Cbrink does a pretty good comparison video on YouTube. I haven’t watched it in awhile.
I’m spoiled… I’m one of those guys that got locked in at $89/year when TR first started the yearly subscription. Now I feel like I’m getting away with highway robbery… haha!!
However, from a business perspective, grandfathering drives customer loyalty. I’m a great example. It would be a really dumb move to cancel my membership, even when I take breaks from structured training.
I think that TR and other indoor training focused apps have to deal with more seasonality than other generic subscription services. Many people view indoor training as primarily a winter time activity, so by grandfathering people in this helps keep them subscribed year round instead of just winter months. Having yearly subscriptions vs monthly gives TR a lot more certainty and predictability to their income stream.
This policy may cause some difficulties regarding revenue eventually, but I think only once they stop growing. Also, this would likely end if they are acquired.
He actually started deleting comments on the new video because he can’t defend himself
I was an indoor trainer hater and very closed minded about it. I tried it in the past, but just could’t bare it. I had to ride outside, but knew this would be limited in the winter because of bad weather; the cold temps doesn’t stop me from riding, but rain, snow and early darkness will. I decided about 4 weeks ago to have an open mind about indoor training and do some investigating. What I found was cyclist suggesting TrainerRoad (TR) and Zwift. I heard of Sufferfest, but the title turned me off because I didn’t want to suffer; well that is what the title suggested to me anyway. I settled on TR (and Zwift for now) and what I have found is that TR makes cycling indoors on the trainer more interesting because I’m not just mindlessly pedaling indoors; it’s forcing me to work and this in turns keeps me focused, motivated and excited on the trainer, unlike in the past where I wanted to pull my eyeballs out of the socket from the mindless trainer rides. The easy to follow structured training plan keeps me focused, which is what I needed. If I had to pull everything together and move this here from one platform to another etc., I’d lose interest very quickly. At the moment, I use it with Zwift where Zwift helps with some distraction, but I find myself not looking a Zwift too much anymore. I’m happy to be able keep my cycling legs and improve at the same time during this time of the year.
TR, for me, is better than paying a coach who probably use training plans from these same apps to generate many of their suggested training plans. This allows me to cut out the middle man. But, I do not compete or plan to compete, so my situation is different than most. One feature I really like is that I can load the day’s training ride to Wahoo and take it outside whenever I want to.
I do find it entertaining when folks cry about spending $20 a month for something cycling related, yet some of these same cyclists are willing to spend $4k for a set of wheels or $400 for a pair of shoes (a perishable item) or $200-$300 on a bib and not blink an eye. Yet, they cry about $20 a month on a program helps keeps them fit on the bike, especially those living in climates where the weather does not allow them to ride outdoors. WHY?
Iamholland, I definitely understand how many monthly fees can add up and the need to cut from the low hanging fruits. I don’t see me using Zwift all that much once the weather breaks, but I do see value in TR even after the weather breaks for those days I can’t or don’t want to go out and ride even during the warmer months.
I am very new to all of this, so I don’t know all of the training platforms out there. I briefly looked at some of those other training programs (Training Peak, Fast training etc.), but TR just seem so easy to get started and I wanted to get started quickly and easily. With that said, I did get free trial periods for Sufferfest, Ful Gaz, Rouvy and Kinoma when I purchased the Wahoo Snap, so I will probably test them and see if I like them.
Ha. Me too. Don’t really care enough to watch. A few bullet points would be enough. Especially given, I’m going to switch.
I think that those grandfathered in would understand an increase along with inflation for example.
This isn’t directed at a particular user. What I find most interesting about this thread, and others in this forum, is the almost cult like following. Someone dares to criticise TR then everyone jumps on the cult bandwagon to defend it. Do I like TR…yes. Could it be better…a lot. TrainerRoad isn’t some type of panacea, it is OK at what it does. But I feel sometimes we need to take a more honest look at the platform.
I think the anger is from the youtube guy misrepresenting TR and having an affiliation with Sufferfest while doing a review.
There are tons and tons of threads on this forum telling us how we can improve (which we appreciate!). Some are slight feature suggestions and other are pretty straight forward like telling us to “wake up” or we will die.
I think there a quite a few threads and users that offer honest criticism and it invites some great discussions. Often, members of the TR team are part of these discussions which results in an improved product.
The analogy to a “cult bandwagon” seems a little hyperbolic and doesn’t really add much to these conversations. In your opinion, what are some of the things that TR could improve on? It seems like you have a lot of suggestions.
I don’t believe it is. I think we can see from this thread there are people who haven’t fully watched the video but are happy to attack the persons character rather than the points raised.
For me the big thing which TR need to improve on is there use of historical data. At this point with the number of users they have and the data points they collect per user they should be able to build an adaptive training profile for longer term users
I honestly don’t ever see what you describe. I certainly criticize plenty of what TR does, and almost to a man (or woman) every one on this forum seems to.
Since joining trainerroad a few months ago, I have been OBSESSED with poring over all of the plans, workouts, and any information on training that I can get my hands on. With their podcast, along with the research-based info on the website, in the workout text, and even in this forum, TR has been the best thing for my health, motivation, and committment to actually following through on my fitness goals. THANK YOU TRAINERROAD…you have a fan for life. Much respect!
