# Trailforks Pro - New app subscription service



## OttaCee (Jul 24, 2013)

Big changes with Trailforks moving to app subscription model if you travel a lot outside your home area (square of 38 mile sides, which equals to 1400 square miles). App will be free to use within your home area and on the desktop.

Sign Up:
https://www.trailforks.com/pro/

Pricing $3/month, special pricing if you sign up in September 2020.

FAQs on the changes:
https://www.trailforks.com/pro/faq/


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

F*ck Trailforks.

30km radius doesn't remotely cover my "home area". It's more like 30-60mi (I just measured it out on a map).


----------



## RMCDan (Feb 28, 2008)

Harold said:


> F*ck Trailforks.


Are you seriously losing your sh!t over $1.50/month?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

RMCDan said:


> Are you seriously losing your sh!t over $1.50/month?


When it was the same stuff they supplied without charge before, yes. Same BS Strava pulled this year, too. Taking features they didn't charge for in the past, then charging for them. It's fine to offer a premium service and a free service. But it's damn shitty to take features away from free users and begin charging for them.

Particularly, I'm pissed that TF is making their radius so small. Oh, we're going to throw a bone to people and let them access their "local" trails on a free account. Just about everywhere I've lived, my "radius" has been roughly a 1-1.5hr drive. Some places I've lived have had zero trails within 30km of my city. With the radius TF gives, that rules out trails that I'll ride in the evening after work.

Everybody wants subscription services now, too. Across all aspects of life. So someone exercising financial budgeting in their household needs to pick and choose subscriptions carefully and not just start paying when a formerly 100% free service they've used now requires a subscription to access what you used to access.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

Yeah, this super sucks.

If the "home" area was larger, I might be less annoyed (still annoyed though).

But this 30 square miles... That covers exactly one of my local riding areas that I actively ride, out of at least 4-5 that I consider "local" (about an hour drive in any direction).

Also, looking at the FAQ... I'm still not certain how Free and Pro differ. It says free can still record rides anywhere in the world, view your own rides, and check trail conditions/update them. That seems like most things?

Or does that mean that the public facing trail maps will now be behind a paywall?


----------



## tbmaddux (May 22, 2012)

ocnLogan said:


> Or does that mean that the public facing trail maps will now be behind a paywall?


Yes, it looks like a sort of screen overlay, or graying out of content. Should become more apparent as it the implementation rolls out next week (?)


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

Looking more at the main page, I noticed it explicitely says "app" features for pro, are unlimited offline access to trails/etc. To me that sounds like maybe the website will still let you browse trails in other regions/etc (scouting trails/planning rides/etc).

In fact, it looks like the app is the main thing affected here, so it might not be as big of a deal for me personally. I only record on the app, and view everything else on my PC. And I don't use any of the "social" features either (I don't "follow" anyone else, or view their rides/etc).


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Harold said:


> When it was the same stuff they supplied without charge before, yes. Same BS Strava pulled this year, too. Taking features they didn't charge for in the past, then charging for them. It's fine to offer a premium service and a free service. But it's damn shitty to take features away from free users and begin charging for them.
> 
> Particularly, I'm pissed that TF is making their radius so small. Oh, we're going to throw a bone to people and let them access their "local" trails on a free account. Just about everywhere I've lived, my "radius" has been roughly a 1-1.5hr drive. Some places I've lived have had zero trails within 30km of my city. With the radius TF gives, that rules out trails that I'll ride in the evening after work.
> 
> Everybody wants subscription services now, too. Across all aspects of life. So someone exercising financial budgeting in their household needs to pick and choose subscriptions carefully and not just start paying when a formerly 100% free service they've used now requires a subscription to access what you used to access.


If they don't make money, they go out of business, then there won't even be a free version to use. It alway funny when people complain about having to pay for something.


----------



## fridday (Aug 28, 2020)

ocnLogan said:


> it looks like the app is the main thing affected


I think we can expect the website to follow. Trailforks has removed the sentence that said the website will be free forever from their About page.

Before:









After:








I hope this will result in people using Openstreetmap instead: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mountain_biking


----------



## Catmandoo (Dec 20, 2018)

An 18 mile local area is BS. If there are trails within 18, or even 40 miles, likely you ride them all the time and as such have no need to use TF. 

Just a way to keep the operation afloat and maybe it'll help fund add'l features. I've no problem paying a small fee for a decent service. I do this with RideWithGPS as I use it all the time, so am happy paying for it. TF I don't need to use much.


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

I've never paid for an app as I don't use many. But TF is the one app I would pay for. And at $1.50/month, its a no brainer.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Bacon Fat said:


> If they don't make money, they go out of business, then there won't even be a free version to use. It alway funny when people complain about having to pay for something.


It's always funny when people miss the point.

It's not about there being a paid version. It's about taking away formerly free features and making you pay for them. Strava did this with leaderboards. I never used those much, so no real skin off my back, but it was still a shitty move. TF's move here is REAL shitty because the first thing that TF existed for was to show maps of the trails. And now that core functionality (the only reason I even used TF) is going paid.

If they had planned a bit better, they could have realized that they're going to need to make money with it some way or another (if only to cover development costs), and set up free/premium services from the start (or at least planned for it and set it up that map use/planning would always be free, but new features would always hit premium first and some would always be premium). But nah, as shown above, they came in advertising "Free forever!" and now "oops, my bad, now we have to charge you for things, so technically, we lied."

I also have issues with charging people to access GPS data that they were GIVEN or that they skimmed from other services. Maybe I should write TF a bill for the trail data that I've submitted to their website now that they're going to be charging users to access it. On trails that are also outside the 30km "home" radius. So now I can't even access map data that I've uploaded, I guess?

And as to the point about the 30km radius being BS, it kinda is. I don't have ALL the trails in my usual riding area memorized yet (it takes awhile to memorize several hundred miles of trails within my 1-1.5hr radius), so I still consult maps from time to time. But within 30km, yeah, I've got all those memorized. So I don't NEED TF to navigate myself. Though I occasionally do pull out maps to show visitors who are lost. It just won't be TF.

Also, considering when TF's main competitor (MTB Project) shows all the maps on its website and allows offline downloading on its app for free, it's honestly kinda hard for me to justify TF. Seems like TF is counting on people thinking it's SO MUCH BETTER that they'll feel justified in paying up and continuing to pass on MTB Project. Meh. Frankly I think TF will lose some people over it. I already used the two services fairly equally, but at this point, I'm going to be going dialing back TF use.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Harold said:


> It's always funny when people miss the point.
> 
> It's not about there being a paid version. It's about taking away formerly free features and making you pay for them.


Yeah, you're mad that you have to pay for a service that was previously free. You feel you are entitled to their hard work for free...a lot of the population feels they are entitled to others hard work and service for free.

Start your own program and give it away for free, or stop complaining that you can't get free stuff


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Bacon Fat said:


> Yeah, you're mad that you have to pay for a service that was previously. You feel you are entitled to their hard work for free...a lot of the population feels they are entitled to others hard work and service for free.
> 
> Start your own program and give it away for free, or stop complaining that you can't get free stuff


Their hard work? They relied on the hard work of their users for that database. The bone they throw? A discount on sub fees. But I still have to pay to view data that I submitted.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Harold said:


> Their hard work? They relied on the hard work of their users for that database. The bone they throw? A discount on sub fees. But I still have to pay to view data that I submitted.


Yeah, you agree to that when you used their app. Stop complaining. You aren't owed anything.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Bacon Fat said:


> Yeah, you agree to that when you used their app. Stop complaining. You aren't owed anything.


It's good that there are other options out there, so nobody has to pay TF for anything. Still doesn't mean that it's not a shitty move by TF.


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

Progress is relentless. Can't stop it just because something used to be this way but now needs to be this way. I can't see even $3 a month covering the operating cost of paying software devs just to maintain the app and website let alone develop new features.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

It’s mostly a few things for me. 

It’s hard anytime when something changes. Especially something they said would be “free forever”. 

I hate subscription services. I’d rather buy software outright, than pay for it in perpetuity. 

They state that the free version is because they expect people to be contributing to their local trail systems with condition information/etc. this makes sense to me, but have one problem with how it’s implemented. 

Their “home region” is incredibly small. I looked mine up. I live in the greater Seattle area, an area blessed with lots of good trail networks/systems. 

Yet most of the trails that I consider “local” wouldn’t be included in my "home region". Meaning, Duthie Hill, Tiger Mountain, and Raging river. Arguably the most popular mountain biking networks in the area. 

