I disconnected everything from Strava and did a data dump yesterday. Guess I should hit the delete button, too, if we're thinking that's the metric they're using. So at least 1 person went through the effort.

---

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

the problem is they took something that was free and now they are asking to be paid. as much as i don't want to reward them for this behavior i will probably pay the $5 per month so i can be satisfied. Its not like they don't deserve my money. they do and i really enjoy strava and looking at segments but give me break when they say this change is to make things better for user experience.

What exactly do you feel you would be gaining by completely deleting your account? If they added new features in the future that you wanted or somehow backed off the new subscription terms you would have to re-load all your historically information (not sure if you can easily do that by uploading a single file). It sounds like you think you are going to teach them a lesson or something, like if I lent you my toy and now I want it back you are saying we can't be friends anymore.

I'm flabergasted by how a relatively large number of people on this thread are acting like they were personally harmed by Strava's decision. You weren't paying them any money, and to the extent you were providing anything of value (your data), they were providing a lot more data back to you in return. At this point, unless you feel they owe something for what has occurred up to now (please explain?), it's hard to see why you would have any feelings at all. When my cable company runs a promo and then it ends, I don't get personally mad at the cable company (beyond the general fact I hate that they have a monopoly;), I just switch back to regular service. I don't say, I'll show them and cancel the cable out of spite. Just because they weren't calling the "free" service a "promo" up until now, doesn't mean it was effectively the same thing as a promo.

To they extent that they changed the terms of the exchange, it's hard to say you were harmed. To the extent that you feel you are harmed it would indicate you felt you were getting the better end of the deal until now (in which case even with their change of terms, you still got the better of the relationship over the time it existed).

As a premium subscriber (so I have thought it was worth it for several years), I don't really have any opinion on this (beyond that it is a business decision), but find myself fascinated by how people are interpreting what happened.

I'm assuming they modeled the possible effects of defections due to this change. If they hired a psychologist to analyze the likely reasonings people would come up with for defecting i think it would be pretty entertaining to read.

I imagine they derive/have historically derived most of their revenue from advertising and sponsorship/partnerships and have been significantly impacted by the pandemic. All their eggs are in the endurance sports (a luxury hobby) basket. With the niche interests they cater to, they would face significantly more risk exposure in a sudden downturn than Facebook/Google even before accounting for any advantages the platforms of Facebook/Google have.

While losing segments sucks, why is it evil to monetize one of the more valuable features of the platform if the business is struggling and needs immediate cash flow to survive at all? I know nothing about Strava the company specifically, but I am quite certain they know how much engagement the free segments have driven and the risk a move like this has on the future of their platform; that they went ahead anyway is a pretty good indicator of how much they need to. Anecdotally, the 180 employees mentioned is steep decrease from other (older) numbers that show up in a Google search.

It may well be the case that their business is only vulnerable at this point due to historical issues with monetization/innovation, but that's an entirely different discussion. Random point regarding their headcount and the cadence of platform upgrades: only a (large) fraction of their headcount are R&D folks, and not all of those folks would be focused on the platform.

Super valid questions, I think I've addressed them.

Completely deleting my account? Not a lot is gained. They have my data and that's part of the user agreement when you sign up. As far as re-loading historic information? That's not really what I use Strava for so that's not a HUGE deal to me, but yes, is a consequence of deleting your account. I don't agree with your comparison to the toys/friends: it's more of you lent me your potato, I added Mr. Potato Head parts under the assumption we'd still be playing together, and now you want to charge me rent to use my Mr. Potato Head parts. Not cool, bud. :)

Being personally harmed? I don't think my reaction is one assuming personal harm. They didn't personally harm me, but they did take an action that I take serious umbrage with. I do feel they owe me (and my fellow users, early adopters, etc.) access to the features we helped build by uploading our data in the first place. The features they used to set themselves apart are what the user base built through the GPS data. And they have a pretty decent monopoly on that. In addition, Strava has been hell-bent on protecting 'their' (my! yours! ours!) data against other groups (i.e., Relive, Ironman) - that wasn't for the end user benefit, even if that's what they claimed. They were protecting their IP which is exactly what I'm doing by no longer sharing my data with them.

I also think it's quite ludicrous to assume anyone thinks they're getting the better end of the deal - Strava was getting invaluable information (user data) for free and monetizing it. And they were providing a cool service in return. This is how tech companies work. But to claim that the potential use of that data isn't a better deal than the 'service' provided is overreaching - see, Facebook/Instagram, Google, and so on.

I've spoken with quite a few friends who are Premium subscribers and they said the same thing - they saw a value so they don't mind paying for it. While that argument seems backwards to me, and no one has yet defined what set Strava apart (now I can list a few things that you have to pay for, but up until this week I couldn't), different folks will always find value in different places. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't agree with you. And that's ok.

