the changes to me are about increasing adoption rates and increasing active monthly users (making things easier to start and use) and haven’t improved the fundamentals of training and workouts. The AI adaption of plans might be more like having a Coach to adapt your training based on performance, but I don’t think that study is completed yet. AI could have been a subscription add-on @ +$5.00/month, and hey, after a free trial I may have opted in for that. It’s obviously harder to build out product this way, but gives some element of tiered pricing for users.
How about sharing your vision, or even your feature roadmap for the future? I’m assuming after I buy-in to the vision I can change my subscription to a higher payment?
I DO value and enjoy the product and applaud you for this approach.
This could not be any more fair. I hope people will drink one or two fewer “starbucks” a month and support Trainerroad.
BUT I have to say this thread is excruciating. Why do people think that anyone is interested in their financial situation or the “agony” of their decision whether to pay a few extra dollars a month…
Is there any possibility of a 4th option? What about legacy members that wanted to lock in ‘forever’ again at slightly higher price? Full disclosure: I was in pretty early so my price increase would be more than 5 bucks/month
I’ve been locked in at $99 a year for quite some time now. What I get now from TR is loads more than when I first started. I can afford the new price so I’m happy to support, I can understand that others won’t be able to and I think what Nate’s has done via the options should be commended.
Even though it may only factor into perhaps 25% of my training in-season, the value proposition for what is offered from TR is ridiculously high. When I saw @Nate_Pearson’s announcement I kind of said to myself ‘finally’. Having worked in the tech space I have thought TR has been undervaluing itself for awhile now.
For $0.517/day USD now, I am more than happy to pay that. The feature set that has been added recently is just ridiculous. When you take a step back and realize all the tools at your fingertips inside of the TR universe, it’s an absolute bargain. Then you have the value add of the podcast, which has been amazingly informative for going on ten years now.
And this may have already been said, because I don’t have the patience to read the entire thread, but let us not all forget the cautionary tale that is allowing a cycling centric entity to be wrapped up in an M&A grab by VC or private equity. Wahoo and Outside inc. should show everyone the importance of rigorous independence of a niche brand. When you become part of a bigger entity, priorities tend to shift away from what made your brand successful in the first place as part of a land grab; because almost every VC/PE is trying to replicate ‘first scale;then monetize’ model of the unicorns of tech. That’s just not applicable in a market such as this. Again, Wahoo and Outside being glittering examples of this.
And yeah, I was grandfathered but am more than happy to pay the new price.
@Nate_Pearson: out of pure curiousity, have you considered issuing shares directly and exclusively to the most devoted of your customers? Judging from this thread, TrainerRoad are enjoying overwhelming support from a sigificant amount of loyal users/customers. I’d guess that quite a few would be open to the idea of making an investment if the opportunity came along, especially if that helps TrainerRoad avoid being gobbled up by some VC/PE firm or competitor and risk TR losing focus on what many of us appreciate with your company.
I hope you go this route as well. I am leaning towards staying on legacy pricing for now but can also see me wanting to provide additional support in the future by moving to a 15% discount from current price.
Thank you for the great product, transparency, and lots of warning with discussion and dialogue.
Thanks @Nate_Pearson .
The timing of this is tough. I get it and want to pay more - but it has come at worst time for me personally. Lower income, huge financial pressures and as a result using TR a lot less.
I’m hoping to be able to pay my way more in the future so welcome the future option of moving from Legacy to loyalty discount.
Thanks for your approach Nate - so refreshing, honest and inspiring.