I’m in support of the family plan. I know the platform is free for under 16 year olds and that’s commendable - thank you Zwift.
I think that families should be encouraged to do more together… but let’s face it, it’s unlikely that a family will have a smart trainer each, so access to the platform will be limited for each person. Providing a discount acknowledges this and makes it easier to pay for a service that they can perhaps not access as often as some other users.
I don’t see it as a ‘right’ and I don’t understand why some people have posted so negatively about the suggestion. But really that’s a moot point. This thread started in 2018 and when it was moved to this forum, the comment by Zwift was to “enjoy the discussion”, which doesn’t sound like they are actually taking note of it, but instead are happy to just leave it bubbling in the background.
I’m kind of lucky though as I tried to get my family into cycling and even started up Zwift children accounts for them, however, they didn’t enjoy it as much I’d hoped so they stopped. I guess I’ll not need the family account myself
PHEW!
I thought it was like my old Raleigh Equipe - I know it’s in the shed… but I’m never going to ride it again.
Seriously though. If you consider how often families sharing equipment would use Zwift. I imagine they would be ‘riding on’ less than the most active individual user.
(BTW, thanks @JamesBailey… that was a super fast response)
You’re right @Lee_H , but nobody has really given a reason why it should be considered, so I offered one.
I actually bought a second smart trainer for my children to enable them to use Zwift whenever they had the urge and I had it set up ready to use at any time too. Given our setup, I’d have been happy to pay a full-price subscriptions for two to use Zwift. Alas, it wasn’t to be.
That said, if my other two children had also shown interest and all three shared a trainer - swapping bikes each time that used it - I know that the overall usage would have been low (because they would have been put off by the need to swap the bike each time, dragging one in from storage and putting the other back), so the cost of three additional full-price subscriptions would have stung a little.
I know I’m referencing children, but that’s because it’s my experience. However, that experience is easily translated to young (or not so young) adults who share a trainer, but not a bike. It’s not however so easily looked at from a runners point of view.
At the height of the pandemic lockdowns in 2020, their chief of marketing said on record that ‘it [didn’t] feel right’ that multiple accounts were required per household, the vast majority of which will only own one trainer. Turns out that was bollocks, and they’re totally happy with it. The thread is so old because the concept been dismissed by the company even when it would have been appreciated the most.
Fortunately they’ve got an army of loyal subscribers willing to fight against better offers on the company’s behalf; people who presumably don’t personally take advantage of any other shared digital services such as Netflix, Spotify, Amazon Prime and many others, and never buy multipacks of anything.
There’s literally no point discussing it I’m afraid.
Hello there,
I just joined Zwift and was surprised (more disappointed) that there is still no family option here. Add me to the list of users awaiting got this feature.
Same - my partner and I both cycle, but we’re not going to pay €15 each per month for Zwift - we have shared accounts for Netflix, Prime, Spotify, etc., so why should we not for our cycling trainer app. €20/m for us both would be more than enough.
I’m interested to hear Rouvy does have this though - I feel a trial period coming on.
Thank goodness.
380+ comments over 3 1/2 years and as I scrolled through this is the only Zwift Staff response in the thread. Except that it is not a response, nor a statement of policy. It does not add to the discussion or end it. So I guess be aware that there is another guy who would like to see multiple profiles enabled on an account at multi user pricing.
Have one trainer and 4 “interested” people in the family. While I can justify a membership (in one application) for myself, especially considering my teen and college aged children’s anticipated level of usage I simply cannot fathom shelling out $60/month when we can’t even ride /together/ on the same trainer. Once warmer weather hits, we’ll all be in the hills together. I’m on my “free 7 day trial” right now, but we’re looking at 2 paid and 2 free memberships to RGT as a better use of our money. Every member of our household can watch Netflix or Amazon at the same time. We even paid to upgrade the number of simultaneous screens that can be used. (So yes, a surcharge to support multiple users in the same family at the same IP address is understandable) But why do we need 4 full priced memberships for 4 people to get utilization out of 1 trainer?
It seems it would be a trivial addition to support multiple profiles under a single account and yet only permit one profile to be logged in at a time. (Again, Netflix is an example of this – you pay for two screens, you can have 2 logged in. The third gets a message saying too many screens are in use). There are clear benefits to us in using separate profiles – it allows us all to track our own rides, track our own performance gains. but that is not worth an additional $45/month
I have a static bike and all family uses it. I fell paying 15 euros per month for each person is too expensive. That’s the price I pay to go to a gym and use their own equipment.
Just got a smart trainer and was excited to use it with my Partner to compete together on Zwift. There’s no way we are paying for two separate memberships when every other subscription service provides an option of adding family members (even at marginal extra cost). We cannot share an account due to me needing to sync with Garmin for training metrics, thus I cannot see us continuing our membership after the trial period.
This is a shame because Zwift is clearly a lot of fun - sort it out and we’ll not hesitate to subscribe in future!
As a complete newcomer (today) finding a user forum where an uncontroversial yet 3.5yr old feature request to Zwift with 400 contributions has had no response and no open ticket is a bold red flag.
- Assuming Zwift aren’t reading their own rider forums [are they more receptive on social media?]
would people recommend any other platforms before we get invested here? We have heard very good things about Zwift.
We’re a couple who ride for the exercise, no kids, and too old to be too fussy. It seems a little unfair/unsporting/unnecessary to have to pay twice to process data from two accounts in one instance on one CPU. Very happy to pay fairly for good software by all means however I don’t understand how a second or third seat is an equal overhead and justifies treating them separately.
Is the cost of a second ‘seat’ to Zwift the same as the first? That would sound more alarming than exploiting multi-user installs as a profit stream. Happy to be convinced otherwise tho. thx
- Assuming Zwift aren’t reading their own rider forums [are they more receptive on social media?]