---

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

Can you upload this data to Golden Cheetah, Garmin Connect or other platforms?

Gotcha. It's hard to tell online (or I am just dense AF).
Good point though. I think more than a few non-paying members will redneck up (WTF that means) with "I can see the KOM holder and Top 10, so that is good enough for me. I'll buy me an extra Budweiser a week instead."

---

The more people I encounter the more I love my cats.

You need to use present value for that to make any sense.

$0.17/day is only $0.0000002/second... so cheap! Or if you like big numbers, it's $6,000 over 100 years.

The problem I see is that a lot of people have only a vague, passing interest in segments and KOMs, certainly not enough to pay for it, irrespective of how low the price. This isn't Spotify or Netflix. I think Strava have over estimated how invested people are in segments.

I honestly haven't tried. The file types within the "Activities" folder are mostly .fit.gz, with some .gpx and .tcx.gz. Routes are .gpx files. Gear, connections, activities, comments, pretty much everything else are within .csv files, so it seems like pretty much everything is there. Photos you uploaded too.

---

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

I don’t see how providing a service and platform is a problem.

The memo I read said that they were financially incapable of continuing without charging for services. They just had to figure out a way to slice and dice it and price it.

---

https://www.strava.com/...tes/zachary_mckinney

If that's true then this move is a perfect way to assess that. If no one signs up then it clearly wasn't worth their time maintaining and supporting those features.

I dunno, using Zwift even once per week I've started caring a LOT LESS about Strava segments.

Zwift dangles a carrot LIVE for you. You even get a LIVE jersey if you get it! It's so interactive and fun to chase sprints and KOMs and PRs on Zwift it makes Strava live segments look like dog food versus Coq au vin.

Either way, if it shows you PRs who really cares if you're outside the top 10 what actual place it is?

I've started to "cry in the dojo" on Zwift and structuring free-riding after KOMs and sprints or group rides or workouts centered around that as my "work" and made the outdoors rides more of the "whatever for fun" rides. I choose a logical route for a workout like 3x8's or 2x20. I mean, 2x20 is two times up the Watopia climbs. 3x8 would be the volcano climb. Etc...

I got a Zwift KOM jersey for a few minutes last night. It's fun. Folks see it then randomly want to ride with you afterwards till you lose it.

Did anyone notice they released a new route builder?

Their strategy doesn't make sense at all. Release bad news the same day you launch a new product?
The only reason I knew it existed was I happened to need to look up a previous route I did.

The router builder shows a better heatmap, road surface. Still missing a huge important tool imo which is the ability to insert additional waypoints mid route

---

IG - @ryanppax
http://www.geluminati.com
Use code ST5 for $5 off your order

Have not read all 200+ comments, so sorry if this is duplicated.....I do not really care for the segment feature because the algorithm Strava uses is terrible and someone that clearly is on a bike for a run segment should not be allowed. So why would anyone want to pay money for a feature that is literally a digital badge that you can easily cheat for? Why not focus on fixing the segment algorithm so that there is some integrity behind it?

I think they changed the auto flag algorithm recently, since I got my first ever auto flag on a bike ride on Tues. Unfortunately it appears to be brain dead. My guess is that it auto-flags if the computed power is higher than what is possible on a bike, but doesn't allow for tucking, tailwinds, and drafting on a descent... which wasn't even a segment. I had to fill out a ticket to have the activity reviewed...

It wouldn't be hard to make a good algorithm, but I wonder if anybody there understands physics or even rides a bike. They've added some good features over the years, but just as many things have gotten worse.

One that still annoys me is there is a segment on one of my regular routes that Strava consistently confuses with an adjacent road. The segment is a short uphill sprint, while the other road is a descent, and the end of the sprint is where it intersects the other road. My personal top 10 for that segment is all from rides where I didn't even do that segment, and even the GPS track shows that I was on the other road. Strava even has me tied for 11th overall, and I don't think I've ever even been 11th in any group ride I've done up that segment (especially not on 114w for my PR)...

---

"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"

Excellent comparison, and this is exactly why I think the $5 is simply nor worth it... I don't care if it's a cup of coffee or two or whatever. The $5 are 38% of the cost of say Netflix or Spotify premium. For me, specifically, I can't justify that cost for KOM's and, to be honest, shitty segments when there can be tons on a route, some of them different than others with ZERO standardization and true metrics. I find zero value on that, and as such, i find zero need to pay for it. This is why this decision was puzzling to me because really what Strava should be doing is working with the volume of data for advertising and keeping and increasing the volume of free subscribers. But that's just an opinion. I respect whomever disagrees, after all it's your money not mine.

