TR pricing based on hours of Training?

Would it be possible to offer a model where you pay for Trainerroad costs by the number of training hours?

Pricing could be something like this:

50 hour training cost for example $ 40

100 hour training cost for example $ 75

200 hour training cost for example $ 140

I think it could be a WIN WIN situation, depends on the price (fair for both sides) , for a user view it is easier to handle holidays or Injuries, where you can’t ride?

What do you think?

1 Like

For what it’s worth I am quite happy with the subscription model. It makes it easy for me but also for the business to plan AP/AR.

14 Likes

Sorry to say but it’s probably a lose here for trainer road. You’re talking less than $1 per workout.

Think of a low volume plan with roughly 12 workouts a month which works to like $12. Why would you pay for the subscription?

I think you’d have to charge something like $6-8 per hr or per workout. This would make folks if they are dedicated users to pay for the sub after like 3 workouts.

Wow that’s going to get expensive for anyone doing a triathlon plan. Also remember that a lot of us are grandfathered in at lower prices so a model like you suggest is very unattractive.

An injury button - stop paying for a certain period - would be appreciated

6 Likes

Seems that would be rife for abuse - the injury button

1 Like

if people are “seasonal” users of TR, switch to the pay monthly schedule. You can pause and restart whenever you want.

2 Likes

How much for 600 hours pa? $360?

Would it be all hours on the calendar or just indoor trainer rides? What if you do a TR sessions outside?

1 Like

Fully agree - so should consider how to implement.

I could certainly imagine being a low-volume user where a pay as you go type model makes more sense. For example, I’d like to do a couple zwift rides per month, but there’s no way I’m going to pay $20 for that. Most months I don’t even use the free 25km. I would pay $20 to have 10 hours or so of riding banked up so if I wanted to use it I could. But back to TR, I’m not sure ‘casual user’ is really the target audience.

Okay - well you’re probably going to have to offer TR something more than just throwing this over the fence at them. :slight_smile:

From their perspective - this feature would be all downside.

  1. they lose money based on you pausing your subscription
  2. they would need to invest time to implement/test the feature
  3. they would have to spend time/money to “verify” your injury.

This is all downside for TR.

if you’re not grandfathered - then sure you just cancel your account and re-enable. if you are grandfathered, well - if you’re truly coming back to the platform and let’s say you’re out 1 year you’ll make up the $100 in the year after that.

maybe some loss in customer sat/loyalty here - but I’d argue if a customer got injured and they were 100% upset that they couldn’t pause and left the platform because of this, that this proverbial customer probably wasn’t exactly they type of customer you may have wanted to retain in the first place - or at least it’s a potentially difficult segment of the customer base to hold and retain.

5 Likes

Not a fan of the idea, I think you’re paying for a service and it’s not like the amount of hours training you do has any impact on the costs of running TR. This would only benefit low volume users but as I said you’re paying for the upkeep of a service.

10 Likes

I like the idea of a subscription which means I can then try whatever plan at which ever level I want. Cost per hour could also drive away high hour users - and that’s not fair.
As others have said it costs a certain amount to run TR and if we enjoy it enough to use the plans etc we should pay. And it’s far cheaper, I’d imagine, than a dedicated coach for most folks. :grin:

1 Like

They could offer a teaser plan to get people hooked … like 3 months for $29.99. And make it once per email address/account so people don’t just do that every winter.

It’s too bad so many online services are getting so expensive. Strava wants $60/year for their weak extra features. I’d be happier with Strava is everybody just paid $1/month.

Yeah, sorry, not a good idea. It’s not like TR incurs fewer expenses on lower volume users. They have the same costs to develop and if you start to segment the users it inherently becomes unfair. An analogy is in the case of health insurance, where you pay the same rate as someone else, even if you don’t use the same level of services (not to turn this into a debate of health insurance but risk pooling is a good thing).

Anyhow, lower volume people have the same experience as higher volume as far as features and ultimately were supporting the training platform and future development

3 Likes

Unlike health insurance, it costs hardly anything extra to provide service to 500 hour per year user versus a 50 hour per year user.

TR though isn’t a public utility. They want to make as much money as they can and will explore whatever pricing models maximize profit and long term sustainability.

If you are on a monthly sub plan, you can do just that. You can stop at the end of any month, and start again when you want.

I like the idea of this post. My recommendation however is to have a lower tier for those who do not require high volume or specialty plans.

It makes no sense for someone who only uses SSBLV to pay $189 a year.

I can’t believe there are people complaining about their $100 grandfathered plans when I’m paying so much.

1 Like

I’m on a non-grandfathered monthly plan - so around 20-21 CAD per month depending on the exchange rate. 240-255 CAD per year. And I don’t think it’s a bad deal at all. It compares well to the alternatives.

And doing LV plans, by the way.

1 Like

Well I know I’m not the only one who feels this way. The current pricing model doesn’t make sense for MTBers who want to do structured training, but still prioritize their outside riding over that training. Clearly I’m not the only one who thinks there is a better way, hence this post.