A neat thing about being a consumer in a capitalist system is that if you don’t like the price of a product, you can choose not to pay for it. Maybe not everyone here knew that.
Or playing devil’s advocate to devil’s advocate; if legacy pricing didn’t exist TrainerRoad wouldn’t exist because they wouldn’t have had the early adopters to get the software off the ground.
I’ve been a member for five months and get to enjoy the latest iteration of TR software. I can’t imagine the improvements made over the last seven years or so or the bugs legacy users had to put up with.
At current pricing id probably be worth less recurring revenue to TrainerRoad. I’d probably only have an active sub during 12wks of base or $60 or $0 and just do my own workouts in zwift. So the $99/yr I pay to TR is really charity of convenience
Wild! 
I’d also add that the perceived value of a product or service is highly individual. If, for example, you really don’t like testing and find that AI does a good job of estimating your FTP, that alone could make TR worth pretty much whatever it costs.
If you love testing and/or feel AI doesn’t give you good FTP estimates, that bit of TR is worth absolutely nothing.
And so on.
This is precisely the premise I tried to disprove further above with the graph. The amount of lost revenue coming from an apparent lower Legacy price is negligible because it is a percentage of the price for a percentage of the total users. This turns out to be a tiny % of the total sales. If you grab this % of sales and distribute it equally on all the users, then the price decrease is in the orders of less than $1 per month or less than $12 per year.
This thread is toxic as hell.
Here’s the deal, I pay TR. They give me product. That’s it. I don’t care what anyone else is paying and if you care what I’m paying it says an awful lot about you.
If TR decides to charge me more or if my situation changes, I’ll have to decide is TR is worth keeping. That’s it. No one else’s price is a factor.
If I have to start considering other TR users when making this decision, I’m probably out if this thread is any indication. Some of the loudest in this thread are showing just how negative users can be.
You don’t. 
Even if legacy pricing was gone people would still complain that others used to pay less for TR 
This.
Because of the price I am locked into, I have kept my annual TrainerRoad subscription for the last 2 years without actually using the service but rather to simply keep my pricing locked in just in case. So from me, TrainerRoad has got more out of me due to legacy pricing.
I really should cancel, but I don’t want to lose my US$99/year rate 
That is a perfect example of what I was talking about…@DaveQB would be far better off canceling his membership and paying for TR as he needs it. But he wants to retain his Legacy status, so he keeps paying for something he doesn’t really use or need.
Same for me. I use TR every now and then but been doing more unstructured outdoor rides, concept 2 rowing and lifting the last year or so. I used to zwift but dropped that sub a while back.
Legacy pricing is a reward to the people who did leconte and Mary Austin multiple times a year bc it was “in the plan”
Same here, in fact I just paid for another year at $99. I only use TR when the weather sucks so 3-5 months a year, and only regularly (more than once a week) for maybe 2 months a year. I haven’t used it at all in 10 months so somewhat stupid to keep my subscription, but like you I want to keep that $99/year rate.
Now, thanks to ‘Alternative’ button, we see that those workouts were nothing more than an amuse-bouche to the real horrors residing in the TR catalogue.
In the past I have complained about the legacy pricing model and it not being fair that customers have no way of ever reaching that level of discount for loyalty. It fell on deaf ears. I ended up sucking it up and paying the 189 because I wanted something to support my cycling.
However, I have come to the conclusion, based on my own personal preferences, that I don’t see the value at 189. My usage is minimal, it isn’t fit for my needs. I’m not even sure when my annual subscription ends. I won’t be renewing. There are far more cheaper alternatives that I can use. If I was someone who had 0000s of ££$$$ and I wasn’t bothered about value, sure I’d keep paying. If I was a dedicated cyclist who regularly uses plans, sure I’d keep paying but based on my needs I can get away with using some other services
If TR were to offer a 99 subscription I would probably pay it in the future because at that price point I would probably find value. I guess in a market driven economy TR see their pricing structure as working for them. It is their choice alone and it is the consumer who has the choice to either subscribe or not to subscribe. Moan away but the most powerful tool consumers have is their debit card number!
They could always offer $99/yr pricing with the caveat that you get a legacy version of the app that is from pre 2018 (when the $99/yr price increased iirc).
You’d have ramp tests, performance analytics, calendar but none of the other cool bells and whistles like AT, TrainNow or AIFTP.
Maybe that’d be enough for some small group but I think most would say f that and that it doesn’t offer enough value, even tho that was the state of the product when us legacy pricers were paying year over year
Let people have all the bells and whistles and 99 retro, but they’ll have to go back to 20 min testing.
There is a third that relates to fairness, but I think that fails in my eyes because in the purest sense, the service is either worth what you pay for it or it’s not.
I think the issue is that lots of newer subscribers feel that an annual sub is worth what other people are paying for it. If it was $100 for a sub, but legacy subscribers were on $50, then I dont think there would be an issue. At $189, its expensive enough to fall into the realm of can I afford TR and Zwift or do I need to make a choice, or look at other options… Perhaps ~$100 a year is a watermark for a lot of people, bear in mind often people have a lot of subs, not just to training apps.
Lots of companies/services use legacy pricing. People need to get over it. I have a $189/year subscription and don’t care if someone pays less for their subscription or less overall because they only pay for six months of the year on a monthly basis. Either you see value in the training/use of TR or you don’t. That should drive your spending, not what someone else is locked in at some point. Fast forward five years when people are paying $249/year and you’ll see them complaining about the $189/year people with those people “defending” their legacy status. Once again, just focus on you and the rest will work itself out…jeez it’s basically the conversation you have with a child.
I really don’t understand how your reply relates to my comment, which was nothing but a lame attempt at making fun at this stupid toxic discussion. But it looks like it got you going, so rest assured I didn’t mean to offend you in any way.