I have exactly one riding area that I actually ride in that radius (not any of the ones above). And thats not counting other trail systems that most would still consider "greater seattle region", like Bellingham.

Not saying I know the ideal “home region size”, but just stating that their intent was to have most local trails be free, and to pay for stuff outside that, that they seem to have missed the mark. 

Maybe I’ll go give feedback on their forums, and maybe some tweaking of the numbers could happen in the future. 

And, I understand it’s their prerogative. Just also stating that I’m not tied to supporting them.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

OttaCee said:


> home area (37 square miles)...


A circle with a radius of 3.4 miles has an area of 37 square miles. That would be an awfully small riding area. You must mean something different...perhaps 37 miles square, or something?


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

I agree the local area is way to small. I consider anything within a 60 mile drive as local.


----------



## sns1294 (Oct 8, 2013)

Lone Rager said:


> A circle with a radius of 3.4 miles has an area of 37 square miles. That would be an awfully small riding area. You must mean something different...perhaps 37 miles square, or something?


It's a 30km (18.6 mile) radius from your "home area" whatever that is. I am more than 18 mile from the closest trail so I may just have a blank map...

EDIT: Apparently they changed their FAQ since yesterday with grade school level math thinking that 37 square miles was more than an 18 mile radius??? It's not, it's way less...


----------



## OttaCee (Jul 24, 2013)

More clarification on free area coverage on the Trailforks app

Square of 60km (38 mile) sides, which equals to 3600 square kilometers (1400 square miles)


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

OttaCee said:


> More clarification on free area coverage on the Trailforks app
> 
> Square of 60km (38 mile) sides, which equals to 3600 square kilometers (1400 square miles)


Insufficient.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

OttaCee said:


> More clarification on free area coverage on the Trailforks app
> 
> Square of 60km (38 mile) sides, which equals to 3600 square kilometers (1400 square miles)


Wow.

The way they first had that written was... dramatically different/misleading, or just incorrect.

1400 square miles is vastly different than 38 square miles.

Another quick look at the map, means I should get Duthie Hill, but potentially not Raging River/Tiger Mountain. And means that Bellingham is a totally different region, dispite being just over an hour drive away from my neighborhood.

Still smaller than I think I would self describe as my "region". But at least it's not as laughably small.

At least you get to choose exactly where it is.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Harold said:


> Insufficient.


Lol It all must be free. I demand it.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Bacon Fat said:


> Lol It all must be free. I demand it.


That's bullshit and you know it.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Harold said:


> That's bullshit and you know it.


For the price of one small coffee a month, you too can support a Harold from getting lost on his bicycle. Won't someone please support a Harold.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

It looks like they've updated the PRO FAQ since yesterday. Perhaps they saw the thread and its feedback?

They now have a screenshot of the 1400sq mile area, and have added this clarification.



> To be clear, the website and access to maps and trail data remains free on the website. Only the map outside your free area in the Trailforks app will be greyed out unless you become a PRO subscriber.
> 
> Some niche features on the website like Garmin basemaps become a Pro only. We are excited to have more resources in the future for many new features, some of which will be Pro only. But the website will remain largely unchanged and a lot of the apps functionalty still works as a free user.


And this.



> The app will choose your free area automatically but you can adjust this area once to your choice. The free area is a square of 60km (38 mile) sides, which equals to 3600 square kilometers (1400 square miles). This area can be positioned anywhere you like and does NOT have to be centered where you live. It's intended to encompass your most used riding area even if that area is far away from where you live.


Glad to hear the website trail info/location stuff will keep working as expected.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I only use Trailforks because our local club insists on using it for trail status updates.
The app gets opened once a month at most.


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

I'm kind of curious how this will affect Garmin GPS units with built-in TF?

I can probably manage $3/mo if needed, so no biggie either way.
I started mountain biking 30+ years ago, long before smartphones.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

CanuckMountainMan said:


> I'm kind of curious how this will affect Garmin GPS units with built-in TF?


That is a good questions.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

I guess this kicks in Oct 1? The free account on the app will be limited but I imagine you'll still be able to access the website and unrestricted trail info via your phone's browser for free as long as you have internet connectivity. 

Though I've got the app, I haven't really used it. I do use the TF website (among other resources) to research new places to ride, but generally lay out and download courses with RWGPS.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

ocnLogan said:


> It looks like they've updated the PRO FAQ since yesterday. Perhaps they saw the thread and its feedback?


That's better clarification. Still, I'll probably just remove the app from my phone at this point.

It's still irritating that they're taking something away that was once completely free now that they've convinced a bunch of people to use it.

Regarding the downloadable Garmin basemaps, those used to be only accessible if you "donated" to a trail org (though the transparency on that was poor, and I didn't trust it). Are they saying that now you have to pay TF to get those, INSTEAD of donating to the trail org? Or pay TF IN ADDITION to donating?

Either way, I think a different method to monetize would make more sense. My use of the trail map apps on my phone (only the phone, not browsing maps on my computer) is pretty limited to the times I do a mtb trip somewhere brand new. At most a couple times a year. Sometimes, as in this year, it's not at all. I see the temptation that businesses have with making a subscription-based service because there's regularity to bringing in money when you get people to sign up. But for some business models and some use scenarios it's actually not good for the customer.

This is why I severely limit the number of streaming services I subscribe to (and other subscription services of other types). I simply don't watch enough television to actually make it worthwhile to pay for more. I pay for a couple that offer specific things that I like and I skip the rest. I do like the pay-per-use type services where I can just pay a rental fee for a single show/movie that I watch. Amazon has their interesting hybrid streaming where they have individual rentals and then they have stuff included with Prime subscriptions. Though I pay for Prime for the shipping, not the streaming.

For TF, putting their downloadable Garmin basemaps into Pro doesn't really make sense. Just charge singly for a download of a state, whether you're a free user or a Pro user. Making it a Pro feature basically just amounts to laziness for not wanting to have different fee structures.

Given my infrequent use of their app, paying a subscription for all the time I'm not using it doesn't make sense. Make it so that the app itself is no longer free and costs a dollar or two in order to download (so ANYONE using the app has some skin in the game). Instead of severely restricting geography to free users (the area is small enough that it's not hard for most people to memorize the trail connections within it), restrict the number of offline downloads allowed. Basically, allow people to cache 1 state's worth of trail maps in the app for 1 month or 1 week per year for free (have the app automatically clear them after that time period unless the person subscribes). This allows occasional users to stay free, but the frequent users are given an incentive to go subscription. And as I said before, put new features into the premium service first. Right now, it doesn't seem like they're adding any totally new features to their premium service.

The other reason that it's a hard sell for TF to go so heavily into a subscription service right now is because there are plenty of other places that trail maps can be accessed for free. People who have been doing this for awhile generally have a good idea where to go for this stuff. Considering the easy availability of other free data, I see those competitors gaining use, since it's not like it's TF or nothing in most areas.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

Bacon Fat said:


> It alway funny when people complain about having to pay for something.


Well it's not exactly like this  Trailforks is providing place, people (you know, those who complain about having to pay for something) are actually providing data. Trailforks doesn't make trails, Trailforks doesn't even draw trails to maps, people do... for free, and for Trailforks to earn money. So it's not exactly so black and white as you say


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

What's Strava and Trailforks??

Sent from my HD1900 using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Eh, I only use it when I travel. There are other comparable options available for free, some better. Good luck to them, no more trails from me....


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Harold said:


> Just charge singly for a download of a state, whether you're a free user or a Pro user.


What's a state?


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

NordieBoy said:


> What's a state?


It's a situation, circumstance or condition. For example, I'm in a state of confusion.


----------



## Greg_o (Mar 22, 2012)

Harold said:


> That's bullshit and you know it.


Kinda like expecting a service for free?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Greg_o said:


> Kinda like expecting a service for free?


Let's just make **** up that Harold isn't actually saying. Seems a fun game, eh?


----------



## ACree (Sep 8, 2004)

Harold said:


> Their hard work? They relied on the hard work of their users for that database. The bone they throw? A discount on sub fees. But I still have to pay to view data that I submitted.


You nailed it. Bait and switch, get people to provide them the product, and then charge them to access it.

They have the data on who has submitted what. Would not have been hard to offer additional discounts or credits for prolific contributors.


----------



## ACree (Sep 8, 2004)

Bacon Fat said:


> If they don't make money, they go out of business, then there won't even be a free version to use. It alway funny when people complain about having to pay for something.


Perhaps every poor business model should be propped up with that justification?


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

ACree said:


> Perhaps every poor business model should be propped up with that justification?


The poor business model is one that doesn't make money. If their product is useful, people will pay for it. The deadbeats weren't ever going to pay for it anyways, so losing that customer isn't a big deal


----------



## Haggis (Jan 21, 2004)

Bacon Fat said:


> For the price of one small coffee a month, you too can support a Harold from getting lost on his bicycle. Won't someone please support a Harold.


I'll support a Harold, if only to stop him whining!
TF has been a godsend for organisations that develop and maintain a trail network. 
We have 80km of local trails and TF has been very useful - far better than the app we spent a bundle developing ourselves...


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Bacon Fat said:


> The poor business model is one that doesn't make money. If their product is useful, people will pay for it. The deadbeats weren't ever going to pay for it anyways, so losing that customer isn't a big deal


Hmmm....



Pinkbike said:


> Trailforks is not just any trail mapping website, it's a user contributed database that puts the control into the hands of the people who have worked so hard to preserve and maintain the trails we love. Did you know that many trail Associations don't own the GPS data for the networks they support. Many areas have maps owned by private interests and not all, if any, of the profits make it back to the associations. Trailforks' mission is to provide a direct funding model to put 100% of the money back into the association. On Trailforks users can directly support the people that are swinging the hammers and digging the dirt to maintain and preserve the trails we all love to ride.





Pinkbike said:


> Pinkbike will ensure Trailforks' longevity, with no requirement for it to be self supporting. So many other trail sites have come and gone, never taken off, have paid access to useful data or are locally focused. Trailforks is free, world-wide and automatically integrated with tens of thousands of photos and videos already on Pinkbike.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

And now their business model has changed.


----------



## mtbdudex (Jan 13, 2020)

Great sleuth work!!


fridday said:


> I think we can expect the website to follow. Trailforks has removed the sentence that said the website will be free forever from their About page.
> 
> Before:
> 
> ...


Lots of Trailforks baseline data came for the user community, volunteers built it up via data submissions, me included.

I'd like a reward system for us volunteers, maybe one time fee?

I'm not on any local trail board currently, did my multi year stint years back. So won't get that bone either.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

The website will still be free. Only the app has the subscription fee.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

I was always amazed that TF was free. Such a great resource whenever I want to explore new-to-me trail systems, whether in my home state or those I travel to.

I’ll cheerfully pay $1.50/mo for such an amazing resource. I’m grateful TF was free for as long as it was.
=sParty


----------



## fredcook (Apr 2, 2009)

I like TF, but... the home area is WAY to small. 1,400 square miles? Really? The metro area (with over 9.5 million peeps) where I reside where people commute across regularly, and ride nearly 40 trails, covers 9,500+ square miles! For us, 1,400 square miles means nothing.

The other thing, for me anyway, is TF is most usable when I am out of my "home" area. After all, I know my local trails with my eyes closed. No need for TF at that point.

I have mixed feelings about charging, but it is a business and has costs. Better than pop up ads in my opinion.

But my guess is those that need TF for out of town trails will just create another login for that area, and call it "home"... just sayin'.


----------



## fredcook (Apr 2, 2009)

Alright... I bit the bullet on the intro offer, half off for life. $17 a year is minuscule. Looking around out of curiously, it's a lot better than $60 a year for Strava. Does anyone actually pay that? Not a Strava user, so I have no clue. All Trails is $30. MTB Project still seems free, but I never cared much for it myself.

I admit it, I support TF...


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

fredcook said:


> Alright... $17 a year is minuscule.


It's $18/yr but whatever - you're right it's minuscule.

If someone has to budget for an annual $18 expenditure, they've got bigger problems than the cost of an app.
=sParty


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Look at it this way- Pinkbike promised they would never charge for Trailforks. They haven’t. Trailforks is independent now. I’m glad they’re maintaining their service rather than selling it off to another provider who doesn’t care about the MTB community. 

My nonprofit is relatively modest, but Trail Karma has been surprisingly beneficial for us. It basically covered this year’s office rent. 

I’m willing to pay for things I use and value. I’d prefer to, actually. I wish FB’s model was to charge $5/month. That would solve a lot of problems. 

There is a fair amount of admin/developer chatter. One idea I saw floated was the ability for a local group to partner to sell access to a specific region for free users, much like selling a paper trail map. I’d love to see that.


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

fredcook said:


> Alright... I bit the bullet on the intro offer, half off for life. $17 a year is minuscule. Looking around out of curiously, it's a lot better than $60 a year for Strava. Does anyone actually pay that? Not a Strava user, so I have no clue. All Trails is $30. MTB Project still seems free, but I never cared much for it myself.
> 
> I admit it, I support TF...


Yeah, I do. Mostly out of inertia now, but Beacon was the easiest way to give my GF some peace of mind about my solo rides. Plus it let me download GPX files of other users' rides.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

fredcook said:


> Alright... I bit the bullet on the intro offer, half off for life. $17 a year is minuscule. Looking around out of curiously, it's a lot better than $60 a year for Strava. Does anyone actually pay that? Not a Strava user, so I have no clue. All Trails is $30. MTB Project still seems free, but I never cared much for it myself.
> 
> I admit it, I support TF...


I pay for Strava. I use it a lot, so I feel they are worth supporting. I only use TF when I am looking for routes in new area. Not going to take the chance of not getting to ride the best trails or getting lost for $1.50 a month. So I'm happy to support them too


----------



## carlhulit (Sep 13, 2005)

I have done rides that cost more than $18 in gas driving to the trailhead. Having moved recently trailforks is in use almost every ride so I signed up for pro.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Over here all tracks are listed on TF.
If you are a downhiller.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

I concur it is annoying that they lured all these contributors to their platform while it was free, and will now charge for the information provided by users. But I also understand that they need the revenue. I just wish they left more functionality intact. It seems to me that allowing access to maps should be free, but maybe charge for features like recording, gps location, etc.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

MTB Project is still free. In some ways I prefer it but I use both. MTB Project at least showed their appreciation to the people who uploaded trails. They sent me a free jersey for mapping, uploading and actually putting in good descriptions for the trails. If MTB Project doesn't have a trail usually TF does.

MTB Project was a bit nicer early on. Uploading trails was easy and you had a lot of freedom. At some point with every trail I would upload it seemed to get modified for some reason. Someone was going in after I'd upload a trail and checked to find the local outdated trail map and made alterations to my GPS literally tracking the exact route. I stopped uploading after having to fight with the mods about this trail being rerouted or the map was outdated.

I have no problem spending $3 a month for either MTB Project or TF. I'm sure practically everyone on here wastes more than that on a monthly basis for crap that's far less useful or impulse buys.


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

I'll gladly pay $18/yr no problem,

I let my AllTrails expire last month. (-$30)
Also cancelled Disney+(-$10) and Netflix 4K premium (-$17)*

*(Canadian pricing)


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

CanuckMountainMan said:


> 2020 Farley 9.8 Rage Red 2020 Farley 9.6 Matte Olive 2020 Farley 7 ROARange 2018 Farley 7 Viper Red


Just curious... like Farleys much?
=sParty


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

Sparticus said:


> Just curious... like Farleys much?
> =sParty


:yesnod:

Just picked up #4 today, 
...a new 9.8 for $1240 off regular price.

Wifey and I ride Fat all year round.

Now we will each have a Rigid Carbon with Studded Gnarwhals for Winter groomed trails.
Aluminum Frame w/Mastodon and Barbegazi's for the rougher trails the rest of the year.

Posted here:https://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/newbikeday-1150807.html)


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

MTB project is a great app but the maps are far less complete than trailforks for my area. I think everyone around here adopted trailforks some time ago and really provided great data. 

According to the FAQ, they are giving free subs for pro to trail orgs. Between that and trail karma, I suppose it still makes sense for most trail orgs to use it over MTB project.


----------



## foxpuppet (Jan 2, 2011)

Barely use TF vs Strava for looking for or researching trails. But I sub to Strava and have just opted into TF pro. $18 a year is a bargain. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

CanuckMountainMan said:


> :yesnod:
> 
> Just picked up #4 today,
> ...a new 9.8 for $1240 off regular price.
> ...


If I lived someplace that received snow, I'd have a fat bike, too. But here in western Orygun we typically only average about one snow event per winter and it's usually the wet cement kind of snow.

