From a business perspective it is reasonable to assume that Peloton (because of their large subscriber base) and Zwift (because of their recent fund raising) have more expendable capital than TrainerRoad. That does not mean that either company is trying to squeeze TR out, but it does afford them additional opportunities to innovate that could attract new users and users from competitors. (There’s also RGT, FulGaz, and others to consider, too.)
The target audience for each company is different, but there is clearly overlap. TR meets a niche demand for data-driven athletes interested in performance that I don’t feel Zwift or Peloton cater to right now. Should they try to do so, though, TR could have a competition on their hands.
For me (n=1) the biggest draw to TR is the extensive training library (including Plan Builder) and ability to change plans at any point. My initial foray into structured training was through a coach selling online plans but I had to purchase each plan. It worked well preparing me for my very first event but subsequent plans didn’t do it for me. Every time I wanted to change I paid for it.
While I’ve probably spent more for the TR subscription than if I just bought 1-2 years worth of plans, the active forum community, podcasts, and responsiveness of @nate_pearson, @chad, @Jonathan, and the rest of the team are huge selling points such that I want to support the company through my subscription. But all of these are free and in no way guarantee TR business to remain viable, let alone innovate.
From the small bits of business insights that @nate_pearson has shared on the podcasts it sounds like corporate culture is awesome and TR would be a great place to work. Again, though, not necessarily something that attracts paying customers.
I personally think the biggest risk to TR would be if Zwift developed a training library even half as extensive as TR’s, and included it as part of their base subscription. TR and Zwift are priced competitively right now, but in this scenario Zwift would have more services to offer for a comparable price (i.e. extensive workout library, plans, rides, races, challenges, etc).
Group workouts were a great innovation for TR. DCRainMaker has made other suggestions for the indoor cycling industry to consider such as recording even more data that is already being transmitted over Ant+ and BLE (e.g. respiration rate, left/right balance, etc) and using it intelligently to help make us faster. And for TR that’s what it is about … making us faster. Continue to offer and innovate on that and they should have enough sustained business to remain viable for a very long time.
, but because the level of interaction is far superior IMO. Not to mention that gaming on consoles leads to a default of voice chat as the comm option since KB are seldom used.
But there are other implications, if you are Zwift why not complement direct-to-consumer with the Specialized dealer network to market, sell, and service the new Zwift hardware? Will be interesting to see this unfold.
