The change to Strava

Jimbeam3678 said:
I mean who do they see as their target audience? As I said previously casuals will use free version, serious athletes can find better and more detailed products for not much more or even free. So I’m saying I’m struggling to see what market they are aiming for ?
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on your definition of those. IN my eyes, serious athletes are less than 1% (this is those making a living from it) and casual I guess would be those that cycle or jog from time to time to stay in shape. There is then a HUGE amount that will cycle/jog regularly and want to track progression, times and more.... which me and probably many others are in. I think it's for this group.

Jimbeam3678 said:
It was mentioned Strava didn’t advertise or sell data like Facebook etc, I was mentioning that they tried that and obviously failed.
Click to expand...

Oh okay, wasn't me so I'll leave that bit along :)

Jimbeam3678 said:
They have a huge userbase which have the option of free or paid and they aren’t making money. Something is fundamentally wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes, they were giving the main thing away for free. That was apparently wrong. They have changed that, hence the discussion.

Anyway, I'll bow out of this thread now as I can imagine we're going to go round and round, when we should likely just agree to disagree and see in two or three years if Strava have gone bust :)
 
Hopefully I’m wrong as I think Strava is great for what it is, but it could be so much better. Hopefully when it does, I’ll be paying.

As I said nothing against you, was an interesting civil discussion which is rare on here nowadays :)
 
SPG said:
I am not around to support devs on their endless quest of app development and subscription based products for features that i will never use.

I want to pay once and once only.
Click to expand...

In that case you fundamentally misunderstand how Strava works and is maintained.

A subscription is the most viable business model as they have operating expenses to maintain your product. It's not a game they have to print to a CD and ship once. Strava has to be updated to remain compatible with new phones, new operating systems, new head units and wearable tech, sensors etc. They also then have to pay for the hosting of the website, and the cloud storage for the colossal database they must have to maintain that holds everybody's data. Not to mention all the compute power to work out the leaderboards and your stats.

This type of service just fundamentally doesn't work with a single up front fee that grants you access in perpetuity. There is an ongoing cost to your use of Strava, therefore they need an ongoing revenue stream to cover that.

People have mentioned several times there's alternatives, what exactly is everyone referring to? I use Zwift, and I briefly used Trainerroad. I'm aware of Sufferfest. Is there anything else out there that covers the social media aspect as well as Strava while also providing reasonable training data?
 
Murf said:
People have mentioned several times there's alternatives, what exactly is everyone referring to? I use Zwift, and I briefly used Trainerroad. I'm aware of Sufferfest. Is there anything else out there that covers the social media aspect as well as Strava while also providing reasonable training data?
Click to expand...

There are plenty of superior alternatives for training data itself.
No alternatives for the social media side of things nor the segments. That's what Strava have wrapped up very well and the main reason they'll survive/gain ground from this money move.
 
UTmaniac said:
They've simply seen cycling become hip and trendy worldwide during the lockdown and they now want their multi-million dollar mansion they deserve. I very much doubt I'll be subscribing once they prematurely end my £19 Summit Analysis annual sub in mid August.
Click to expand...

I'm really confused how, from the evidence available, you have come to the above conclusion. They have stated they are not currently making a profit and their previous membership model just does not provide the ability to develop their product and company.

You are of course entitled to pull your membership, but I don't understand your reasoning. Do you begrudge individuals making profit from products that you use and clearly find merit in? Why would anyone take a risk and start up a business?
 
E
xdcx said:
There are plenty of superior alternatives for training data itself.
No alternatives for the social media side of things nor the segments. That's what Strava have wrapped up very well and the main reason they'll survive/gain ground from this money move.
Click to expand...

Exactly as i have said its nothing more than paying for social media with a athletic tinge. I get that it needs money to survive but suckering people in over the past years to create the segments in the first place and then the leaderboards then removing them due to worldwide pandemic and a influx of users they suddenly cant afford the Server bandwidth or whatever it is, Stinks nothing more than money grabbing to me.

The business model was FAIL from day 1 yet they blame the users.

I do not have a hate on Strava its fun, but i wont pay for it and its metrics are useless compared to that of my Garmin & Training peaks, Like many i am never going to be the fastest across path X, being the fastest across path X does not motivate me my goals are wider and longer term besides i am pushing 50 next year hence my old school views on software development, Pay once and pay again 3 or 4 years later for the new improved version yet the old version should still work !!
 
SPG said:
i am pushing 50 next year hence my old school views on software development, Pay once and pay again 3 or 4 years later for the new improved version yet the old version should still work !!
Click to expand...

Does your age impact your ability to understand that they have ongoing expenses to maintain the service for each user?

This isn't Strava specific, but I'm baffled as to how we've gotten to a position where people think that services should be provided free, or that there's no ongoing cost to providing a cloud based service. You have to pay, through personal data, advertising, or a subscription. There's not really anyway around that. Businesses exist to make money, they're not charities.

"Money grabbing" describes every business, ever. If you don't agree with their value proposition, and don't want to pay then that's fine. Don't pay. But to be frustrated that a business wants to turn a profit, and accuse them of money grabbing, it's just such an odd position.
 
What is so baffling about it ? They are using a business model that clearly doesn't work from DAY 1 so they break what made it popular in the first place by taking it away and make people pay for it. Its ironic that an entire cycling industry suddenly focused around STRAVA yet it actually does nothing apart from a virtual clap on the back and a segment that some e-biker has won.

For me it just an extra sprinkle of something thats about it.
 
Your better having some kind of micro transaction system where you pay 10p for this and that when you need it. I mean for their profitability. But I'm sure they've done their sums and this is their conclusion. It opens the door to competitors with a slicker business model though.
 
SPG said:
What is so baffling about it ? They are using a business model that clearly doesn't work from DAY 1 so they break what made it popular in the first place by taking it away and make people pay for it. Its ironic that an entire cycling industry suddenly focused around STRAVA yet it actually does nothing apart from a virtual clap on the back and a segment that some e-biker has won.

For me it just an extra sprinkle of something thats about it.
Click to expand...

They haven't gone bust, so at this point their business model isn't a failure. Like Uber, and Tesla, and lots of other companies, they've looked to gain market share, build out the feature set and increase the value proposition using their own, or venture capital, before turning a profit . If their current strategy of increasing the value of the subscription tier, and decreasing the value of the free tier results in a subscription uplift that makes the operation profitable and therefore sustainable without doing too much damage to their user base then their business model, and this pricing decision will be a success.

However, they may have assumed the market contains a lot more people like me, and a lot less people like you than is actually the case. In which case, it will probably fail. Time will tell. :)
 
True they have not gone bust, but have been running on borrowed money, From the GCN interview it was clear it is nothing more than making money, in the middle of a pandemic when people are using it more. I think we may see a new contender on the block soon. Segmento.com would be good as everything cycling in Italian is just better :)
 
SPG said:
True they have not gone bust, but have been running on borrowed money, From the GCN interview it was clear it is nothing more than making money, in the middle of a pandemic when people are using it more. I think we may see a new contender on the block soon. Segmento.com would be good as everything cycling in Italian is just better :)
Click to expand...

And at some point, that contender will have to start making money. :)
 
grudas said:
that's pretty much it.

software development, hosting etc is all very expensive. I can see why they did it and in many ways it is annoying but in more ways I understand why.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know I've come across quite critical of people's positions in this thread but ultimately every business is eventually going to have to monetise their product. Nothing is free, even if there isn't an upfront fee.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom