Polar’s Paid Fitness Plan Sparks Subscription Backlash | Image Source: www.tomsguide.com
HELSINKI, Finland, April 11, 2025 – In what many fitness technology enthusiasts consider a crucial moment for the usable industry, Polar has joined the ranks of companies that change their business models into subscription services. The launch of the Polar Fitness Program, a paid update of its fully free Polar Flow ecosystem, comes in the heels of Garmin’s controversial introduction of its own premium service, Garmin Connect+. And for long-term users, this change is less like a characteristic impulse and rather a confidence gap.
Polar Fitness, now available in the EU, Norway and the UK on Android devices, offers personalized cardio training plans, optional training on strength and mobility, and a calendar-based approach to fitness programming. Users can adapt their weekly diets around personal routines and recovery periods. But from €9.99 per month, the service triggered the debate about whether consumers get real or simply nuanced value in a monetized version of what was once free.
Why is this much for long-term users?
Historically, Polar and Garmin have marketed their products as top-of-the-range, one-off purchases that were not accompanied by persistent costs. Buyers justified an expense of more than $700 on devices such as the Polar Grit X2 Pro, on the understanding that ongoing services - daily training, recovery ideas and fitness measures – were grouped as part of the product’s premium price label.
This dynamic is changing. According to industry analyst Robbie Kellman Baxter, author of The Affiliation Economy, this trend has been long in creation. “Sales of construction equipment alone can no longer support these businesses,” Baxter explains. “They therefore migrate to subscription-based models where software – and the recurring revenues it brings – can stimulate growth.” But as he also points out, customers tend to resist paying for the features they previously enjoyed for free.
The regression is not only theoretical. The setbacks against similar models were fast and vocal. The Verge, referring to Garmin and Polar’s changes, observed an increase in complaints from social networks and Reddit wires that decipher the “commitment” of usable technology. BMW’s unsuccessful attempt to charge heating seats and the controversial deployment of Oura’s subscription for its smart ring offer recent examples of consumer frustration.
What is included in Polar Fitness?
The new subscription service is based on Polar’s FitSpark, a feature introduced in 2019 that provided users with cardio training focused on daily cores. However, the fitness program goes beyond daily advice. It now includes multi-year plans adapted to historical user training data, biometric information and personal objectives.
Users can select the preferred training and recovery days, after which the application generates custom exercises using real-time data such as heart rate, sleep and recovery scores. The programme supports progress through 20 levels of training, prompting users to gradually improve. The training sessions are pushed directly to the user’s device and include video orientation, a feature that is particularly absent in Garmin free level programs.
While Polar training focuses on duration and heart rate zones rather than fixed distances or power targets, it focuses on adaptation. If a user records a bad sleep or unexpected intense training, the program is adjusted accordingly. Think of it as a minimalist personal trainer who understands the nuances of your body preparation. However, critics say that much of this offer was already offered – free of charge – in different formats.
How’s Polar against the competitors?
To understand the magnitude of this change, it is important to place Polar in the wider landscape. Garmin’s new Connect+ service costs $69 per year and includes summaries generated by AI, although many users have criticized them for being superficial. Fitbit Premium ($80 / year) offers personalized plans, health ideas and video exercises, although its training history with free functions is more limited, making the change to paid content less abrupt.
The Oura model ($69/year), although not structured, is strongly focused on health measures such as sleep and stress, providing a more well-being approach. Meanwhile, the Whoop Premium service ($239 / year) includes hardware support and constant replacement, but it is shown more towards performance monitoring than prescriptive training.
In this context, Polar’s offer has a competitive price, but criticism is not costly but contextual. Garmin offers many comparable features: real-time adaptable training, recommendations based on recovery and free training plans. This reduces Polar’s value proposition and raises the following question: Why pay more for less?
Do Polar and Garmin risk user loyalty?
Yes, and that is a growing concern. According to many comments from forum users such as r/ Garmin and Twitter, one of the main reasons customers chose Garmin or Polar compared to competitors such as Apple was the absence of recurring fees. As one Threads user pointed out: “The mines have always felt a little off the price, but they were justifiable since there were no continuous costs. »
The introduction of subscriptions disrupts this long-standing contract. It is not just about paying more – it is about eroding trust. When asked whether users believed these new pay services would be discretionary, many expressed scepticism. The general feeling: Today’s extras could become the essence of tomorrow.
Could they benefit from Rivals?
Maybe, yeah. Competitors like Choirs and Suunto – who currently maintain strong software experiences without subscriptions – can win. Suunto, once criticized for lack of innovation, bounced back with devices such as the Suunto Vertical and Race series. Choirs continue to offer software updates through their range of devices, making older devices feel new again, something Garmin has sometimes been criticized for neglect.
While Apple remains a dominant force in the smartphone segment, its Apple Fitness+ program focuses on general well-being and media-rich training rather than advanced training measures, which means that niche players like Choirs and Suunto may feel excluded by Garmin and Polar.
“The more brands you get behind pay walls,” said an industry analyst to Tom’s guide, “the more you open the doors for brands that offer free alternatives, even if your equipment is not so striking. This is a real-time recalibration of the market.
How does this fit into the largest technical image?
The shift to services is not limited to fitness technologies. Apple 2019’s service event marked the beginning of an era where recurring revenues exceed hardware sales. According to The Verge, this transition is speeding up in the light of the Trump age tariffs that make the production of equipment more expensive. The highest material costs push companies to generate revenue through subscriptions. And as Baxter points out, it could even influence the design of the product: ”Companies can start building hardware for longevity and adaptability through software updates, expanding the life cycle of monetization. »
In this ecosystem, software becomes the engine of growth. But for consumers, the concern is how companies are gracefully doing this. As Brownlee Brands (MKBHD) learned when its wallpaper application introduced subscriptions, even loyal fanbases have limits. According to Reddit’s sarcastic comment, Polar “looked at Garmin running on a wall and said” Take my beer. ”
Thus, the usable technological landscape is at a crossroads. Either companies are changing their subscription models to offer a truly different and irreplaceable value, or they may bleed their user base to more generous, transparent or simply more affordable rivals.
The next few months will probably determine if Polar’s bet pays off. Much depends on how users react when the programme extends beyond Europe. But as it stands, many believe that the company took a step in the wrong direction, at the time and in the execution. If there is a lesson in this subscription saga, that is: loyalty is fragile, and once broken, it is difficult to repair.
