Thought it worth adding my feedback, as feeling conflicted as to my continued use of Trainnerroad.
Been a user since early 2015, on a monthly plan as I occasionally take time away from cycling, so like the freedom to come and go (but would have been an active subscriber for the vast majority of this period).
It seems to me like Trainnerroad has been investing heavily in new features over recent years (and can see why price rises are needed to fund additional features)…but as a more ‘casual’ user, I don’t really feel like I’m getting the benefit of the features. I feel like by simply using the basic features that brought me to Trainerroad in the fist place (workouts and training plan), I’m subsidizing the advanced features (outdoor workouts, advanced analytics etc. for those who do use them.
I’ve tried most of the other platforms, but always strongly promoted Trainerroad over the years, but not sure I would do at the new pricing. Introduce a “tiered” pricing structure, and I’m likely to stick around using the more basic features, otherwise, I’m likely to look elsewhere.
Nope. I see no need to effectively censor this topic.
Discussion is open and welcomed (within the forum guidelines) per every contact I’ve had with TR support in prior “hot topics”.
Anyone wanting to read, participate or ignore this topic (and any other) are free to do so.
Options to avoid seeing this discussion range from skipping over this thread in the active thread list (don’t click in to read), to using the [Muted] option at the bottom of the thread (to hide it from your feed).
In short, it’s the choice of each and every member of this forum how they handle this or any other topic within bounds of the forum guidelines.
I’ve been a TR user for 18 months, locked in at $99 p.a. I make good use of my subscription and it’s been good value for me.
Since using TR, I’ve recommended it to plenty of others because it’s an effective tool, and was good value.
I’m lucky to have more disposable income than some others, but at the new price point I’d think twice, at least, before subscribing, and it would be a very tough sell to me because the value proposition has declined. My recommendation of TR to others will also now change: great tool, but expensive, UNLESS you’re lucky enough to be locked in on old prices.
The problem with these “tiered” pricing schemes is that the calendar and analysis are not extra features, they are actually core parts of TrainerRoad.
Strava(for example) can separate that out as an extra feature, because they are a social media website who also do analytics. TrainerRoad is a site that makes you faster, and analyzing your data is part of what makes you faster.
TR was great before the calendar was ever added, and many at the time requested the ability to go back to the old way, which was promised in a future update.
Analysing data may make you faster, but it’s not a core feature. I got faster just by following the simple time crunched plan. As soon as I did the workout, I turned the iPad off. Looked at nothing again until i was ready to do the next prescribed workout.
Undoubtedly if you get into analysis and want to spend the time on such things, you may go even faster again…but that’s why I think tiered options work perfectly - casual users want basic features that are proven to work…they won’t get as fast perhaps as those using the advanced features, but the option to upgrade to that level is there if they want it.
What is the logic to not offering a tiered system?
As stated by many dedicated TR users here, the market they want to target seem to be more than happy to pay for the advanced features.
Why risk losing a significant percentage of more casual users by not offering a reduced feature set?
I’ve been a TR using for maybe 4-5 years so I’m grandfathered in. At $99/year it’s a great value. At $189 I still think it’s a great value. I agree two price increases in a year can be a tough pill to swallow. I still use TR even though I have a coach. I either re-create my coach’s workouts or pick any of the TR one’s if I have a choice for that day’s workout. Mainly as I think their ios apps are very polished and works very well for me. Even if I was paying $189 and was paying a coach I still might have a harder time going away from TR.
to hazard a guess, commercial viability. ie too many users would opt for the most basic tier and that wouldn’t provide enough revenue to support those additional features or develop the TR platform further.
@Supercyril my thoughts exactly. Some users may not want anymore features so a tierd “lite” and “advanced” might justify a price increase for new or prospective users. Likewise existing users who only use it periodically might want to downsize on a monthly subscription.
I personally like TR as it is, and am scratching my head of what additional features I would be looking for.
As an aside , for those who would like a UK based coach and pay just 50% of the quoted US$ monthly fee, please get in touch.
Sure it would. I for one don’t use them. The “core” of TR workouts and plans is all I need. It would be a simple concept to have a TR Basic, TR Premium etc. Lots of apps do this. I think the question is what percentage of TR users will make use of new features. I am guessing there is a good proportion simply want a basic training package. There is also a good proportion, you know the kind that also follow and post on forums, that want as much as possible. One size fits all generally doesn’t fit all well. If TR has done their homework and determined that the tools they provide as value-add have high usage rates across their subscriber base then maybe I’m the outlier, but on the other hand if they “build it and tehy will come” then tiered make more sense.
In my case:
I don’t race/compete and don’t need/want a “coach” so saying it’s cheaper than a coach is moot.
I don’t do outdoor workouts - never will, I train indoors to enjoy outdoor rides
I don’t do triathlons - will never use swim/run features
I don’t use analysis features
I don’t use other platforms so integration or replacement for others doesn’t matter
I don’t “train year round” it’s a winter weather late-fall to early spring i.e 6 months activity
If TR wants to develop these, make them pay to play but to bundle them in an all or nothing makes it a tough value proposition for some users who will never make use of them.
I think this could be nice. I’d be interested in some level of basic access, minus the plans, calendar, analysis etc. Say access to the workout creator and maybe at least some access to the workout library. I think the plans are good, and the calendar but I like doing my own planning and I can get access to a calendar easily enough other places.
I think the problem here is that because a lot of people started before the analytics and the calendar existed they think of them as being “extra” features. But they aren’t. They’re part of TrainerRoad and absolutely part of the core. TrainerRoad is not just a simpler product without them, but in fact a worse product.
Complaints / critical comments about those discussing this topic are not productive.
(head… bang… wall…)
This topic is financial at it’s core and as such, will be very important and subjective to people on a variety of levels. It’s not your place to criticize what someone considers fair price or an appropriate way to spend their money. Make your own choice and leave others to theirs.
Whining about the ongoing discussion does nothing more than imply that people should not share their thoughts and opinions. It’s a terrible thing to imply and counterproductive to the entire point of a discussion forum.
If you are tired of the comments, think everything is repeated, etc… step out by using either of the methods I described above.
Please cease posting that type of comment and keep on topic.
So in other words, the majority neither want or need the advanced features, but will be made pay for their development?
There has to be a case for getting rid of the grandfathering system at this stage. If any big new features come out it would be bordering on ridiculous for them still to be honoured at the original fee. Of course the original members should be rewarded for their loyalty and support, so perhaps an incremental price bump to their membership would be appropriate.
To the argument that it’s only the cost of a coffee per week extra - this is missing the point completely.
It’s putting TR at a price way, way above it’s rivals.
For the average user (which you claim is the majority of the figures don’t add up to use a tiered system), other platforms offer much better value.
To my mind, if the sufferfest implements a structured training program from within the app, which I know must be close as its in the pipeline, TR could suffer massively. I for one would find it hard to ignore.
Understand that I’m saying this from a place of love for the TR system - I want it to succeed.
This really is the first time in years that they’ve done something to make me question them…which worries me.