Anyway very nice bike! Er, bikes! Isn't cycling great? So many different flavors -- we can each have whatever we want. Have fun!
=sParty


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

So after sitting with this for a little bit of time, I've reached a couple of conclusions. First, TF really boned the implementation of this pay for pro thing. There was almost no warning that this was coming. I learned about it when I opened trailforks on my ride yesterday and suddenly the app wouldn't work unless I paid them money. I figured out how to set the free area and was able to get going, but still, implementing this with zero warning to users was pretty stupid.

Second, the fact that TF made what was originally a free service into a pay service without adding anything is really a poor marketing tactic. It should have been very apparent to anyone planning this that there would be an immediate negative reaction. This ties into the first conclusion - there should have been a better plan with more lead time before springing this on users.

Third, $18 a year is actually a very good deal for this, and something I am definitely willing to pay. I am concerned that a lot of volunteers are no longer going to contribute, and that will diminish the usefulness of the app over time, but if that happens then I can always cancel. But I would hope TF is very aware of the danger here and does something to encourage participation (credit toward subscriptions, for instance). 

Fourth, the biggest concern I have is what is in store in the future. Is trailforks going to get bought by garmin or someone else who makes more changes? Is the price going to be increased over time? Will we end up having to shell out $20 a month for this down the road? Who knows, but again, I guess when the time comes I can always bail.

So I guess for now my conclusion is that I'm going to pay for the subscription. But I don't really feel that good about it, and it's largely because TF screwed up the implementation. Reading the forums, there are many who seem to feel this way. The damage done to TF's goodwill may diminish over time, but it could also make TF very vulnerable to a competitor in the near term.

One final thing - if I could make one suggestion to TF on how to proceed from this point forward, it would be that TF should make all user-submitted data available for free on the app. That means the ability to browse any map content submitted by users and what people have posted about those trails (descriptions, difficulty level, etc). Then require a pro subscription for using GPS location, map overlays/topo, recording, ride logs, profile leaderboards, etc. I imagine most who would be willing to pay would do so just to get GPS navigation. But allowing the user-submitted data to still be accessible to all for free on the app would go a long way toward mollifying the bitter taste left in many of our mouths from the way this was done.


----------



## mtbdudex (Jan 13, 2020)

Comparison: I use tapatalk for so many forums. Daily, hourly, way more than Trailforks.
I got tired of their ads, so now 0.99/month add free.

IMO Trailforks at $3/month is high, I'll probably do early bird to secure $1.5/month.
Each monthly service plan adds up, every red cent matters.

Oh, both my boys use it, age 14 and 16, are they under a family umbrella so to speak?



















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fredcook (Apr 2, 2009)

mtbdudex said:


> ... Oh, both my boys use it, age 14 and 16, are they under a family umbrella so to speak?


Good question. I know some families that use TF collectively. And that begs another question. Does the Emergency feature work outside of home areas for free accounts. That's a feature one of those families depends on when their younger members are riding alone. I've already subscribed, so I don't know if that feature shows up on free accounts. Guess a question for TF.

For those not familiar with the Emergency feature, it's a big red button you can tap to contact 911 with your coordinates, or send them to another person.


----------



## RRauzer (Jul 24, 2019)

Has anyone else had this (just?) occur to them? I signed up for the Pro account 9/1/2020. Have the Apple "Subscription Confirmation" email so I know I did indeed upgrade. Been working fine - same as before Pro existed. Today I went on it to research a ride I wanted to try today and I'm limited to the free version's mile restriction and it's asking me to upgrade to Pro. Rebooted, logged out, and also tried a "Restore Pro account" option in the settings which all haven't changed my free status. Really frustrating...


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

IME, they’re responsive to the support tickets you generate in the app. Give that a shot.


----------



## RRauzer (Jul 24, 2019)

evasive said:


> IME, they're responsive to the support tickets you generate in the app. Give that a shot.


I'll agree with the responsiveness in this case. I did email support yesterday and they did reply and fix my issue in roughly two hrs from the email.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rob214 (Apr 18, 2019)

what about single track and mtb project apps????


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

rob214 said:


> what about single track and mtb project apps????


mtbproject is still free (for now). don't know about any others.


----------



## mtbdudex (Jan 13, 2020)

"We Need Your Help Mapping Other Sports
Trailforks is expanding to other sports or 'activity types'. We have a big task ahead documenting trails for hiking, moto, horseback, skiing, snowmobiling and more.

Help add new trails or edit existing trails by selecting the activities they support.
We are also looking for new regional Trailforks Ambassadors for these new sports."


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

mtbdudex said:


> *"We Need Your Help Mapping Other Sports*
> Trailforks is expanding to other sports or 'activity types'. We have a big task ahead documenting trails for hiking, moto, horseback, skiing, snowmobiling and more.


Not really sure but sounds sort of ridiculous considering those people helping their business grow, actually need to pay to make their job. But hey it's just me, and I'm sure for most of people this is perfectly cool thing


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

mtbdudex said:


> "We Need Your Help Mapping Other Sports
> Trailforks is expanding to other sports or 'activity types'. We have a big task ahead documenting trails for hiking, moto, horseback, skiing, snowmobiling and more.
> 
> Help add new trails or edit existing trails by selecting the activities they support.
> We are also looking for new regional Trailforks Ambassadors for these new sports."


I'll pay the $3 for the app because I find it very useful for unknown trails or show routes to other people. But I'm not going to go out and do their job for them. Lol. GTFOH


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

There are people that like to help others in the community.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

the-one1 said:


> I'll pay the $3 for the app because I find it very useful for unknown trails or show routes to other people. But I'm not going to go out and do their job for them. Lol. GTFOH


It would be nearly impossible for the Trailforks team to do all of that tracking themselves. The $3 helps keep the app and the infrastructure going, development and infrastructure are not cheap. You don't have to help, but others that do are doing so for the good of the community

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RMCDan (Feb 28, 2008)

the-one1 said:


> I'll pay the $3 for the app because I find it very useful for unknown trails or show routes to other people. But I'm not going to go out and do their job for them. Lol. GTFOH


Their "job" is to build and maintain the app and its supporting infrastructure, which is no small task and certainly a lot more difficult than recording a GPS track while riding your bike. The overwhelming majority of users didn't and never will contribute data anyway.


----------



## sns1294 (Oct 8, 2013)

Their implementation of this "PRO" service has been terrible. It's been throw it at the wall and see if it sticks since the start with seemingly no thought put into it. Between the ever changing home area to the "we never said the app would stay free" who knows what's next.

For what it's worth, apparently if you are a TF ambassador, a local admin, or have contributed over 1000 TF points with 500 being trail additions/edits you are eligible for a free pro subscription: https://www.trailforks.com/pro/localadmin/ I am a local admin and have the minimum points so I requested and got the pro upgrade instantly.


----------



## mtbdudex (Jan 13, 2020)

I paid thru Apple store, got email receipt.
Pro not registering 4 hours later.
Other app updates happen real time.
Both iPhone and desktop show nothing.
Others who did pay: how long before showed up?
I’ve restarted my iPhone also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mtbdudex (Jan 13, 2020)

My
Issue solved via a reset Pro menu thing, I got a PM on it, now Pro active 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## skywalker991 (Feb 18, 2017)

Quite strong opinions on both sides. I think some people are missing the point or two.

- Whoever thinks it's "only" $3 probably can't manage their personal finances well. Add a few "only $3"s multiply by 12 then by a few years and add interest and you will probably get enough for a new bike or very least a kickass mtb trip. Does it represent a good value for money? Is it wort it? It depends. I don't use it that often, not for my local trails. I know them well. So we're talking a few trips / weeks in a years in which case it's quite expensive imo
- The thing that I find the most off-putting and borderline disgusting and immoral is the fact they charge for showing you trails that they contributed nothing towards. Smeone else built them, most likely for free out of passion. So TF contributes nothing really except, traffic, while making money out of it. They are leeches, just like Facebook et al. I think most people didn't think in these terms since it was free but now it's evident that TF main aim is to make money. Which brings us to...
- TF's main priority is to make money. But they have been quite sneaky about it, which I think quite few people finds offensive. They say this "small" fee is to cover their costs. Don't believe this. It's bull¢rap. I think it's quite evident what their intentions are. They pulled off a classic trick. Made it free, hooked people and then started charging. They're so two faced to remove their "motto" which was something along the lines "we'll never charge for our services". Guess what this "small" charge will go up pretty soon. Guaranteed. If they can charge $30 / month and get away with it, they will.
- TF's free option is a joke. Actually no, it's not a joke. It's well calculated and deceitful way of giving you false impression of choice. Not only the radius is very small but why would I want a map of my local trails?! I know them like a back of my own hand. I personally feel borderline offended by this. Clearly they don't think much about their customers.

