Haven't really noticed much change with the free version, just stay in the top 10, pretty simple.

I like analysis too, but I want to be able nonchalantly hold my head up high, as I enter the coffee shop with a breezy air, admired by my old as dirt Strava-synced buddies, over whom I hold a 1 second lead on the local tough as shit 5% monster.

i got 3 months of the premium free with my wahoo elemnt bolt. was previously a free-loader :-)

have to say, i've liked the stats analysis, fitness level, power data, etc. it's kept me motivated as i feed zwift and outdoor rides into strave. and the mapping function has made it super easy to find other folks rides or create my own. the combo of the wahoo and strava has helped me explore the area with so much more ease and confidence, i'm doing solo 80-90 mile/8-9000 ft climbing rides every weekend now. it's been a blast. i had started fiddling with ridewithgps when i first go the wahoo, but strava's integration with the wahoo just makes it so easy, so why pay or use another service with ridewgps?

i'm fortunate to be able to afford this $60/year and while relatively thrifty, i find it's worth it. i don't have cable tv. i don't buy starbucks coffee. with covid, the family and i no longer go to the movies.

strava's a good company offering a good service for cyclists/runners/etc, so i'm happy to support them with the $60/year

Finally a sensible post.

There was never a free account. They sell our valuable commodity, our data, and give a service in return.

They reduced that service without reducing the selling of data.

I deleted my account.

Ahh, it's a tough call on what I'll do myself. I've moaned in here, but can't decide yet.

Segments can be fun, but, in the end they don't really necessarily work to train me very well. We don't have mountains here. The LONGEST road segments are rollers that "run stop signs" and still only manage to be less than 4 miles long. So, pretty much only hill sprints and maybe some VO2 hills or segments.

So, instead I've been doing my own TT course design and just hitting the lap button.

What kills it most for me isn't the not seeing the overall leaderboards, it was losing my own list of personal efforts. If Trainingpeaks could track that, it would be all I need. Doesn't WKO5 do that now?

I agree, they did that. But it's still a good value to me. So I'm going to keep using the free version.

I feel kind of bad for company. Reading the various articles, the crisis is apparently manufactured by the VC overlords. It seems like Strava had reached a stable, profitable, self-sustaining business. But self-sustaining and profitable isn't what VC firms want. They want massive ROI. The next Uber.

So Strava is having to jump through hoops and scrape for more dollars for the VC overlords. There's a cost to taking those millions.

I agree there was also, for a time, an institutional arrogance at Strava. But I'm OK with the quasi-apologetic tone of the recent announcements. The new (old) management seems to "get it."

I'm not sure that's really true. Back in 2010/2011 when they started I don't believe they did sell that data. That may have been part of their strategy, but it was several years later before they publicly stated they were selling it. By that, I mean that as I am a 'customer' for the data they are now selling, it was 2015/16 when they came to the 'market' and said they have a data product they were looking to sell.

And for all that people believe that the data is for sale, who do you think is buying, and what $ value do you think there is on that? The market for biased data on cycling and running is pretty niche. Remember they can't tell people how many people cycle on any roads. Or even really the most used roads as their data is highly biased to training / leisure trips, not everyone records commuter journeys even those subscribing. And there's huge variability between the types of cyclists, or eve the same cyclist on different days - recovery ride, pack smashfest, interval session, trip to the store to grab some milk. In terms of that data being useful for anyone planning transport (cycle) networks, its not that useful. Infact the data from Google from all android phones is more useful for cycle and walking planning than the strava data.

Strava data is ok for some consultation / comms purposes, the heatmaps help with engagement, but for planning where safety, potential market (ie working out the additional people that would cycle if we invest in cycling measures, almost by definition the strava data is useless).

I absolutely agree that the VC crisis is driving this.

Which is especially interesting as the Series D funding was lead by Sequoia Capital (and Michael Mortiz), which I believe is the same Michael Moritz as Crankstart Investments (the funding behind the PTO). Am I looking for a conspiracy that doesn't exist?

---

KJ
Swim and Triathlon Coach
AllTerrainEndurance.com
KJ@allterrainendurance.com

I just subscribed. I hate paying what was for free but for $5 a month the enjoyment factor is worth it.

Build...give it away for free so people use it and than charge for it because they like it. What a model for success!

It’s in their T&Cs, plus you can request to see what they have done with your data.

If you download your account history, a summary of this is provided.

It’s useful for many, many more things than you say, however I work in this field, so I’m more sensitive to it, I guess.

As i mentioned earlier in the thread and above, we're both speaking from a position of this being day job as well as hobby. Not sure which side your job is on - data sales or transport planning. I'm the latter and as I say, whilst the sales pitch has been towards how useful the data is from the industry perspective there's been an overstretch by the marketing guys. So both the use value and the $ value are not there. It's a tiny market - 1 public sector agency (city council, county council, state, etc) for each location. And that means there's not the commercial price fight for data that facebook sells.

