Let me go back to the original post I responded to: that your new provider of choice doesn't have their act together is no fault of Strava's. All I'm saying is that there is not much another service can do to get "their act together" based on what Strava provides. And there's a few things Strava could to make migration a lot easier that still wouldn't require them actively connecting and pushing data to every competing service there is. The fact that Strava readily accepts these alternative approaches when it comes to receiving data from other services makes this shortcoming even more obvious.

wut. They could provide a means of bulk uploading of the raw data. This is incredibly straightforward.

wut. They provide an easy means of bulk downloading of the raw data. This is incredibly straightforward.

No, it doesn't. Each of these "alternative approaches" requires a lot more work and coordination.

Let's just agree to disagree while also agreeing that you're wrong. I'm glad that this settles the matter. Take care.

Glad if I was able to make you feel a bit better about yourself. I'm sure every little bit helps.

I have been paying for 18 months. I guess I like having the additional analysis data. It's no that expensive, and I just started using the Live Segments feature, which I think is cool. I do compare myself to others. Right now it's not pretty--I didn't ride much the last few years. So I like seeing where I'm at from a fitness perspective. I have also created some segments, which is fun.

The app could be better, but they seem to be more responsive about making changes. I need to learn all it can do and use more of the features. A good deal for $5 per month. So for now I plan to keep paying...

(FWIW: I don't buy coffee at Starbucks very often. When I do, it's coffee, not the ice cream drinks. I don't order soda at restaurants or buy soda at the grocery store. I have eliminated a lot of items that just cost money and don't improve my life.)

I've been a paying member, $60/yr, for a few years now. It's been so long since I started paying, I'm not sure what the benefit is and I don't really care. I'm of the mindset that if I get a worthwhile service from a website that I consistently use that I don't mind paying. I get annoyed on occasion with a couple things but as a payer, I think I have a right to ***** now and then. Those electing to not pay, IMHO, don't. Simply as that.

The FAD called Strava
 

I haven't used Strava and just now know what it is. Sounds like fun but also a FAD kinda thing.
I use a little Cateye Strada W/cadence I bought for $20
For distance XC Hang Gliding a Variometer and GPS a must.
And there are some cool devices like Flytec Sensbox.

- Jim Steel 40+ year cyclist and Hang Glider Pilot

Other than they are not making money, what evidence do you have? What would you do differently

I have been paying for several years.

Interesting point.

I have a feeling Strava was planning this for awhile. I don't blame them, and $5 a month is really not very much. Maybe they needed to do this to save their business? Plus, if you can't pay right now, wait. You don't NEED the features of Strava. The free version still serves a purpose.

I understand the need to push more people to subscription, or to otherwise monetize the info they collect. If you don’t help them achieve that, then they don’t much care what you think.

But I think it’s a very poor tactic to take something away from the free level; even if you don’t care about the particular feature. It just causes resentment. Far better to simply add every new feature to the paid level. OTOH, if I’m not going to switch to a pay level, and likely never will, then why should they care if I’m put off by their decision?

Good points. I do think Strava is vulnerable in that they move slowly and I'm not convinced the features placement of their app is as intuitive as it could be.

Could it be that Strava gave too many features at first? The free account should have been what it is now, and Premium contained the leaderboards and other, more advanced features?

I don't have a problem with what they did. Time will tell if it remains the dominant ride tracking/social media site.

Strava, Elite version
 

Strava's new pricing will discourage new users as well chase off existing non-paying users.
Users quitting Strava is the worst consequence of the new pricing.
I can easily afford a Strava subscription now adays, but for most of
my life I was frugal even though I was solidly middle class.
Paying for apps and websites was something I did not do, still rarely do.
The best part of Strava for me was being to see other people riding in my area and looking at their routes,
their performance relative to mine, pictures and profiles. Segments were fun also.
Lots of regular folks use the app, mixed in with super athletes.
Strava is not worth downloading with the current/new non-paid feature set.
Strava is going to lose the middle class. That's a shame.