Will I subscribe? I don't know. Most likely not. One thing for sure, TF as a company lost my trust and respect for ever.


----------



## skywalker991 (Feb 18, 2017)

Lastly, it makes me laugh when people say TF is part of the "mtb community", whatever that means. 
If a buddy in my "mtb community" wanted to charge me a "small" fee for showing me trails (that he hasn't built himself), I would tell him to pi$$ off and go ride them himself


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

skywalker991 said:


> - Whoever thinks it's "only" $3 probably can't manage their personal finances well. Add a few "only $3"s multiply by 12 then by a few years and add interest and you will probably get enough for a new bike or very least a kickass mtb trip. .


If you have trouble with 3 dollars a month, then you probably are the one with trouble managing their personal finances


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

I wish I had the space in my life to be this outraged about something so trivial.



skywalker991 said:


> Quite strong opinions on both sides. I think some people are missing the point or two.
> 
> - Whoever thinks it's "only" $3 probably can't manage their personal finances well. Add a few "only $3"s multiply by 12 then by a few years and add interest and you will probably get enough for a new bike or very least a kickass mtb trip. Does it represent a good value for money? Is it wort it? It depends. I don't use it that often, not for my local trails. I know them well. So we're talking a few trips / weeks in a years in which case it's quite expensive imo
> - The thing that I find *the most off-putting and borderline disgusting and immoral* is the fact they charge for showing you trails that they contributed nothing towards. Smeone else built them, most likely for free out of passion. So TF contributes nothing really except, traffic, while making money out of it. They are leeches, just like Facebook et al. I think most people didn't think in these terms since it was free but now it's evident that TF main aim is to make money. Which brings us to...
> ...


----------



## skywalker991 (Feb 18, 2017)

Bacon Fat said:


> If you have trouble with 3 dollars a month, then you probably are the one with trouble managing their personal finances


I don't see any logic in your statement. What if you don't earn much? It doesn't necessarily mean you are bad at managing your finances.


----------



## skywalker991 (Feb 18, 2017)

evasive said:


> I wish I had the space in my life to be this outraged about something so trivial.


And yet you have a space in your life to reply with a trivial comment

I'm not outraged just sharing my views


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

skywalker991 said:


> And yet you have a space in your life to reply with a trivial comment
> 
> I'm not outraged just sharing my views


You were at least borderline disgusted- your words, not mine.

I didn't say I don't have time to indulge my hobbies. I devote a lot of hours to bike advocacy, in fact. Many of those hours are frustrating. But there are many things far more disgusting, immoral, or outrageous out there than this.


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

skywalker991 said:


> I don't see any logic in your statement. What if you don't earn much? It doesn't necessarily mean you are bad at managing your finances.


If you can't afford THIRTY SIX DOLLARS per YEAR you seriously can't afford to ride mountain bikes as a recreational activity.

Caps for emphasis of the absurdity.

Furthermore if you can't afford it then don't buy it.


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Fajita Dave said:


> If you can't afford THIRTY SIX DOLLARS per YEAR you seriously can't afford to ride mountain bikes as a recreational activity.
> 
> Caps for emphasis of the absurdity.


It's not about few bucks, it's about being f$cked. Some folks don't mind it, some other do.

Personally - I won't pay for Pro, I'll donate double to local trail org instead.


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

borisotto said:


> It's not about few bucks, it's about being f$cked. Some folks don't mind it, some other do.
> 
> Personally - I won't pay for Pro, I'll donate double to local trail org instead.


Great then don't pay for it.

Especially with mapping there's developers working on apps like TF non-stop. Software development and maintenance is very expensive. Expecting it for free is insane. They at least tried to make it free and at some point realized it wasn't financially feasible.

Personally I'm using MTB Project anyway which is still free and I uploaded the vast majority of the trails in my immediate area. Which took probably a few dozen hours of my time within the last few years. Free is nice but I won't be butt hurt if they decide a small fee is needed to keep their app running.


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Fajita Dave said:


> Great then don't pay for it.


I won't.



> Especially with mapping there's developers working on apps like TF non-stop. Software development and maintenance is very expensive.


Dude, I'm in SW for 25 years, don't tell me how things are done there. "Very expensive" also varies wildly - from top-notch Principal engineer in SFBA to Intermediate level guy in Romania/Ukraine - could be 20x difference.



> Expecting it for free is insane. They at least tried to make it free and at some point realized it wasn't financially feasible.


Who said I'm expecting anything? 



> Personally I'm using MTB Project anyway which is still free and I uploaded the vast majority of the trails in my immediate area. Which took probably a few dozen hours of my time within the last few years. Free is nice but I won't be butt hurt if they decide a small fee is needed to keep their app running.


I guess I'm not alone in my way of thinking, so
1. I don't pay subs fees unless I see real value. 
2. I don't mind forking some $$ for a one time fee for the app.
3. I don't like being lied to or taken advantage of. 
4. I support local.

#1 - TF doesn't fit the bill. 
#2 - I'd probably paid up to $10 one time fee to keep the TF team going if things were handled differently.
#3 - exactly the case.
#4 - as said earlier, I better donate double to local MBA.

Main thing I have issue with is how transition was presented and handled. They simply lost my trust, so it is not question of _how many cents per year_ it is, it is that I don't want to do anything with them at all.

Simple "_Don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's raining" _kind of thing.

YMMV


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

borisotto said:


> I won't.
> 
> Dude, I'm in SW for 25 years, don't tell me how things are done there. "Very expensive" also varies wildly - from top-notch Principal engineer in SFBA to Intermediate level guy in Romania/Ukraine - could be 20x difference.
> 
> ...


So being in software for 25 years, how do you keep something like this afloat with new features and updates, without having the users make a payment? Not an attack, I'm genuinely curious. 2 years into software career

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

socalrider77 said:


> So being in software for 25 years, how do you keep something like this afloat with new features and updates, without having the users make a payment? Not an attack, I'm genuinely curious. 2 years into software career


Donno TF history of ownership, but there are few $$ options for app developers to keep things rolling:

1. free app sponsored by some rich_guy/company for whatever reason. 
2. full free app with annoying ads and paid ad-less version. 
3. free 'light' app with paid full version (Bike tracks is the good example of what I've paid for and been happily using for years). 
4. paid app from the beginning (sometime with short eval time).
5. free app with extra features for paid subscribers.

TF went from #1 to #5 as far as I understand.

#1 - clean but normally short lived
#2 - clean and fair
#3 - clean and fair
#4 - clean and fair 
#5 - clean and fair as long as things are not moving suddenly from free to paid section.

Now, on these new features, fixes and updates. Sooner or later every successful app (and SW product in general) is pretty much exhausting its features, reaches polished enough state and eventually the product pretty much stalls.

After that app developer has a choice - let it be as is for foreseeable future with minimal investment or push envelope further. Popular options are to expand somewhere else (marry _Call of Duty_ with _Vegan cooking, _add new activity types (scuba diving on bikes anyone?)), just make money in some other way to fund whatever expenses/RnD you need to cover. Or both at the same time.

Here comes subs model - pay recurring fee for your extras and a promise of new great features. Unlike Patreon, where you support someone and these folks are working their asses off for your support and you do see it, app developer may simply use subs cashflow without really delivering anything new - _you've got your extras, we've got your money, we have fixed these 2 very important bugs in the last month_, life is good. Yes, someone has to pay for the infra - AWS, storage, web hosting and so on, but these things are pretty reasonably priced these days when set up properly.

In short - subs cashflow is an easy predictable money (that's why TF went this way) and if you have good user-base, really good product and you push your users *gently* - you can expect vast majority to convert. Heck, "its just $1.50 a month, I'm not that broke". IMO, TF screwed up on the last part.

Turned to be pretty long answer. 
As usual - YMMV.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

borisotto said:


> Donno TF history of ownership, but there are few $$ options for app developers to keep things rolling:
> 
> 1. free app sponsored by some rich_guy/company for whatever reason.
> 2. full free app with annoying ads and paid ad-less version.
> ...


Makes sense, thanks for the info!

