The Strava dilemma: Is it money well spent?

(Image credit: Daniel Gould)

published 30 June 2020

Late last month, training platform Strava made some significant changes to its user terms. Some of the features that were previously free are now available only with a paid-for subscription, and most new development will be available only to subscribers. In Strava’s own words to its users, “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.”

There followed an eruption of passionate responses on social media, many attacking Strava’s decision, but also quite a few defending the platform. We’ve been forced to reassess the value of segments, KOMs and kudos to each of us personally. It’s time to cut through the noise and weigh up the benefits of Strava – to training, motivation and general enjoyment of cycling – against the £4 per month subscription fee: simply, is it worth it?

The switch to a paid-for model has roused heartfelt emotions. Ben Dowman, a psychologist and self-confessed Strava addict, gives his perspective: “From the outside, as a user myself, Strava’s communication has been very parent-child. We have had free access to Strava’s functions for a very long time, and now it feels like we are having our favourite toy taken away from us, with no room for discussion or negotiation.”

There is a saying: if you’re not paying for it, you’re the product. Many assumed that the free use of Strava was granted in exchange for our data – a win-win quid pro quo. I put it to Strava’s global marketing director Simon Klima that this is why some users have reacted angrily. “Subscription has always been the heart of Strava, making up the vast majority of our revenue,” he stated. “We did not sell personal information before, and we do not sell it now.”

Given the ongoing effects of social distancing on racing and group training, Strava has a stronger grip than ever on the psyche of competitive cyclists. Therefore, some riders perceive Strava’s timing as harshly opportunistic. In contrast, some other cycling brands are offering extra and free services, e.g. The Sufferfest created a new training plan to help cyclists cope better with lockdown, while extending its free trial period. Then again, Strava has been open about the fact it is yet to make a profit despite its huge user base – and its need to do so may have intensified with the global economic disruption and uncertainty.

Whatever the reasons, the sudden changes have left some Strava users feeling unsettled and frustrated. Though Strava is offering a long trial period, it is taking away features that were previously free. Dowman adds: “It will be very interesting to see what happens at the end of the 60-day trial period once users have had a chance to explore all the new benefits and functions. Will it be enough to convince them to pay to continue?”

Strava has been around since 2009 and has become deeply embedded in cycling culture, becoming a part of our everyday lives and language. Like other forms of social media, it gives us a sense of community and connection with like-minded individuals – not to mention the addictive dopamine drip of kudos clicks, Strava’s equivalent of ‘likes’. It lets us peer into the cycling lives of other people and make comparisons, a double-edged sword that can be motivating but can also provoke envy and resentment. Above all, Strava provides opportunities for competition every time you ride your bike. Behind the scenes, the company has worked very hard to make its platform about more than just leaderboards and KOMs.

Coach, Ribble-Weldtite rider and Cycling Weekly columnist Jacob Tipper was one of the voices on social media supporting Strava’s new subscription structure. He tweeted: “90% of cyclists I know use Strava almost every day, I’d rather be giving them [Strava] £4 a month then giving it to Netflix, Amazon, Apple Music and others. If you own a £4k bike, it’s not that big a deal, or just continue using the free version without leaderboards.” It was one of his most popular tweets ever.

“A good thing with Strava is that it gives accountability towards speed, not just power.” This is particularly beneficial for those who do much of their training indoors. “It’s easy when doing full-gas efforts to sit bolt upright or get out of the saddle to increase your watts, but that doesn’t actually make you go fast. Having more insight into speed can really help; it’s speed that wins races, not power.” It is not for everyone, he conceded. “You can’t use it all the time, but some people are very keen and respond to it very well.”

This is a view shared by physiologist and coach Dr Andy Middlebrooke of Exercise Science Consulting, who uses Strava with some of the riders he coaches. “We might only do a lab-based test every two to three months, but we can choose a segment for them to ride regularly and use that as a performance test on a monthly basis,” he said. “It is done in a controlled way; I specify it in their training plan – it’s not a random attack.”

Leaderboards and segments have been created by the growth of the community. It’s riders who have made this addictive feature what it is – hence why Strava users have a strong sense of ownership over it. Leaderboards were previously free, but now only the top-10 is visible unless paying a subscription. KOM chasing, particularly in very popular cycling areas, is the preserve of the strongest riders, so the effect is that the majority of users are now unable to check their position – unless they pay.

In the early years of Strava, a moderately fit rider on a good day with conducive conditions could scoop up a few KOMs or top-10s within a ride without specifically targeting them. Now, it’s all about KOM sniping. It’s almost impossible to stumble into a segment and get a good place on the leaderboard. Those serious about their rankings have to meticulously prepare before making a specifically targeted KOM attempt. You need to know the exact start-finish positions of the segments and the best wind conditions to tackle them. “You used to get people chasing KOMs on steady rides,” said Tipper, “but that doesn’t happen so much now that it’s harder. Riders only make specific, planned attempts.

Strava has changed the way some people ride, using segments as unstructured intervals, polarising riding efforts. This can be beneficial for fitness, compared to single-paced riding. However, it has its limitations, as Dr Middlebrooke explained: “We know that athletes need to do training sessions in different zones to improve their performance: recovery rides, long steady rides, high-intensity efforts – it’s very well established. Segment chasing, however, can lead to riders pushing themselves really hard all the time, reaching a point where their performance goes downhill.”

