WhyFi

Ah, so being able to quickly and easily download all of your info isn't enough - a service provider should also synchronize with every other competing service provider out there, including back-cataloged files. Got it, thanks.

Athens80

Garmin Connect?

Actually,you're commenting on the ease of using Strava as an intermediary, as a conduit for syncing other services on an ongoing basis. That's not migration, which is a one-and-done process.

Bulette

Radical changes to the API that result in breaking 3rd party applications has the potential to effect both Free and Paid users. Less than a year after Premium was released (c.2012) Strava made similar drastic changes to the API and broke platforms including Wahoo and CycleOps (DCRainmaker, 2013). Back then at least, the community was given a month's notice.

----------

Overall, it seems like Strava might get what they want out of this -- an immediate and significant uptick in subscriptions. Whether or not they continue to grow the userbase thereafter is an open question. For more casual users, noticing what features are now missing might take a few more days, and transitioning to alternatives might take even longer; new users may never see the use of Strava from the free version, making it more unlikely for them to become subscribers.

Fiery

Strava makes it easy to sync to, but impossible to sync from. They did not make migration easy from their end, they pretty much did the minimum to make it possible at all. It makes sense from a business perspective, but please let's not pretend that they aren't intentionally trying to make it easy to join and hard to leave.

WhyFi

I was asking about Premium content, not APIs and 3rd party apps.

You didn't answer the question: do you really believe that they anything less than connecting to and syncing with every competing service is a knock against them? 'cause that's just ridiculous.

taco2ewsday

You'd be shocked by how many .com's don't make any money many just try to build an audience so they can slap a value on user counts and engagement figures to try and get bought out. For me I figured I have not paid for a Starbucks coffee in 2 months that's at least 60$ I'll give the subscription a try. if I dont like it in a year I can cancel. I have already set my calendar reminder a year out to cancel

Sy Reene

I'm trying to understand the math on this. Maybe the vast majority of Strava users are/were free subscribers. They have about 50 million subscribers (of some sort). If 30 million pay, that's $1.8 Billion in revenue, which would cover paying each of their 220 employees $8 million salaries. Ok.. I'm sure they have to buy some computers and rent some office space.. but still.

Bulette

I guess I don't understand the insistence on only evaluating Premium when conducting a consumer analysis. Strava's business plan (and many other web-companies) is to entice a user base with free features and earn conversions to premium subscriptions. When the free features are unreliable or nonexistent, what hope of attracting new users does Strava have?

taco2ewsday

Of the 38 people I follow 13 have the little subscribe icon and most of those folks are 'affluent' to say the least I'm not sure the average cyclist or runner has been giving them any $ I wasn't until this week.

And it's more than some computers I'm sure their Amazon Web Services hosting bill is in the 10's of thousands per month.

it's 5 years old but interesting

Sampling Strava | Mark Slavonia

Iride01 

Yep, that cost big bucks. They'd grind to a halt quick if they only had our home ISP cost and more than a handful of users wanted to access them at a time.

Riveting

I've been Premium since 2014. 17 cents per day is a relatively small price to pay considering that "they/we" say that cycling costs about 13 cents per mile, all costs considered. Analyzing my power curve (power meter required) for low spots, and then on a future ride making a small incremental increase in watts for that time interval, is how I train. I could (and do) use other tools to do this, typically Garmin Connect or Golden Cheetah, but the social motivation and inspiration (photos of local scenery, viewing the big rides of hardcore local riders/friends, and learning new routes) that Strava currently provides puts everything I like in one convenient place, without bouncing around from app to app, just to save 17 cents. When another tool pops up that does all of this (for free), I may jump, but for now Strava owns this space.

WhyFi

Because I was specifically responding to expressed reluctance of investing time and effort in to their Premium content.

wphamilton

I had enjoyed checking my run or ride against my recent and historical performance. Not enough to pay for it though.

