Nate,
This just my two cents as no one cares and my thoughts.
Bottomline, for me, TR has provided a value added product.
The Eco system is pretty good AACC podcast, this forum and of course the TR structured program.
Yes, AACC and Forum are free and anyone can take advantage of them cost free or is there a maintence cost?
Additionally, combined with the TR structured training this ECO system for me has been great. I can suppliment it with reading books(yes some of us still do that ) and the myriad of podcasts and avoid paying for a coach… One could say TR is augmented self coaching on the inexpensive side for those that have the disclipne for structured training and don’t want to shell out cash for a coach. I suspect a coach would cost more than my annual TR addiction.
So in the words of Siskel and Ebert
Just a thought: Maybe you can grow the subcriptions in a similar fashion that global compnies use for employee compensation based on the country. For example, the payscale is different for those living in the US, UK, France vs Romania,China, or Costa Rica. Even if they hold the same position and do the same work. Don’t know if this is feasible as more subscribers also generate a cost for services and product maintenance.
For me TR provides the structure and psuedo coaching I need to complete my cycling, and lifespan objectives. I was around pre calendar so I have seen more than few enhancements that live up to what TR has NEVER gotten away from and this is to Make You a Faster Cyclist. Not all companies CEOs, founders can say this, sometimes they lose their way and stray from the mission statment
So in the theme of Jerry Maguire you had me at Make You a Faster Cyclist via structured training…
I’m in the same boat, only I did end up dropping it. It was a tough call as like you, there felt like a connection and sort of good will with the company. I enjoyed the podcasts and those early days of COVID in 2020 where they had Beers with Chad. Those were super enjoyable and highlight to end on the week on for me.
Now I don’t expect things to always stay a certain way forever but at a point, the changes and new developments just weren’t working for me. The best way I can describe it is that TR used to feel like a cycling company using technology. Now they are a tech company that centers on cycling.
I’ve been writing my own workouts again since canceling and it’s been going well.
Not to mention after a few years you learn enough and have done enough workouts to know how to structure a workout and a week and that progressive overload over the course of a plan, without the burnout that many TR plans give. It’s really not hard to ride endurance and throw in a few interval sessions, progressively increasing the time and/or intensity of intervals and shortening/reducing breaks between.
TR definitely worked for me as a newbie but as time went on I gained less and less fitness each year and it just wasn’t worth it. I’ve been off it for 2 years now and my fitness has still slowly increased over that time without the pressure to follow a plan
I’m down with it. I don’t use plans as much as I used to, but it’s so nice to have the option to get a quick suggested workout. Most often, I pick what I need for my training from the library of workouts with many options for each energy system/zone.
Found this interesting. I have used TR in the past, first time for a few years, until life forced me to leave it for a while, After that the price went up when I came back, and since then I’ve tried it and left on a few occasions. Firstly it was because the plans stopped working for me, got very tired on a diet of threshold and VO2 workouts plus my time trials, the old 40km TT plan was brutal, but then after the Covid lockdowns I gave up racing and focused more on things like audax and bikepacking, still like to train, but found TR wasn’t really good at helping with these disciplines due to not taking what I did outside into account.
Like quite a few others who’ve commented, I now effectively self coach and prefer that to following a rigid plan, I do use other sites to guide me, but they are a fraction of the price of TR. I would probably have used TR more if there was a decent web based workout builder, as I find quite a lot of the TR workouts quite frustrating in how they’re structured, recovery intervals that are too long or three sweetspot intervals of different intensities, which makes comparison impossible.
I know it’s not going to happen, but a cheaper option of the calender, workout player and library, without any of the AI stuff and RLGL or plans would tempt me, but as the current price is too little value for me, I can’t see myself trying TR again if it gets more expensive.
I’m sort of with you on this… I love PL levels, but the rest of the updates over the last couple of years are suspect in my training experience. The workout library and workout alternatives are a huge contributing factor to my continued subscription. [still waiting on a reasonable unstructured/affiliated outdoor ride experience].
It’s your choice. $2 ain’t much and it probably won’t hurt things too much.
—-
But at this point 5 years on from that massive previous bump your new memberships must have really tanked I’m guessing? So what levers do you now pull?
Competition must be fierce for new users.
If you want to slowly dwindle away into being unsustainable then just keep raising the price and hope for some killer new feature that revolutionises things.
As others have said - I really think you should offer a basic tier. Calendar, plan builder and workout library. (If you’re looking to grow)
I may not have asked my question clearly, or perhaps you’re choosing not to answer (which is your prerogative, and in which case I am good with no further response from you here – that’s a genuine comment, not a zing of any kind…).
My timing question was when we might anticipate the “almost done” project adding the impact of additional sports/activity types on RLGL. Right now I don’t see any early access opportunities on my career page, but don’t know how you determine to whom you offer that; one assumption could be that TR isn’t that far along in the development/testing phases.
More specifically on timing: would you anticipate we see add’l impacts for RLGL before we see RLGL in Plan Builder, after RLGL in PB but before WLV2 on TR workouts, after WLV2 on outside workouts, or after WLV2 on outside workouts? Or might it be implemented in conjunction with one of those additive features? That’s what I was trying to understand in my previous post.
I am a big fan of TR as a triathlete. It’s nice to be able to build training plans, and I pretty much follow the bike workouts exactly and then modify the run and swims (plus do additional swims). So I see the value in TR because of the above. The price increase is probably fair, but it will make me consider looking at different training platforms that are cheaper.
Also an Aussie - I started using Wise to pay for my TR sub. You set up a virtual credit card, load it with USD and make that the payment method on TR. It saves a lot in crappy conversion rates and fees.
The increase is acceptable. It’s nothing compared to the thousands of dollars i spend annually on road and mtb bike maintenance, repairs, and replacement parts. An extra couple bucks a month to continue to stay healthy and fit is ok!
Still not catering to international customers, charging in US Funds. The podcast has always felt to me that they don’t really worry about international listeners that much. I feel that they only care about the US market. I won’t be renewing as it’s just not affordable in the current economic climate.
) and the myriad of podcasts and avoid paying for a coach… One could say TR is augmented self coaching on the inexpensive side for those that have the disclipne for structured training and don’t want to shell out cash for a coach. I suspect a coach would cost more than my annual TR addiction.