But why quit? Quitters are cutting off their nose to spite their face. They're already paying $0. They've lost the ability to pay nothing to compare their best time on a segment to their friends' best times (unless they're all in the top 10). But they're paying nothing and still getting something. There's a lot of Strava left at no cost. If someone started a service tomorrow that did all that Strava does for free, and had all the social networking strength that Strava already has, that would be a big deal. Well, it's already there, and all non-paying users have to do to keep it is to do nothing.

I have never had Strava or any other similar product. I don't really see the need for it. Will it make me go faster? Will it make me climb hills better? You should have added a question to the poll, "Do you have Strava".

Faster? Possibly. Better climber? Possibly. It all depends on how you use the data, such as HR, cadence, estimated (or actual) Watts on a given segment of your ride. Being able to easily compare an exact part of a ride that you do several times per season (or week, month, however often) makes it very easy to tell if you are making progress or holding the line. So, yeah... possibly make you faster and a better climber. The one thing I can promise everyone here that Strava absolutely will NOT do, though, is pedal your bike for you. You have to put in the effort.

Except time and data. Only the time really "costs" you anything in a meaningful way, but the data does have value.

It depends what you want and get out of Strava. The free version is still useful to a lot of people, and those people should keep their noses. But if the only things you find useful are "gone" and you're unwilling to pay $5 a month for them, then you're not doing any cutting that hasn't already been done.

I feel like I'm coming off as down on Strava. They have every right to do this, they came up with a very cool concept, unique at the time, and not easy to program. Kudos to them, I hope they stick around for the long term.

I don't think this move will help them long term, on the other hand if it drives more business to other services, well, competition is good for everyone. 🙂

What if it doesn't do any of that, but you enjoy using it? I think that's what they're really all about.

​​​​​​Just be aware that people wind up finding what they're looking for. Meaning: do you want to be faster overall, or faster on certain segments? (Either one is ok.) I have a couple of private segments in my Garmin, they're short sprints, I really need to be improving my 60-180 minute power. But that's my fault not the segment's.

I'm in the same boat. I have a couple of private segments in GC that I use to compete against myself. I find it interesting to see where I've set PRs and where I've dogged it.

GC does everything I need. I don't have the time, or the patience for that matter, to compile trip reports in both locations. I started entering data in to GC before Strava was around and I'm too lazy to change my ways now. For users who like the social aspect of Strava, and are invested in racing their buddies and maintaining friends lists, then the $5 a month seems like a small price to pay. Just my random thoughts.

It is the cheapest, effective motivator/training tool I have and absolutely will continue to pay for it. Strava helps motivate me and my riding buddies to get smoother (faster), become stronger climbers, challenge each other and (against ourselves) constantly, etc. Being able to see where I lose or gain time. Use it a lot for planning rides in new areas when exploring/travelling, track my riding stats and connect socially to other riders all in one place.

I will continue to pay for it. To me, I find it funny with a community that will sink in large amounts of cash for all the various aspects of our hobby is freaking out over $5/month for a service that was providing capabilities that should have been covered by ads or subscription fees long ago. I think the free option is still pretty fair and useable for casual users. Strava's mistake was not getting their act together and doing this long ago.

The top 10 leaderboard is completely useless in a lot of places. Most of the segments I ride have way more than the top 10 (so flagging is a waste of time) made up of people averaging 45mph uphill...

As others have said, why not give the option of watching ads while still getting it for free? Why not make it $1 a month, instead?

Also, as others have mentioned, they need free users to make the leaderboards interesting. It reminds me of free to play video games, where people who play like to complain about "free" players, meanwhile the games generally need a lot of players online to make them viable, so the free players are absolutely essential.

Entertainment for the very bored, a botched "what is Strava" article. Published today, still taking about Summit.

Users can record their exercise, and choose from a wide variety of exercise options like running, e-bike riding and canoeing, including things like distance, pace and details about how you felt about the experience.

https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-strava?amp

I mean I guess that's technically not inaccurate, but what a bizarre way to describe it.

And why no e-canoeing?

The Strava guys addressed that in their statement, I think. They said that they've tried ads in the feed and product promotions, and got pushback from users each time. You have to give tehm credit for maintaining such an ad-free social media platform in this day and age; compared to my Bookface or instagram feeds the lack of people trying to sell me stuff is quite refreshing on Strava.

I hope they make a subscription model work, but I'm personally not signing up any time soon.