I do have Fitbit uploading automatically to Strava, and Golden Cheetah automatically pulling from Strava, so I'll keep my account as long as that functionality remains free. There's no other reason for me to visit Strava now though and it's somewhat disappointing. I think they've made a serious mistake.

merlinextraligh

It now appears that I can’t see my own previous efforts on a segment in the free version .

That makes it just about useless to me.

may just use Garmin connect

kissTheApex

you’d be hard pressed to find any business that would make migrating away from them really easy imho.

That being said, in Strava, there’s an option to download all your activities in one time. And there are many cycling apps (both local and web based) that allow you to batch upload very simply.

in fact, if you install golden cheetah, you’ll see that you can “sync” from Strava, while many of their “competitors” only allow uploads from golden cheetah.

Having never used the social aspects of Strava, I’ve downloaded and deleted my activities, but let’s call a spade a spade...

merlinextraligh

I haven’t read the whole thread so I may have missed it.

Has anyone raised the issue of how tone deaf It is to impose a new fee in the middle of a Pandemic.

It would appear that people are using Strava more in the Pandemic, in part as a way to stay connected in the absence of group rides. I started a Strava club for the people who did our regular Saturday ride.

Add that many many people are unemployed, can’t pay the rent or the mortgage. Every $5 matters when you have zero income.

Seems horribly insensitive to impose new costs on your clients, particularly when other companies are trying to find ways to help their customers get through this.

For that reason alone, I’m not going to pay, at least for now.

Sy Reene

I think you did miss something.. there's still a free option, and still includes the social networking you're concerned about people losing.

WorldIRC

I'm mixed on this. Strava is certainly a "luxury" application, in the sense that it is not food, water, shelter, utilities, or telecom. As well, the functionality that has been "promoted" to premium is not really something critical to the nature of today's world.

That being said, you're right, the structure change could have waited and Strava could have just positioned it accordingly.

Sy Reene

Actually I'm not sold that during the pandemic there are a lot more Strava users.. Aren't a lot more people choosing to ride on trainers indoors than otherwise (and yes, I guess you can put indoor rides into Strava, but still...). There might be a lot more people on bikes to avoid mass transit, but not sure they're your typical Strava target audience anyway.

Drew Eckhardt 

b2c web businesses are difficult. You need to hope network effects kick in because low (or no with advertising businesses) revenue from each individual precludes significant customer acquisition costs. Getting to that point can take a decade and a hundred million dollars. When you bet wrong your options are much more limited than with a B2B company where sufficient revenue to cover customer acquisition costs comes early.

The heatmap is the only strava feature I care about. It suggests roads popular among cyclists that I might want to take on a long ride.

I upload rides I think strava followers would like, but otherwise would stop with a local upload for training (Golden Cheetah) and ridewithgps for sharing (it allows attached pictures and has better map options).

ridewithgps is worth $10/month to me for the ride planning features (selectable maps like OSM with water sources, trace rides to import as routes, generate custom cue sheets) but Strava doesn't deliver enough value for me to pay money.

Athens80

The percentage of paying users may be more like 5%, rather than the 60% in your estimate.

kingston 

According to their website. RWGPS has not taken any outside funding and is cash-flow positive. My guess is that RWGPS has a much, much higher percentage of paying customers than Strava.

dr_max

I have lost my cateye Strada in the desert going down Kit Peak in Arizona 3 years ago and started using free strava on my iPhone in my rear pocket.

the only thing I check at the end is my total distance and elevation.

the segments was starting to piss me off as there are many who are going slow the rest of the ride, group riding, and attacking on a segment during a ride to get the KOM.

I mainly ride alone since covid19 and since I have kids I go for early ride, so I don’t like the segments since it’s overly dependant in tailwind and strava doesn’t correct for that

canklecat

Well, paying for a Strava subscription had one unexpected benefit. Apparently I'm not the slowest old dude out there. I'm more middle of the pack. The age breakdown is interesting. I thought some of the faster guys were my age, but they're younger.

But the weight breakdown isn't as kind. A 150 lb 62 y/o still ain't a 150 lb 22 y/o.

Athens80

Shane Miller has posted an analysis of what you get with Strava for free at YouTube: