Garmin still has segments. The key to success is a broad user base who both create and ride segments. There is probably not much stopping anyone with GPS activity data from creating segments in their, but the value is driven by an active user base.

For any social network, the value is in scale....

So you think the value of the Harvard alumni network is based on scale? I would argue it is based primarily on exclusivity, scale is a secondary factor.

Likewise, in a network, the value of all nodes/edges is not equal, it is entirely possible a network analysis of strava shows that non-paying nodes are not nearly as valuable for what strava's business strategy is.

Strava is a directed network(I have much greater number of people who follow me, than I follow), which is very different from facebook (undirected network, all friendships are reciprocal).

I agree that scale is one aspect of how you can analyze a network. However, if you are familiar with formal network analysis, there are many factors other than "scale" that may be used to analyze networks.

Dear Strava community,
If nothing else, 2020 has been a year of regaining perspective. A silver lining of hard times like these is that they inspire introspection and focus – What matters the most to us? And how do we live up to that?

Our answers to those questions have only gotten clearer in the past few months, and we’re now leading the company with a single purpose: rededicating Strava to our community.

We’re obsessing over our athletes – over you – and no one else.

Strava athletes deserve an affordable and constantly improving experience, and we hope you’ve noticed how focused we’ve been this year on delivering that. Our small but mighty team of 180 has released 51 athlete-facing improvements already in 2020, from Apple Watch syncing, to new maps and metrics for snowsports, to a huge update to our Routes features, and a lot more. We’ve also removed some distractions, such as Sponsored Integrations (the closest we’ve ever come to putting ads in the feed). And we returned the option to sort your feed in chronological order. We heard how much that change drove you nuts, and admit it took a really long time to respond.

Dedicating Strava to the community is also a commitment to longevity. We are not yet a profitable company and need to become one in order to serve you better. And we have to go about it the right way – honest, transparent and respectful to our athletes.

Our Plan Puts Subscription At the Center of Strava.

This means that, starting today, a few of our free features that are especially complex and expensive to maintain, like segment leaderboards, will become subscription features. And from now on, more of our new feature development will be for subscribers – we’ll invest the most in the athletes who have invested in us. We’ve also made subscription more straightforward by removing packs and the brand of Summit. You can now use Strava for free or subscribe, simple.

This focus on subscription ensures that Strava can serve athletes decades from now, and in an up-front way that honors the support of the athletes we serve today. We plan to take what we earn from these changes and reinvest straight back into building more and better features – not devising ways to fill up your feed with ads or sell your personal information. We simply want to make a product so good that you’re happy to pay for it.

A monthly subscription costs as much as a couple energy bars, and we think that’s money well spent. But we also know, especially lately, that there are athletes struggling to make ends meet and that the free version of Strava must remain high quality and useful. Rest assured that we will always offer a version of Strava for free, and you belong in this community whether you subscribe or not. We’re betting all our chips on you, either way. We hope you’ll bet on us.

We are beyond grateful for your business and your support, and thrilled to recommit ourselves entirely to you, our fellow athletes.

See you out there,
Michael and Mark

That seems like an unreal bad decision. Pretty much the only reason I, and many other people I know, use strava is for segments. No one who pays for trainingpeaks or a coach is going to pay for TP in addition to Strava. And then this kills the fun for a lot of people in my local cycling club for instance, who have been doing a Segment of the Week challenge. Sure, one person who pays can still see everything but it's way less fun to not immediately see your results and where you stack up. They've probably done the math and know that 10% more paying customers easily offsets 30% of their free customer base never using it again or something like that, but really disappointing to see.

At $5 a month it's pretty damn cheap compared to everything else in our sport - not much more than the monthly subscription to slowtwitch.

So you think the value of the Harvard alumni network is based on scale? I would argue it is based primarily on exclusivity, scale is a secondary factor.

Likewise, in a network, the value of all nodes/edges is not equal, it is entirely possible a network analysis of strava shows that non-paying nodes are not nearly as valuable for what strava's business strategy is.

Strava is a directed network(I have much greater number of people who follow me, than I follow), which is very different from facebook (undirected network, all friendships are reciprocal).

I agree that scale is one aspect of how you can analyze a network. However, if you are familiar with formal network analysis, there are many factors other than "scale" that may be used to analyze networks.

How could it take 180 people to run Strava? (Especially since small changes and updates seem to take so long) It seems like they got too excited and built a little empire they can't afford.

How could it take 180 people to run Strava? (Especially since small changes and updates seem to take so long) It seems like they got too excited and built a little empire they can't afford.

** snipped ** A boat load of free users ** snipped **

Cue the free alternative to Strava in 3..2..1..

Cue the free alternative to Strava in 3..2..1..

I'm with you and don't understand the how economics of Strava. It seems like they have a structural problem with there business that needs to be addressed before trying to re-invent the subscription game again and again. With 180 employees I can only guess most of those employees are helping with 3rd party developers and then this is where I would be looking to cash in. I have collect data on devices from Lenzye, Garmin and Tacx/Zwift and all these companies have leveraged Strava rather than sort out functional software. By charging the companies for whom you are developing the software it becomes much easier to work out market pricing and employee load. In effect you hire the number of people you have work to support.

If this not the work most of the 180 employees are doing then lord knows what they are doing. I had a quick google of Training Peaks and from what I see they are between 11-50 employee. I realize they have membership numbers on a different scale but I can't see why Strava is doing that requires so many people that Training Peaks isn't unless its working directly with the 3rd party app companies.