I don’t think we need to know that information and I’m certain they wouldn’t give it out. I wouldn’t.
2 Likes
even if they did, it wouldn’t really tell a lot as by the time the announcement was made, folk like myself who stop for the summer have already stopped and i guess there’s a lot of annual memberships out there, therefore the real test will be how many renew come the winter for those that pay monthly, and how many renew their annual memberships
1 Like
I truly think most people can afford €20,- per month for something they love doing. And let’s be fair, looking at the hobby we all chose… it’s not the cheapest…
But… when spending goes up above ‘peanuts’ and it requires a 2nd thought… people tend to get the decision scale out. Same you see for netflix/spotify/other streaming services. Prices went up globally, salaries mostly didn’t or only a bit. So people have allot less to spend. Not only is the amount of spendable money less, you can also buy allot less with it.
So when Zwift announces they too, unfortunately, have to increase their pricing; people are forced to check again whether it’s worth it / can afford it.
Nothing new to be fair, but here’s where I think Zwift could help people make a decision;
- transparency on roadmaps / vision
- what’s to come
- If a ‘community’ is so important for Zwift, it’s reactions to comments by the community have been really selective.
Speaking from myself; I don’t mind spending more money if it’s worth it. So is it worth for the product as it is now? Seriously doubting it. And if the money going to a place that I have faith in will increase my game in the future, I would definitely pay the €20,-. But unfortunately I see sooooo many requests (even old ones) not getting any attention / reaction. And previous ‘updates’ added only so few things… that I truely would think paying a subscription feels ‘unfair’ and an oldskool; pay €50,- for the game and 2€ a 5€ per month for ‘online’ feels better…
But yeh… thats from a consumer perspective, and not from a shareholder. Whereas it’s more simple. More profit > less profit.
6 Likes
They seemed to back down on increasing the xp needed per level. That was supposed to be May 1.
(post deleted by author)
No i haven’t seen this post, i tried searching the forum but obviously used the wrong key words.
I flagged it for deletion, thanks for the info.
1 or 2 Euro raise per month would have been absolutely fine for me, no complains at all. But not like this. It’s said there are “roughly 1 Mio” subscribers worldwide, so with average 5 € per month and cancelled subscriptions due to the raise already calculated in… you make the math. I estimate between 4 - 4.5 Mio each month ON TOP.
They have to make a profit, of course. Understandable. But this reeks of greed and i’m not having it. Although hurting a bit about the decision i’m forcing myself to do without. There are other apps (even for free) that i already tried out.
It’s about principle and about sending a message.
Let’s see if others follow.
1 Like
You’re not looking hard enough. There’s been lots of discussion.
It’s all everyone is taking about.
Ease off on Claudio folks. In the thread he started, he did actually say sorry for not spotted the existing posts - then his original post was then moved here but without the rest of that thread.
5 Likes
Shocking increase. I have been an almost daily user for the past four years but this is too much with less than a month’s notice. I have just downloaded Whoosh and need to give it a try and serious consideration. Not sure penalising your users/ customers is the right strategy. Corporate investments and partnerships should cover inflation-related costs. A 5 or 10% would have been legit but 33% in the UK whilst we are struggling is indecent.
2 Likes
Would you pay half to Zwift but no races?
1 Like
Why half? are you wanting racers to subsidise other zwifters?
1 Like
User pays system - quite fair… The non racing folks could be said are subsidising the racing crowd. 
And we have to suffer the pace dynamics they wanted after loudly whinging and complaining.
It’s still convoluted and skewed against lighter weight riders.
2 Likes
I think you’ll find whingers and complainers actually got the pace dynamics reversed from what racers wanted.
2 Likes
Not entirely. It should have been completely thrown out and start again from scratch.
Racing costs more than just a ride program.
It only seems fair that casual riders and exercise enthusiasts pay $10 or $12 while those who wants the full race experience can pay for the current Zwift rates $20 a month.
It would require ten thousand racers to forward $10 just to pay the Zwift games prize money. Plus the cost of advertising and promoting the race itself. Then, the race community can pay for celebrity racers like Mathew Van der Poel ($500,000) and Mark Cavendish, Lucy Barclay, Geraint Thomas, Chris Hoy ($100,000 each?), the entire Canyon/Sram team ($10 million) and the Tour avec Zwift ($25-$50 million?).
Most of the workouts are designed by individuals and given to Zwift free of charge. Casual riders have plenty of roads and worlds to use, so they are not primarily the ones who request new courses and race formats.
Maybe, racers can have bikes that only unlock for racers only. The same for jerseys. Worlds like Crit City and Bologna…races only.
1 Like
Can’t say I know the numbers but I suspect racing in recent terms has cost less than riding development .
Sure you can say the zwift games money but tbh nobody really wanted that or cared for it. I’d much prefer they spent that money on development of the core product than prize money.
Casual riders have had plenty new development as well in recent years, clubs, countless tours and unlocks. Pacebots, climb portal to name a few.
And racing has what? Pack dynamics, ttt mode. Maybe the money they pay wtrl.
Either way there is a balance to be had but I don’t think it’s close by saying exercise enthusiasts would be half the cost to racers.
Not to mention the benefits of racers tend to be more often year round subscribers.
(post deleted by author)
Actually, I think you are proving more evidence in support of my statement.
Zwift riding is stable and doesn’t need any development.
Racers want more and that costs lots of manpower.
I’ll forward this resolution to hq.