Open letter to Nate Pearson (CEO of TrainerRoad)
Dear Sir, I thank you for your thoughtful and considered reply to my original video here (Which Cycling Training App is Best? Should you chose Zwift vs Sufferfest vs TrainerRoad? - YouTube). I would like to clarify a few points. I made a ‘free speech fair criticism’ video of 3 apps and didn’t single any one out in particular purely praise and nor did I say TR was ‘no good’ or that people should not choose it nor did I tell people to buy a competitor product. Yet the amount of hate mail and name calling from your users is frankly appalling and I hope you don’t condone that; I had to delete some of the more abuse posts and some were self-censored by youtube for bad language. In the cold light of day did my fair opinion warrant such a severe reaction which is also (in part) mirrored on this forum? To repeat, I said all these apps are good in their own way and each has a place if they are working for the customer and helping them improve. Yet it is true, I did single TR out on price but cost is not the same as value. In this regard none of the apps are necessarily bad value (as opposed to expensive relative to others). If users are not using the app or not improving then none are worth the money even at a grandfathered reduced rate.
You have asked if I am paid by sufferfest (or another TR competitor). I am not, and already said so several times, but now sufferfest themselves has written to confirm this…so my opinion piece video is not a “paid product placement” as you have alleged. You keep repeating the ridiculous assertion I am paid by a competitor and refuse to accept the answer which is curious and I wonder if this is a method of deflecting my criticisms? No one at fastfitnesstips (including myself) have ever taken any money or goods from any company in return for any review and hence we remain able and willing to give our own opinion. This has got us into arguments with Peloton and Ceramicspeed when we called them out on what we saw as an outlier price. Is it better to live in a society where honest people cannot give their opinion with accusations flying left right and center? Most good companies will take any such comment on the chin, and ask how can we improve?
That said, let me acknowledge, you kindly mention various new features in the pipeline and these are probably excellent but better if people can try these out before committing upfront. I already asked (see the original video description and comments) for TR and Zwift to please forward us a no-money upfront code for our viewers to try these enhancements. But you say no one has contacted you. So I am hereby asking for the third time, publicly, please give our viewers a public 30day free code as you have been promising, without an upfront payment.
Next, you say several times that TR is exactly the same price as Zwift when paid annually. Without wanting to appear petty, please would you confirm you annual price is $180 not $190 to bring these in line. I know it’s might seem a small difference, but it is one that might mean a lot to some people as well as validating your pricing claim of exact equivalence. This is a simple request, not a demand, it is up to you to price the product exactly as you want, I am simply pointing out that the equivalence you claim, isn’t quite correct.
I want to acknowledge that you kindly removed the “13% improvement per hour” claim from your site, thank you, and in return I duly acknowledge that that was a claim about interval training and nothing to do with TR per se. You appear to say your 1%/99% rule is valid and you stand by it. Allow me to mention that you are sitting on a mountain of user data, a lot of it in a public domain but most of it not. Apparently some of your viewers want to sue me for looking at your public records and making these into spreadsheet table. If they are unhappy about TR broadcasting their workouts publicly, you might want to double check on their consent status. Having read your GDPR statement I see you reserve the right to analyse data on file. I would therefore please ask you to please analyse your own files to clarify that the 99% recommendation is on the basis of actual outcomes namely the percentage who did better on SSB was 99:1 vs TB.
Next you criticise our analysis of your 90% rule in the 8x2 test (aka 2x8 test) and the 95% rule in 20minFTP steady state test (Is 90% of 8min x 2 test power really your FTP? (8x2 vs 20min FTP tests) - YouTube). I am open to feedback on this. To quickly summarize quite an in depth piece of work, we analyzed at PRs from 5s thru 2hrs inclusively and also all FTP tests on file. We initially used 60min PR as the gold standard but to improve validity we extended that to actual 60mins FTP tests which were notated as such by the rider and in close proximity to their other tests. You are of course correct this is a rarefied group. Result show that not only is the 60minPR highly correlated with 60mFTP but the standard calculations of 90% (+/-3%) and 95% (+/-3%) are correct only in about 10-20% of your user base. What this means in practice is you are at risk of miscalculating FTP for around 90% of users doing a shorter steady-state protocol if you are relying only on this method. Again, I want to acknowledge you have since launched the Ramp test and our early analysis appear to show that the Ramp test is more accurate measure of FTP60 than other methods in most people. However, it also means people will find they probably get two different FTP predictions (and zone thresholds) from the steady-state FTP tests and the RAMP test (……yes a minority will line up of course). Now some maybe most will argue about our protocol or whether FTP even exists, or whether an outsider is even allowed to look at the public data; in which case I simply urge you to check your own data very carefully and I believe you will see we are correct. What you do with this information, assuming you don’t already know this, is entirely up to you. As an aside, Zwift uses an even more crude model of 95% of any 20min PR, but their users are probably less sensitive to accuracy than yours.
To repeat, I bear neither you nor your product any ill will or malice. I am a hospital doctor and cycling coach and cycling enthusiast who has raised valid points. Even if you don’t agree with me, there is no need to keep accusing me of selling out, or worse. In all sincerity, I wish you well in trying to improve cycling and endurance sports. Bw alex mitchell MD lead coach from FFT (or “youtube guy” as you prefer to call me)
Yeah, I don’t think this is gonna turn out well for you. But I guess if just trying to fan the flames of controversy is your goal, you’ll be OK.
Thanks for the response!
Yes, if anyone is bullying you that’s no good. If people are engaging in constructive criticism then we’re all for that.
Everyone, please remember to always attack the idea and not the person.
I believe so, yes.
I haven’t read every response skipped around and read people’s thoughts.
I come from a traditional get a coach. Plan races. Have a plan. Follow the plan. Some coaches are good. Some are not. I have one in Aus that is legitimate. He talks to you. Knows life gets in the way etc.
But what I get out of TR is different. I get a plan. A forum. I’ve talked with several members offline about training and life. And the podcast I consider like one to one coaching and having friends talking over training. What you get out of TR is a lot more than most coaches, Zwift , Sufferfest etc. I am not saying anything against Zwift, it has its place. You get a lot more from your $ with TR.