Yes, we could do something like that. A sorta (choose your price) as long as it’s higher than what you’re paying. I’m not sure how many people would take advantage of that.
If you want to help us the best way is to tell your friends. Use the free month codes on your account and send them out to people. Talk about us your TR success on the internet. Share the podcast and YouTube channel with your friends. All of that helps the most and is probably a bigger financial boost than anyone could pay themselves.
The user base for providing open feedback, even if it didn’t directly affect them (us), the expression of “Hey, this isn’t what we’re used to from TR.” Even the most ardent defenders of TR’s value recognized that this wasn’t in their norm.
Nate for being engaged in the long thread, expressing the decision making process to his “investors” and customers.
Nate again for not panicking and allowing it to play out a little bit throughout the week, and I presume churning over it and losing sleep over deciding what “the right thing to do is.”
And again, the company for recognizing that while it was entirely within its rights to do change pricing as it desired, and recognizing the value it provides, but still wanting to do things a certain way to maintain its relationship with the customers.
I can’t think of another company that has the kind of loyal following that TR has, and it’s probably largely due to the podcast. I think we all feel like we’re in tune with what’s going on with the company on the whole, even if it’s really none of our damn business. Excellent work here. Thanks for “letting us in.”
I am in retail; the lesson is never if you will make a mistake but how you react when you do make a mistake. Amazingly you can turn a negative into a positive.
Classy move by TR; ironically the whole “crisis to resolution” creates far more goodwill than if it had been handled with Better communication in the first place !
I understand Nate and salute you and the team for taking this decision.
I just feel like people expect too much sometimes, despite you already offering SO much.
The grandfather system that you use is fantastic, in a time where most companies offer better deals to NEW customers and other subscription services would apply their price increases to all members, regardless of “loyalty”.
I appreciate that you want to be better than these companies though and hold yourself to your own standards, and that’s very admirable. Chapeau!
I want to draw attention to this because it bears emphasis.
In the original thread, I think some people forgot that there are real humans within this company. People with the same feelings, goals and thoughts that we all have. This is not some faceless mega-corp driven to extract every cent from our pockets. The implications of greed, selfishness and other unsavory comments towards Nate and the team in that thread were insulting and beyond unnecessary.
TR is a group of amazing people, lead by someone that clearly loves his customers and the way his business impacts them. I’ve never seen the level of interaction from a leader, and the group working with him, that we see continuously from TR.
I just hope people remember things like this when something happens that is not to their liking in the future. Keep some perspective for you, the people involved, and the actual impact of the situation. The #firstworldproblems tag is a bit cliche, but touches on the reality that we often overemphasize the gravity of situations like this, well beyond what is appropriate.
The current price for all new and returning users (whatever is the active rate).
The “prior” price for all sustaining users (the old price prior to the active rate above).
Essentially have two price points with the top being the current price, and the other being the most recent previous price for all legacy users still on active subscription.
This idea is different than Nate’s current “your price is the price for life” which is really amazing if you think about it. My proposal still rewards loyalty and yet helps the company by increasing revenue over time to address inflation and other growth costs over time.
Quick note on (what I think is) a bug: I was grandfathered in at 12$ but hadn’t changed to the annual plan due having to take the higher annual price, think you rolled out some code to allow me to take 99$/yr price (thank you!). But now after clicking yes to take the $ option it tells me I am now paying £99/yr (UK subscriber). See pics. Is this a mistake?
I’m one of those who both a) find value in the whole TR experience way beyond watts/$ even at way higher than my grandfathered price, and b) felt sad yesterday at what seemed like the passing of an era in TR’s history, which has come to be part of my own. It was the (apparent) change in ethos, not the change in price. I spent much of yesterday trying to articulate what all that value consisted of, just for me personally which got too lengthy to post. Glad I postponed instead of posted, and can just echo others who see a really classy course correction.
On the transparency issue, I do want to add that one of the totally loveable things about Nate as a cycling competitor is hatching all these clever schemes with Pete to crush the competition – and then podcasting them to the whole world! The hardened vets can say, never show your hand like that, you newbie! But in fact he’s performing better and winning more than ever on his bike(s), foolish transparency or not. Publicly making, owning, and correcting a mistake has paid off here too, apparently, when his customers have gone from dismay yesterday to trying to figure out how to fairly pay TR more today! Maybe it’s not bad business after all to keep trying to do the right thing.
Bravo is in order for @Nate_Pearson and the TR team. I have been a user for a couple of years now off and on and on the yearly plan as of last Sept.
It is amazing in this day and age to have some much contact and openness with your customers. Looking forward to being a customer for a long time.
Edti: @mcneese.chad I do think it is an interesting idea each year if you are “grandfathered” your price would/could go up by X amout of dollars yearly to continue to support TR enhancements. I would be ok with this.
I was on the fence about signing up before the last price increase. It was the grand fathering option that made me push the subscribe button. I was surprised it wasn’t announced this time. I’m sure it would lead those who aren’t sure to join. Well done on making amends.
Great communication Nate, from NZ I use you guys constantly as an example of Product Management, customer engagement and all round general “if you’re running a SaaS startup, act like these guys”.
I’m a subscriber since June 2013