Dr Middlebrooke’s coaching approach is to help riders cut down on wasted time. “People want me to do their thinking for them; they trust me to set the right sessions, monitor and adjust their training to match their lifestyle so they can improve.” In this regard, Strava can sometimes be a hindrance. “I’ve seen riders doubling the length of their ride by spending so much time on analysis,” – by this he means segment-watching. “Certain personality types enjoy access to all that data and competition.” There are many tools for storing and monitoring your training data, but it’s segments and leaderboards that keep you coming back to Strava.

If used intelligently, Strava’s analysis has real benefits. “Strava provides a fantastic environment for a recreational rider who wants to get better,” concluded Middlebrooke. “It has everything, it provides the motivation to do longer rides, faster rides and monitor their progress. It provides all the metrics you need in one place, even route planning, in a way that is easy to understand.”

Of course, it isn’t only Strava that relies on subscriptions to survive, but also cycling magazines like this one. Here’s an anecdote from several years ago that I feel highlights how audience (or ‘community’) frustration sometimes belies underlying loyalty. I was working in the CW office when a reader called with a complaint and asked to speak to the editor – at that time, Robert Garbutt. The reader ranted about how the magazine was not value for money and was taking the wrong path editorially. Garbutt very calmly told him that he had a choice: he could buy the magazine or not. At this point the reader grew even more irate and yelled: “I will keep buying it, and you can’t stop me!”

Perhaps the reaction to the Strava subscription change isn’t really about money after all. As many people have pointed out, £4 is a couple of energy bars or a fancy coffee – just £48 per year. The strong responses are about relationships, control and sense of being valued (or not). Strava has claimed to be “re-dedicating Strava to our community” – reminding us that it has the power to give and take away at a moment’s notice. For some users, it’s their sense of dependency on the app that makes them feel vulnerable. For others, the sense of outrage stems from a feeling that Strava is not treating its community as equals, or not fully recognising that it is its users who have given the platform such a stronghold within cycling. After all, what are leaderboards and segments without riders populating them?

Those who value Strava’s full features will likely subscribe, whether happily or reluctantly. While Strava’s ambition “to make a product so good that you’re happy to pay for it” is both admirable and makes sound business sense, some users still feel that in their transaction with Strava, they are giving more than they are getting in return. Even though Strava’s corporate line is to say they support those who support them, with better functionality and new app developments, there is a natural human tendency to most notice what we have lost rather than what we might gain in future.

I do want to improve in some ways, but I’m not so bothered as long as the age-related decline is slow. I enjoy longer rides, 40 miles plus, but also recognise the need to go out and do shorter, faster stuff. Sometimes I go fast, have a rest and then go fast again – some people call that interval training, I think! I do keep an eye on cadence, speed, heart-rate elevation and all the other bits, but I can do that on Garmin Connect, which has other features, all of which are free. Leaderboards are the only thing that makes Strava worth having, but I’m not sufficiently bothered or interested.

I use Strava as a way of tracking my progress and training against myself. I am just getting back to fitness after having my second child and it is very satisfying to see my fitness metrics moving upwards. I use segments to push myself harder than I would if I was training on my own; it is good for motivation. I use the rolling four-week view to build up my training time, ensuring I make sensible progressions. I enjoy the community and social interaction of the platform. It’s even more important now as a way of keeping in touch with others and seeing their riding. It does annoy me that there are some inaccuracies – I have ridden with other people and our average speeds have been very different, despite being side-by-side nearly the whole time.

I use Strava for planning routes and exploring different segments. The route-building facility is really good and heat-maps allow you to find popular routes, which is good for exploring new areas. You can get a fairly accurate estimated time for a planned route based on your average speed, which is helpful. With the loss of racing, thanks to social distancing, I’ve spent more time on Strava – it’s about competing but also about community, as many of the names on the leaderboards are women who in normal times I would be racing against. As with any tool, it is good if you use it properly and safely.

Thank you for reading 20 articles this month* Join now for unlimited access

Enjoy your first month for just £1 / $1 / €1

*Read 5 free articles per month without a subscription

Join now for unlimited access

Try first month for just £1 / $1 / €1

Hannah Reynolds interest in cycling began while studying for a degree in Sports Science at the University College Chichester and surrounded by elite level cyclists. She is now undertaking a PhD at Sheffield Hallam University investigating the use of e-bikes by older people.

A committed dabbler whose passion outweighed her talent Reynolds has competed across all disciplines of cycling bar BMX. In the very distant past she has been south-east road race champion, southern cyclo-cross champion and finished third in the European 24hr Solo mountain-bike champs in 2011. She was also the Fitness Editor of Cycling Weekly for 15 years.

Hannah Reynolds is author of several cycling books, France-en-Velo a guide to the ultimate 1000 mile cycle route from the Channel to Med; Britain's Best Bike Ride. LEJOG1000; A 1000 mile journey from Land's End to John o' Groats and 1001 Cycling Tips.

The Strava dilemma: Is it money well spent?

Useful links

Racing

buyers-guides

Reviews