Is TF not a mix of #3 and #5? They still have a free (albeit limited) version that you can use, and you pay extra for being able to see more areas? That, and you still have the web version that's completely free for everything. Would it have satisfied you if the free version had more features?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

socalrider77 said:


> Makes sense, thanks for the info!
> 
> 1. Is TF not a mix of #3 and #5? They still have a free (albeit limited) version that you can use, and you pay extra for being able to see more areas?
> 2. That, and you still have the web version that's completely free for everything. Would it have satisfied you if the free version had more features?


1. #3 model is Angry Birds - you have a free demo version with couple of levels and then you have paid app with all bells and whistles. You've paid once and you own your copy as-is, and if they add more - you get the update. AFAIK - its not TF model.

2. I don't use web version (never actually been on a website ), only the app. I'd be fine with paying something like $0.99-$1.99 per map of the state/province/country/region and having all features working as before on maps I've paid for. I'm pretty sure TF has considered this approach, but decided to go after permanent cashflow solution. If they introduce this option of paid maps vs Pro subs - I may reconsider and buy what I need.

Coming back to the topic, I've looked into the whole undertaking a bit more - it looks like TF is now owned by a separate company "Trailforks Mapping Inc" that is independent from Pinkbike. Claim is TF has over 1 million downloads on iOS/Android, assuming conservative 25% conversion rate to Pro subs (I guess it will be around 50% actually) it would be 250k subs forking $375k a month on discounted rate. Take off 30% cut for Apple/Google - that turns into ~$3m a year. For these money you can run small office with a team of 10-15 developers and QA folks in Vancouver and have some cash left. Couple years later TF may (or may not - we'll see) pull off Netflix - 'We are extremely sorry, but we have no other option but to increase our fees by that much per month'.

All that makes me think that ppl behind this transaction want to make money, and when the money talks - you need a combination of x-ray vision and a cynicism to get the real picture. Both comes only with experience unfortunately.

But everyone wants to have a decent life, nothing bad about it.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

borisotto said:


> 1. #3 model is Angry Birds - you have a free demo version with couple of levels and then you have paid app with all bells and whistles. You've paid once and you own your copy as-is, and if they add more - you get the update. AFAIK - its not TF model.
> 
> 2. I don't use web version (never actually been on a website ), only the app. I'd be fine with paying something like $0.99-$1.99 per map of the state/province/country/region and having all features working as before on maps I've paid for. I'm pretty sure TF has considered this approach, but decided to go after permanent cashflow solution. If they introduce this option of paid maps vs Pro subs - I may reconsider and buy what I need.
> 
> ...


Makes perfect sense now, thanks for the explanation!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

socalrider77 said:


> Makes perfect sense now, thanks for the explanation!


NoPro, it was kinda fun to research this piece a bit, reminded me about being in start-up environment and how ugly things may turn when REAL money are on the table. Pretty much the final poker scene from 'Lock stock & 2 smoking barrels'.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

I subscribed for $1.50 CDN a month the day I learned of the subscription. I felt fortunate to get in on it at the 50% off promo price. I am a heavy user. Maybe that puts me in a different boat than the people who are upset? Not sure. 

Just got back tonight from a whirlwind BC biking tour. Had my phone in my pocket and used it at least 10x a ride. 

I bike a lot throughout numerous regions of western Canada. That app has been, and will always be, pretty much invaluable to me. 

Maybe I have too little conviction or time to care, but I honestly have no idea why people are so upset with this. None. I am shocked I had access to this service as long as I did for free. 

I agree with the guy above - I wish my life was so near perfect that this could possibly even be an issue.


----------



## mtbdudex (Jan 13, 2020)

Side bar. There's no monthly subscription option I saw, you pay yearly and they advertise how much that is per month .










True monthly subscriptions offer it as such, correct? 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wcapital (Dec 1, 2008)

*Exactly....*



Harold said:


> It's always funny when people miss the point.
> 
> It's not about there being a paid version. It's about taking away formerly free features and making you pay for them. Strava did this with leaderboards. I never used those much, so no real skin off my back, but it was still a shitty move. TF's move here is REAL shitty because the first thing that TF existed for was to show maps of the trails. And now that core functionality (the only reason I even used TF) is going paid.
> 
> ...


Thanks for saving me the time to write what you just wrote so well! I'll use my money to pay for things that are valuable to me (and don't try to monetize user's data, advertise to them AND ask for their money directly!).


----------



## Cerberus75 (Oct 20, 2015)

I use it a lot. So I paid for it. But don't like the paying for them to branch out to other hobbies i don't do. If nothing gets added to the program and something better comes along I'd probably switch.


----------



## idbrian (May 10, 2006)

I never used Trailforks until it went pay. Had it on my phone but used other apps. I always prefer a pay app that will remove ads and add cool features. Perhaps I won't end up liking Trailforks, who knows. 

Anyway, I am wondering if anyone knows of a place where people share how to use Trailforks Pro. Not that I can't figure out how to use the fundamentals, but more about how to best use it. Tips, tricks, advanced settings, etc.


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

I'm fine with paying $1.50/month for TrailForks to continue aggregating data and presenting it in a higher quality and easy to use/.gpx downloadable format than most if not all other offerings out there. Their work also benefits trail planning, building, etc. in addition to riding.

I have never owned a Garmin and only post rides on Strava for my friends to see where I ride (don't give a damn about KOM's, trophies of other sorts, goals, etc. and both the web and app interfaces are lame/non-intuitive in their own special way).


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

Do you need a subscription with the Edge 530 or will all the maps be free.


----------



## render ranger (Aug 22, 2019)

bcriverjunky said:


> Do you need a subscription with the Edge 530 or will all the maps be free.


You don't need a subscription for the Trailforks features on the 530/830.


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

render ranger said:


> You don't need a subscription for the Trailforks features on the 530/830.


Thanks!


----------



## Mtbvkk (Sep 13, 2017)

As a former software developer I’ve been amazed TF is free. Its not just an app that runs on the client but needs Growing cloud data and server support that costs money. It’s a great app and it’s sad that apps have become such commodities that people expect them for free for their recreation Perhaps not realizing the effort and cost. It’s been indispensable in my learning and growth of skills in mtb.

WRT them having Charged first. Would you have paid 3$/mo when there was no data and nobody was using it? And would the data ever have gotten built in the way it has if it wasn’t free? Now that it’s useful over many areas and lived up its promise, maintenance and growing of features is more feasible with an active user base as well just keeping the app going. Charging also now makes sense To be able to keep the app going Since the value is tangible. And it’s way less than a cup of coffee/mo to support a great product which enables riding in a sport where bikes cost an arm and a leg. Plus they are providing a locked in lifetime cost where I’m sure the price will go up over time.


----------



## RTM (Sep 17, 2005)

trailforks doesn't owe anyone anything. it is their right to charge whatever they think the market will bear. if they are wrong they can adapt or fail. literally day one of any economics course. meanwhile, like any other product or service, pay if you agree don't pay if you don't. everyone's "feelings" about it is just white noise.


----------



## stillkeen (Mar 22, 2005)

I don't use Trailforks much, but when I do, I really like it. I was using Strava segments to find trails, but that's not great, as people don't always put the full trail in the segment. I haven't actually used TrailForks for over 2 years, as I wasnt able to mtb the past two years, but that's changing.

Just signed up for pro. What put me into signing up, was:

1) The times I get to mtb, are often when I'm not at home - i.e. on vacation, and therefore my home area on the free version wouldn't work.
2) I have found he app really useful in the past.
3) It's $US13 a year ... seriously, that's nothing if it means I can ride one good trail I'd otherwise have struggled to find without the app.


----------



## skywalker991 (Feb 18, 2017)

RTM said:


> trailforks doesn't owe anyone anything. it is their right to charge whatever they think the market will bear. if they are wrong they can adapt or fail. literally day one of any economics course. meanwhile, like any other product or service, pay if you agree don't pay if you don't. everyone's "feelings" about it is just white noise.


Nonsense.

TF now decided to sell information that someone else submitted to them for free(!), about trails that somone else built most likely for free(!) and TF contributed absolutely nothing towards. After years of gaining trust (and free info) of these people on the back of TF's statement "will never charge for their services" lie.
It's plain wrong on a moral and ethical levels. Yes, it's fine on a cut throat capitalistic money at all cost immoral Donald Trump level, but that doesn't make it right overall.

They don't owe anyone anything on a contractual level but on a moral and ethical level their sneaky move is absolutely disgusting. They won't be getting my money for sure and by the looks of it I'm not the only one.