I have my doubts about the physics ( maybe I should submit a resume) but former pros they have hired include Elle Anderson and Neil bezdek. Bezdek is still hammering the p12s at our midweek crit.

most people crying and complaining about segment loss really are just losing this:

Damnit. How is anyone going to know about my:
Fastest Time from my couch to my bathroom in the morning
Fastest Time from my bed to the bathroom between 3:30 and 4 am
Fastest Time to from the front door to my car when it's the 2nd car in the driveway
Fastest Time from the car to the kitchen counter with 3 plastic grocery bags on each arm
Fastest Time from the 2nd bush on the right hand side of the house to the 4th step up to the deck

quoted from letsrun heh

I wonder if they set the rate at $1 a month. I would pay. (probably would get same amount of money each way from more users). $5 gets into my zwift budget. but also a partnership can be there... The database and algorithms must be nuts to maintain, as im a former IT guy.

I will probably sign up. Compared with what the sports of cycling/triathlon can cost, it's not a lot of dough, really.

After forking out for a subscription, I now find that I can't use Route Builder anymore - I can see my old routes just fine but just get a few preferences in the left hand side of the screen and no map at all if I try to build a new route.

Let's just say I'm not impressed......

Perhaps a risky strategy? I'm not up to date with Photobucket's fortunes, all I know is they offered a free service to customers for years, decided to suddenly charge for what they previously offered for free, thinking that if even 20% paid for it, they would be rolling in it. Unfortunately they didn't understand their target market, every man and his dog fucked off. They limped along for a bit, then relented and offered the photo sharing for free again, albeit with a watermark. Too late sunny Jim. That ship had well and truly sailed. So for some companies it's simply not possible to go back to where they were. People are fickle, people don't like free shit being taken away from them, people become embittered and don't forget. People won't sign up for Strava Premium purely on principle, irrespective of how little it costs. Strava could charge $1/month it wouldn't matter and that's what they don't get. RIP Strava.

As someone who does like looking at Segments, the thing that keeps me from paying is that they aren’t easily comparable across users.

I do most of my rides solo. Most KOM’s in my hood are set on big group rides.

It would appear to be pretty easy to segregate these multi-rider efforts from solo efforts. There would still be some problems with the data, but my bet is most who ride in those big groups are recording and uploading to Strava.

I would pay to have cleaner data.

I won’t pay to have to play detective and see how my effort stacks up against others.

I think the reason I am so disappointed by this is that the need to make these features premium is the result of what seems like years of mismanagement and lack of development. I started using strava ~10 years ago in college and loved the social aspect and leaderboards, and started paying about 7 years ago when I got a power meter, and really appreciated the added analysis I could do on power data. Since then, I haven’t seen many (any?) improvements to the platform that really excite me. Their big announcement email basically said “Hey, look at us making updates finally. We even reverted to a feature of chronological feeds that we had 5 years ago. Progress!”

They failed to find a way to keep the leaderboards engaging for 98% of people in high density areas (I can only get so excited about trying to get in the top 200). I know You can check where you rank for the year or month, but it is out of the way and feels weird, especially since it is on a calendar and not a rolling basis, so beginning of the year or month that feature is pointless. Also, why is the leaderboard still not expandable on mobile?

The route building feature still sucked as of a few weeks ago (haven’t tried the new one). A couple examples: I was trying to have it take me down a commonly ridden road, but had to drop waypoints every mile or so because it kept wanting to make me do a u-turn, climb back up the hill I was trying to descend, go down a different road, and take a busy two lane highway to get the point where the roads intersected. Also, They have all my power data, all my ride data, all my segment data, and they still estimate the time it will take to complete a route you build by mileage alone with no regard for my Ability or the elevation involved. That just strikes me as lazy for one of their supposed core features.

They’ve never even tried to incorporate or let you track nutrition on rides, which is a basic component of performance. Ditto for sleep.

Their promo challenges (which is a new feature in the past few years) seem to be poorly targeted - if I ride a few hundred miles most months, why are they showing me a “challenge” to ride 50 or 100 miles in a month to get a badge? That doesn’t engage me at all.

They have an opportunity to create revenue And help me through linking me to products they know I need based on time and mileage - new chains, shoes, bike maintenances at a local shop, etc. Instead, they seem to operate under the assumption that people are averse to being sold anything, but I don’t think that’s necessarily the case if it is stuff they need.

Basically, I’m sad that a product I could really enjoy hasn’t engaged me more. I’m happy to pay the monthly membership for myself (and would even pay a bit more) because of the power analysis features, but frustrated that they weren’t able to create compelling new features that would make it worth it for others to upgrade, so had to resort to limiting the functionality for most In order to generate more subscribers. Strava has been and could continue to be a huge asset to the endurance community, but continues to fail to live up to its potential By failing to substantially improve, and this just seems like another step in that saga. Hope they can figure it out.