And lets carry on the 'data sales' line anyway. Seems likely that any persons data is most likely to be sold to the council / state in which they do their riding, ie live. And so you'd be paying for that Strava account anyway, just through your taxes / rates. So you are paying, just not seeing it as a separate line item. And whilst you may say, ah, but that cost is shared over more people, true. But that includes your non cycling husband, wife, parents, etc etc that are paying for your strava leaderboards that accordong to 11 pages of posts here no-one at all cares about, but has led to 11 pages of people complaining that they don't get for 'free' anymore....

Did anybody get an offer for 60 day free trial? My guess with this is the paywall hasn’t worked that well so far from strava, but not sure how many new subscribers they have reported

I think ill pass.

Don't like the feeling of being ripped off.

US price $5 per month

UK price £5.99 which is $7.50

Would love to know why I have to pay more. But no doubt Strava wouldn't comment on it.

I think that was available from the start, though they might have been making more noise about it recently.

A few things...

1. I have spent a lot of my career in the software field and it always interesting to see how the vast majority of people out there have no clue how much work goes into software development - even with what appears as the simplest of of interfaces, a considerable amount software development effort is required - especially as time goes on and change management becomes an increasing cost in time, effort and money. My thoughts are if you get value from software, be willing to give back because these software firms all struggle to fund themselves...which brings me to my next point.....
2. Selling data. Why do you care? We are not talking about your personal finances or information that shows your wife that you were having lunch with an ex-girlfriend. I am happy to have my Strava data shared. There tends to be a myopic view of data sharing where it is seen as an invasion rather than something that also helps make society more efficient. For instance, if Strava selling data enables municipalities and cities to plan for more bike and running paths in higher demand areas, why is that not something that benefits us all? Monitoring big brother activities is important, but let's keep this real.
3. I am just getting back into cycling and the last time I was riding was in 2005 on a 2001 Cervelo and a Computrainer. I am shocked (in a good way) how much things have advanced (bikes, trainers, online streaming, and software). What I am finding the most challenging is determining what to use. Zwift or Sufferfest, Garmin Connect or Strava, do I need Training Peaks and what does it do for me that Strava and Garmin doesn't. I love having all these choices, but I also find it confusing. So to summarize, I have no issues paying for Strava but I simply don't know what it does for me that is important that Garmin Connect does not provide. With a W/Kg of only 2.84 (270 watts FTP / 95 kg), I can't see myself ever claiming a top 10 standing on any segments because I would have to loose a lot of muscle mass to lighten up.
   

---

________________
Adrian in Vancouver

I bet whomever did the price list didn't understand nominators vs. denominators in currency pricing.

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

So accounting for the 20% VAT added to the UK price then Strava actually receive about the same.

I've spent my whole career in software. And though I hesitate to cast stones when I know very little about their internal working, some things are mystifying. They have apparently done amazing things on the database front, analyzing millions of uploads per day into segment and map format, each in a matter of seconds (or less), handling terabytes of historical data. Searches are almost always super quick. That's super cool stuff.

But then it takes them forever to do simple UI fixes. Most of those have been corrected recently, but it took years.

When I went to pay it gave me a 60 day trial. Never saw a previous offer for it.

So you don't have sales tax I the US?

It varies state by state, some have no sales tax.

So is it $5 plus sales tax then.

I really wanted to embrace Strava and I approached their latest big changes to subscription accounts with a willingness to be a paid subscriber. With the expiry of the free "subscriber" account ending mid July, I have decided I will not be a paid subscriber going forward. It is unfortunate because I like a lot of what the software provides, however, the segment leader board is by far the most appealing to me and it has some glaring big problems:

1. There are way too many questionable performances and I think the e-bikes are becoming a big issue. I believe that a performance should not be listed unless HR and Power is also included.
2. Many segments are, for lack of a better word, shit. In my mind, segments should not pass through intersections where there is a good chance you may have to stop.
3. Too many segments overlapping. I know this would require restricting creating public segments which brings issues in itself, but it would be great to have one segment that is "THE" segment to measure by.

Sorry Strava. I would have been willing to pay and support you, but I am very disappointed with the above and I will go the free route with your platform.

---

________________
Adrian in Vancouver

strava generally puts it upon the user to fix these problems. Ebikes have been bemoaned upon the support forum for years with hundreds of posts and nothing has been done about it, other than a few users who flag tons of inappropriate rides. on the other hand, segment KOMs taken by people in their car after they finish their ride has been acted upon by strava's algorithm. so at least that's progress. for #2 and 3: all segments are user created, and most users have no idea what they are doing. yes most are stupid, like starting and finishing points of segments not lining up to reality (use satellite view people!!) and overlaps/redundancy. this isn't strava's fault, its the users. you can "hide" segments that are stupid and "unhide" the good ones. this has to be done on the desktop. the biggest thing people dont realize is that the desktop version is actually VERY useful, and the app is VERY limited (borderline useless once you use the desktop version)

For e-bikes, they could at least put a flag like they have for "Indoor" rides so those could be separated out from other segment results, yet e-bike riders can still use the other benefits of Strava.

Ideally there'll ultimately be a technological solution, like setting your head unit for "e-bike" so you don't have to flag yourself. Or even head units automatically detecting it's an e-bike.

Seems unwise for Strava to not cater to a fast-growing segment of cycling.