----------



## Skooks (Dec 24, 2008)

Sparticus said:


> I was always amazed that TF was free. Such a great resource whenever I want to explore new-to-me trail systems, whether in my home state or those I travel to.
> 
> I'll cheerfully pay $1.50/mo for such an amazing resource. I'm grateful TF was free for as long as it was.
> =sParty


This. x1000.

If people don't want to pay for it that's their perogative. For me it is well worth the money.


----------



## Skooks (Dec 24, 2008)

RTM said:


> trailforks doesn't owe anyone anything. it is their right to charge whatever they think the market will bear. if they are wrong they can adapt or fail. literally day one of any economics course. meanwhile, like any other product or service, pay if you agree don't pay if you don't. everyone's "feelings" about it is just white noise.


I absolutely agree with you on this.

There are alot of people on this thread whining about no longer getting something for free. If you don't think what you were getting is worth paying for then fine, don't pay for it. Nobody is interested in your moral outrage.


----------



## RTM (Sep 17, 2005)

skywalker991 said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> TF now decided to sell information that someone else submitted to them for free(!), about trails that somone else built most likely for free(!) and TF contributed absolutely nothing towards. After years of gaining trust (and free info) of these people on the back of TF's statement "will never charge for their services" lie.
> It's plain wrong on a moral and ethical levels. Yes, it's fine on a cut throat capitalistic money at all cost immoral Donald Trump level, but that doesn't make it right overall.
> ...


I understand your frustration but there is another way to look at it. I guarantee no one associated with trail forks is flying a private jet. its quite possible that if they don't charge they won't be able to sustain the service and it will go away. its also possible people won't pay and it will go away. either way, its totally up to you. you can voice your displeasure by not paying for the service, or paying their competition.


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

RTM said:


> I guarantee no one associated with trail forks is flying a private jet.


I'd agree with you if it was hillbilly kind of operations, but it's clearly not. So I won't be surprised if _someone associated with TF_ will be flying private or first class, especially if these flights are "for business purposes" and paid for by the company.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

RTM said:


> I understand your frustration but there is another way to look at it. I guarantee no one associated with trail forks is flying a private jet. its quite possible that if they don't charge they won't be able to sustain the service and it will go away. its also possible people won't pay and it will go away. either way, its totally up to you. you can voice your displeasure by not paying for the service, or paying their competition.


Doesn't really matter how much they're making on the service. The point is that they started up relying on the goodwill of users to submit data, claiming that it will always be free. Once they realized the demands this placed on the back end, rather than recognizing their initial claim and trying to work with that, staying honest with everyone, they quietly made that claim disappear and turned the service into what amounts to a full subscription service, being that the "free" radius is too small to be useful.

Oh, and by the way, they are still relying on people to submit data (for free).

So not only are the users effectively the product like a lot of internet companies treat people these days, but they're now charging those people for the "privilege" and that's the shitty part.

It's like magazines and newspapers charging for subscriptions, yet demanding that authors submit articles and photographs for free. Which happens, by the way. And it's ****, too.


----------



## skywalker991 (Feb 18, 2017)

borisotto said:


> I'd agree with you if it was hillbilly kind of operations, but it's clearly not. So I won't be surprised if _someone associated with TF_ will be flying private or first class, especially if these flights are "for business purposes" and paid for by the company.


Trailforks is a perfect venture capitalist's pickup...they're getting a bunch of borderline naive, devoted customers who will blindly defend the company, not really knowing (or accepting) what's going on behind the scenes. Apple comes to mind but there are many others much worse offenders.

If TF suceeds in squeezing $36/year out of these ppl it will hike up prices in no time and soon they will be paying 36/month rather than a year. Yet he same ppl wiill be still saying it's a bargain because it's cheaper than a meal in a restaurant or carbon handlebars. People never learn and most are bad in managing money, that's why start-ups are sold for millions, and credit card debt piles up.

Let's make it clear too, it's not $3/month as there is no monthly option. If you go for a trip once a year and want to use TF - and all of the sudden it's $36 not $3 ... I know I know, still cheaper than carbon handlebars.


----------



## skywalker991 (Feb 18, 2017)

Harold said:


> Doesn't really matter how much they're making on the service. The point is that they started up relying on the goodwill of users to submit data, claiming that it will always be free. Once they realized the demands this placed on the back end, rather than recognizing their initial claim and trying to work with that, staying honest with everyone, they quietly made that claim disappear and turned the service into what amounts to a full subscription service, being that the "free" radius is too small to be useful.
> 
> Oh, and by the way, they are still relying on people to submit data (for free).
> 
> ...


Exactly!


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

Trailforks is still free. There is also a paid version. The trail map is only restricted in the Trailforks APP, the website maps remain free and open.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

For those who are upset with this...

Would you prefer they shut it down completely? If they can’t afford any longer to run it for free as it once existed, that could be the only other alternative. Would you prefer they do that? If not, what would you prefer they do instead of the $17.99 annual fee model?


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

The website is still free like they said it always would be, nothing has changed there.

People agreed to the Terms of Use when they downloaded the app and uploaded data. Don't ***** about giving the data for free when that's what you agreed to do.


----------



## Captramrod01 (Oct 11, 2011)

Harold said:


> Doesn't really matter how much they're making on the service. The point is that they started up relying on the goodwill of users to submit data, claiming that it will always be free. Once they realized the demands this placed on the back end, rather than recognizing their initial claim and trying to work with that, staying honest with everyone, they quietly made that claim disappear and turned the service into what amounts to a full subscription service, being that the "free" radius is too small to be useful.
> 
> Oh, and by the way, they are still relying on people to submit data (for free).
> 
> ...


I see this argument a lot that the users are giving them the data therefore it should be free. I would argue that the data is useless without a platform that curates it all together.

As far as them promising it will always be free...isn't it still free through a browser?


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Captramrod01 said:


> I see this argument a lot that the users are giving them the data therefore it should be free. I would argue that the data is useless without a platform that curates it all together.
> 
> As far as them promising it will always be free...isn't it still free through a browser?


Yes, the browser interface is free; unrestricted app use is the paid feature.

Despite complaints about them benefitting from user-submitted trail data, I'm skeptical that many people complaining have contributed all that much (except for Harold; I've seen his posts over the years). I'm a statewide admin, so I have a good sense of how many users contribute and how much. Most people who occasionally contribute a new trail submit garbage data - they just upload a GPX track from their recent ride and call it good, sometimes not even clipping an out-and-back.

I've spent a lot of hours adding and editing hundreds of trails. I've added the entire GIS trail inventory from multiple ranger districts. I curate the heck out of our local network, re-editing the lines to better follow ridelogs. All the original linework was intended for display on a paper map, so I did a lot of subdividing and topology cleanup. I do it because I want the best possible resource here and I appreciate the platform that Trailforks provides. I'd rather pay a fee for something I value than be bombarded with ads (like this garbage website - this window keeps moving up and down on the screen while I type this due to the ads and it's annoying AF).


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

Aren't the people who contributed to the map getting free pro access anyway?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

mtnbkrmike said:


> what would you prefer they do instead of the $17.99 annual fee model?


There are a host of other potential payment models they could have chosen for the app. They chose a pretty terrible one.

As I described above, I don't like the small, free geographic area and pay for everywhere else. It's too small to be truly useful.

I prefer a limited number of map downloads and those map downloads are cached for x period of time on the phone before expiring and subsequently requiring a subscription to use.

This covers folks who might do one mtb trip per year and don't need mapping on their home trails, anyway. This covers very casual riders who don't ride very often.

I prefer dividing app features more into "advanced" level stuff (on the paid subscription) vs. "free" stuff (minimal core functionality). For example, let people see the map and maybe elevation profile for free. Put other stuff into the subscription level service. Things like route planning, maybe.

I prefer charging people a small one-time fee for the app (to gain simple core functions). Hell, I would even prefer a fairly large one-time fee for the app over a subscription model.

There are a lot of examples around of different apps that have used different monetization methods. What I take issue with is the fact that right now, EVERYBODY wants an annual subscription. It gets worse every day. It's not that I'm unwilling to pay to use a product or service. But for everybody to charge an annual subscription, even for things I'm not going to use very often? I also don't like the in-app micro transaction BS that's gaining traction among games and some other apps, either.


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

Captramrod01 said:


> As far as them promising it will always be free...isn't it still free through a browser?


Yes, the browser/web version is free. Easy to use from any phone.
Not sure why people are ignoring that fact.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Chuck Johnson said:


> Yes, the browser/web version is free. Easy to use from any phone.
> Not sure why people are ignoring that fact.


