Indeed. I wish I had made or backed such a niche product even half as successful as either of those.
I should trust my instinct, in the Costanza way. If I think it’s a silly idea or waste of time, it’s a winner!
If I like it and think a winner, it’s not worth the effort for anyone other than me 
I agree from an investor standpoint that Peloton and Zwift are more attractive - they simply have more upside than TR due to the size of the target markets being orders of magnitude bigger.
From a customer perspective, I don’t think Peloton is a threat to TR . Their user bases are dramatically different - go on to the Peloton Facebook page and you’ll see what I mean. At least, this is true today. Possibly in the future if Peloton decides to enter the more serious cyclist market, then maybe they will be more of a threat.
Zwift is a lot more of a concern competitively. They are starting to offer similar structured training to TR, and their customer bases overlap quite significantly. I’m sure TR has done a customer segmentation to understand this with more specificity, but it would be interesting to see the Venn diagram overlap of Zwift vs TR users.
Personally, I think one of the advantages TR has over Zwift stems from the AACC podcast and this forum. IMHO, Zwift has not matched this. And customer engagement is a big deal these days.
The calendar feature, and performance analytics I think may be other areas where TR is stronger. And if they leverage big data, and develop a predictive training capability (discussed on some other topics in this forum), that would be another differentiatior.
Safe bet the recent questionnaire and on site meetings in SF are signs that they are actively looking at expanding their reach beyond the known users.
I have fretted about this general topic for over a year, because I love TR and the people behind it. I think TR is responding and more importantly driving themselves to make a better, deeper, and more inclusive product line. I am optimistic that they have a good direction to stay competitive and successful.
Always good to look for more users. Customer retention is equally, if not more important. Would also hope they’ve done a defector survey.
I spend a lot of time thinking about this myself, mainly because I’d like to help people in my life who are interested in getting into shape find TR as a potential tool to make it happen. I think too many initially have zero interest in structured training (“I don’t care about getting faster” is something I hear), yet are happy to waste 30mins either spinning too easily, or if they go to a spin class with HIIT, burn themselves out. I just think if the “layperson” were to get into TR they could find a happy medium where they can push themselves but not burn out and have measurable metrics of improvement, which is a big source of frustration. I’ve wondered whether having some messaging for people just looking to get in shape that revolves around calories burned (accuracy of power vs HR for calorie estimation) if that would somehow help with attracting a new segment of users. Obviously there’s so much I don’t know about marketing and fitness messaging, so I’m sure I’m missing a ton here, but I think TR could really help people learn how to exercise more smartly.
As ever in life, a singular focus is not great in this circumstance.
It’s often good to look at things from many angles.
Edit to add: I think TR is particularly adept at doing the old and new. They have a more narrow focus than other apps, even though it is headed in a broader direction.
I think Zwift is more in danger of the scatter method. They have very grand visions and have done a good job of ignoring longstanding issues and their user base that put them where they are. It seems to me, that they are trying to be everything to everyone. And I wonder if that is a successful mindset?
Yep - agree on Zwift. Their cost structure is way higher than TRs due to the need to hire top gaming programming talent. So they have to develop a good investor story about growth to get the necessary funding.
ESports is a great growth story, but there’s also a lot of uncertainty on how that will evolve. Which probably leads Zwift to have to try a bunch of different things to see what sticks (and maybe ignore some of the fundamental blocking and tackling due to resource constraints)
Actually, @mcneese.chad, I think Zwift is very focused. There is a huge correlation between racing and structured training and this is why I believe that Zwift represents such a huge threat to TR with their recent investment.
I am not a Zwift user and thus have only seen the comments about cheating in forums, but the area of customer relations is an area where TR excels. IMO, it is the company’s #1 asset, and not just by providing the podcast and making the Forum available, but the direct communications between @Nate_Pearson, @Chad, @Jonathan and all of us via the Q&As on the Podcast and their direct response here on the Forum.
Unless there’s a huge inflation in the customer base looking for a static bike machine then I can’t see the same success in peloton.
If you are in the know then you probably have/get a trainer and subscribe to zwift/TR/etc. That is not to say it isn’t a valid product, just that the cost is extortionate and the alternatives (smart trainers) are currently more popular.
DC Raimaker highlights another potential rival to TR and Zwift. Virtugo.
I am on the bet and it doent offer much as yet but if they link with Xert to provide adaptive workouts that would be very interesting
I think it’s great - the more people that get into indoor cycling the better. I got into indoor cycling through zwift but was lured over to TR through the podcast. Now I’m hooked on the TR structured training plans and this is where I’ll stay. I personally don’t find the zwift environment all that exciting. I much prefer focusing on training and listening to podcasts for entertainment.
Venture Capital funding or investment is a double edge sword. Investors are looking for ROI and business then become focused to maximizing ROI. Often the equity stake lies with the investor rather than the company. Direction and development then can become driven by what maximizes returns, not necessarily what the core values or mission are. Seen it many times over. Watch the price creep up, or something like in-app purchases for “power-ups” or stuff like that starting to show up.
This. I saw an article describing with absolute certainty that people would pay to watch Peter Sagan sitting a trainer instead of on the road. I guess if the Zwift bike start having missile launchers and machine guns and zombies on the corners of Alp D’Huez I might watch. Well maybe Froome as zombie would be a draw.
I have used both zwift and tr for a couple of years now and think they both have their place for different reasons personally.
Zwift is fun for competiton via races and also group rides. Just riding around for me is not that motivating. When I was working at home I loved it as I could find a time that works for the scheduled events I liked participating in.
TR workouts are better overall but it is mainly the interface when doing the workout. Something about how it is presented in Zwift does not work for me. I do like the group workouts though.
I dont think you can go wrong either way but in 2019 I am doing TR and no zwift based on the new calendar and other values they add (blog, service, community, podcast) to name a few.
What does it all mean? It means that the suits with too much money think that Zwift is a good way to make even more too much money.
But what does that all mean for TR? Whole lotta nothin.
The people who are only interested in gamified indoor cycling who’ll pay for only one cycling subscription a month wouldn’t be interested in TR anyway. I was one of those people when I first got a trainer. I shopped the apps, and TR was too serious, too boring, so I got Zwift. But at the time, I just wanted to ride, not to train.
The noodling and social rides were (and are still) fun, but I wasn’t getting fitter, and I couldn’t (and can’t) take the training on Zwift seriously, with all the purdy graphics and people and powerups. Suddenly, I realized the value of the too-serious and too-boring blue blocks, and I discovered the podcast and forum, all of which Zwift can’t possibly compete with because it is corporate, sparkley, and gamified.
Yeah. Zwift racing would be way more exciting than this.
money ruins everything.
One of my favourite all time stages of the TdF❤️
I presuming this is a lot of the focus on calendar/ analysis functionality too - making it a single piece of software, capable of replacing TP, Strava Premium etc.
I will keep raising the comparitive device requirements too though. Until Zwift has full functionality on a wide range of android devices, it’s self limiting to a certain degree. It’s PC requirements are also a significant step up from what TR requires.
I would also think Zwift will be looking at the running/ other sports aspects. A turbo trainer has never been as mind numbing as treadmill running! From what I see, indoor training just hasn’t developed as much for other sports. Maybe running power meters will provoke that.
There is already a running aspect on Zwift, you need a BLE treadmill or a $30 footpod that tracks your cadence.