They also promised the app would be free and that changed...


----------



## r0c1nant3 (Oct 29, 2020)

Fajita Dave said:


> Aren't the people who contributed to the map getting free pro access anyway?


See, this is what pisses me off. I've been contributing for years, photos, video, descriptions, hazards, routes, current conditions... well over 5,000 points, but you have to have a least 500 "new trail" or "trail edit" points to get the free account. I only have 50 of those.

My world was falling down around me during the "discount" period. I'd probably be okay with paying $1.50, but $3.00 a month, after all the content I've donated. Yeah, they can get bent.

I'll start donating content to MTBproject.

Edit: I was informed that I do qualify for Pro, so revising my comment. I'm not bothered by $17 a year.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

NordieBoy said:


> They also promised the app would be free and that changed...


Where did they say that?


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

NordieBoy said:


> They also promised the app would be free and that changed...


The app is still free. There is also a paid option.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Harold said:


> There are a host of other potential payment models they could have chosen for the app. They chose a pretty terrible one.
> 
> As I described above, I don't like the small, free geographic area and pay for everywhere else. It's too small to be truly useful.
> 
> ...


I don't know Harold. You're a really smart guy and a long time member whose input on everything I have always respected. In this particular instance, I almost feel a little dumb for not appreciating the issue, and passionless for not having the conviction to join in the fight.

I may be a spineless sheep, but to me, I am very grateful that TrailForks is available, even at $17.99 a year, because I travel lots to different places on biking specific trips. I rely on TrailForks at least 25% of my rides. And for the other 75%, I often have it handy just to check things here and there.

Like I said, I am very grateful there is a TrailForks I can rely on. I must confess that the cost issue has largely gone straight over my head.


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Chuck Johnson said:


> The app is still free. There is also a paid option.


There is no paid version, you cannot buy the *full app* and live with it happily ever after. You need to buy a subscription, not the full app.

As for web site use from the phone - that's nice when you have cellular connection. And when you don't - well, good luck.


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Bacon Fat said:


> Where did they say that?


AFAIR, this was stated on App store page for the app at some point. Don't have a proof though, so it is inadmissible in court.


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

borisotto said:


> There is no paid version, you cannot buy the *full app* and live with it happily ever after. You need to buy a subscription, not the full app.


It is the same app, with limited functionality unless you pay, then you get full functionality. So yes, it is still free to use the app, no subscription required.


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Chuck Johnson said:


> It is the same app, with limited functionality unless you pay, then you get full functionality. So yes, it is still free to use the app, no subscription required.


Yea, you can install Netflix app and 'use it' as much as you want without subscription. 

However 'paid option' in apps world means you pay for the full app once and it stays fully functioning. In older times you could buy Adobe Photoshop and that copy was yours forever with everything it could do when you bought it, that's your 'paid option' which is not applicable to TF app.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Bacon Fat said:


> Where did they say that?


maybe not the app as this was probably pre-app, but not charging was their big point of difference.



Pinkbike said:


> Pinkbike will ensure Trailforks' longevity, with no requirement for it to be self supporting. So many other trail sites have come and gone, never taken off, have paid access to useful data or are locally focused. Trailforks is free, world-wide and automatically integrated with tens of thousands of photos and videos already on Pinkbike.


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

borisotto said:


> Yea, you can install Netflix app and 'use it' as much as you want without subscription.


With Trailforks, though, the app still functions if you don'y pay. In other words, Trailforks is still free. You can still use the map and record rides, etc. The subscription version (Pro) ads more functionality. Not like Netflix at all.


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

NordieBoy said:


> maybe not the app as this was probably pre-app, but not charging was their big point of difference.


Trailforks is still free. There is also a Pro version. 
Here is the FAQ for those that still don't understand:

https://www.trailforks.com/pro/faq/


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Chuck Johnson said:


> With Trailforks, though, the app still functions if you don'y pay.


TF app functions partially, but the most useful function of locating yourself on trail map outside 'home area' doesn't work unless you have Pro subscription.

I don't really see your point - yes, I can install TF for free, yes, some stuff still works, but the core functionality above that probably 95% of the users need is not available in free form any more. So it's useless most of the time without subscribing, and the fact that you can install few megs of compiled code for free makes no difference. Just like getting a free car without wheels - you can still blast some tunes and use AC/heating, but the main purpose is to drive around.

So it is like Netflix - you can still enjoy watching the logo popping on your screen, and the Netflix app still "functions". 

For these who are ready to pay - this is just a nonsense because 'its just 36 bucks a year'', for these who decided to drop TF - its not about the money.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

borisotto said:


> for these who decided to drop TF - its not about the money.


Of course it's about the money. They want to use the service, but they expect others to foot the bill for them. Pure entitlement


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Bacon Fat said:


> Of course it's about the money. _They want to use the service, but they expect others to foot the bill for them._ Pure entitlement


Don't remember seeing a single comment here saying anything remotely similar to highlighted above. But whatever, not my case anyway.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

borisotto said:


> Don't remember seeing a single comment here saying anything remotely similar to highlighted above. But whatever, not my case anyway.


Read any of Harold's post.


----------



## borisotto (Nov 14, 2018)

Bacon Fat said:


> Read any of Harold's post.


I don't see 'I want it for free fully with others fitting the bill for me' line in his posts. But I read things as they are written, without searching for something between the lines.


----------



## Captramrod01 (Oct 11, 2011)

borisotto said:


> I don't see 'I want it for free fully with others fitting the bill for me' line in his posts. But I read things as they are written, without searching for something between the lines.


Everyone here complaining about the 20 bucks a year is by default saying they want to use the app with someone else footing the bill.

I think there is a huge disconnect here with how much software development cost. If people want to hang their hat on Pinkbike promising this would be free forever (I haven't seen that) then that's their prerogative. If that isn't you, then you have a simple decision to make: Is using the full app on your phone worth 20 bucks a year. Yes or No, move on with life.


----------



## SqueakyWheel73 (Sep 21, 2018)

mtnbkrmike said:


> I don't know Harold. You're a really smart guy and a long time member whose input on everything I have always respected. In this particular instance, I almost feel a little dumb for not appreciating the issue, and passionless for not having the conviction to join in the fight.
> 
> I may be a spineless sheep, but to me, I am very grateful that TrailForks is available, even at $17.99 a year, because I travel lots to different places on biking specific trips. I rely on TrailForks at least 25% of my rides. And for the other 75%, I often have it handy just to check things here and there.
> 
> Like I said, I am very grateful there is a TrailForks I can rely on. I must confess that the cost issue has largely gone straight over my head.


This summarizes my position 100% - both on Harold's contributions to this forum and to Trailforks. I'm a relatively new user, but it has let me use a trail network that otherwise would not be easily utilized, and I really appreciate it for that purpose. And for as much as the mapped trails are valuable, the heatmaps provided on the main website are every bit as important.

I get that the data was contributed by users. I've uploaded a few trails myself, but not much. I'll continue to do this even now that I am paying for the Pro subscription. I look forward to traveling and being able to explore more trails using the Trailforks app. I sincerely hope that they continue to grow the app and add more useful features.

I have no interest in downplaying the feelings of people in the community that are clearly opposed to the changes in Trailforks, but I am in the group that immediately subscribed to the Pro service to show support for this platform going forward. As is always the case people vote with their money - if there are other services and platforms that meet your needs then use them and don't support Trailforks. The market will have its say in the end.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Captramrod01 said:


> Everyone here complaining about the 20 bucks a year is by default saying they want to use the app with someone else footing the bill.


 reading is hard


----------



## nick d (May 25, 2007)

Uninstalled .


----------



## Bukaki (Mar 15, 2005)

FYI 

Cut and pasted from Trailforks Facebook page.

Coupon: BLACKFRIDAY
30% off forever
You will never see an offer this good again 
Offer expires Monday Nov 30th

Brings price down to $25.20


----------



## rifraf (Dec 22, 2012)

Captramrod01 said:


> Everyone here complaining about the 20 bucks a year is by default saying they want to use the app with someone else footing the bill.
> 
> I think there is a huge disconnect here with how much software development cost. If people want to hang their hat on Pinkbike promising this would be free forever (I haven't seen that) then that's their prerogative. If that isn't you, then you have a simple decision to make: Is using the full app on your phone worth 20 bucks a year. Yes or No, move on with life.


No, I'm moving on


----------



## Picard (Apr 5, 2005)

I am not rich like you Americans. You have to foot the bill for me

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk


----------

