You don’t own your Peloton bike—even if you bought it secondhand

Take Action

When you buy something, you assume ownership means control over what you do with it—whether that’s modifying it, repairing it, or eventually selling it. However, Peloton has effectively removed its customers’ ownership rights throughout its products’ entire life cycle, discouraging the selling and purchasing of pre-owned machines and overstepping its role as a manufacturer.

Peloton’s most egregious overstep might be its recently announced $95 activation fee added to all third-party resales. The company claims this fee will ensure that “new Members receive the same high-quality onboarding experience Peloton is known for.”

While those are lovely sentiments, let’s put this in the context of broader implications for the reseller-rebuyer relationship. Imagine if you bought a discounted Levi’s jean jacket from the thrift store only to find out that you have to pay Levi’s a third of the original price on top of the marked price. That’s ridiculous—the only people involved in that transaction should be you and the vendor.

Companies like Peloton are violating the rights of ownership that are assumed every time a purchase is made, penalizing customers who expect freedom over the products they own.

No functionality without fees

Over the past few years, Peloton has rolled out updates that continue to minimize the usability of its bikes and treadmills for customers without a paid subscription. There used to be one free membership tier (Unlimited Free Membership) and two paid tiers for customers without a machine (Peloton App One for $12.99/month and Peloton App+ for $24/month), plus two paid tiers for customers with a machine (Guide Membership for $24/month and All-Access Membership for $44/month).

The company first introduced the short-lived Unlimited Free Membership in May 2023. At the same time, it reduced access for paid users, limiting those at the $12.99/month tier to just three bike classes per month, down from one class per day. Just a year later, in April 2024, Peloton discontinued the free membership tier entirely, saying not enough free users were becoming paying members.

Peloton similarly came under fire in 2021 when it suddenly removed the long-available “Just Run” and “Just Ride” modes from its treadmills and bikes, which made it impossible to use the machines in any capacity without a paid subscription. One Peloton customer wrote on Facebook, “How is this even possible that we cannot use the bike or tread anymore without a membership?! They’re basically just paperweights now!” The blowback was so decisive that the company restored that free feature just a few months later—but there will be no such luck when it comes to the defunct free membership tier.

This is just one example of a company that has primed its user base to accept a diluted sense of ownership over a luxury exercise machine that cost them thousands of dollars.

No repairing, just replacing

Peloton bikes and treadmills have a relatively standard limited home warranty that covers most parts and labor for a year and the frame for five years. It doesn’t apply to software or cover damages caused by non-Peloton authorized technicians, nor is it transferable beyond the original owner. While these practices actively harm resellers, independent repairers and secondhand consumers, they’re unfortunately not unique when it comes to how companies administer their warranties.

Users can also purchase a protection plan for between $149 and $499, depending on the machine. The plan extends protection from one year to four years, although again excludes repairs from third-party technicians.

The $699 touch screen seems to be the most unreliable component of the machines, with customers sharing horror stories of screens rendered useless by standard software updates. If you run into touchscreen issues past the one-year warranty, replacing the component can cost users as much as buying a brand-new (non-Peloton) exercise bike.

None of these practices are unfamiliar, but they compound the larger problem of expiring ownership and the endless waste propagated by the anti-Right to Repair practices that are treated like an intractable norm by manufacturers. 

Secondhand buyers treated like second-class customers

Secondhand sales are a key way these luxury exercise machines become more accessible to the general public, as the refurbished equipment sells for 60% to 80% cheaper than new. Peloton’s subscription model puts it in the unique position of already making money off of secondhand sales, because anyone with a Peloton bike needs to pay a monthly fee for all the features to work. In fact, between 2023 and 2024, the number of new subscribers the company gained from secondhand bike sales increased by 16%.

For generations, consumers have opted for secondhand purchases to save money, without having to deal with stores and companies. Now that technology allows manufacturers continued access to their products after selling them, some companies are inserting themselves into secondhand transactions—eating into the savings that secondhand shoppers expect.

Beyond the bikes

When companies charge fees on secondhand sales, it signals a larger shift away from genuine ownership and toward a slippery slope of corporate involvement in everyday consumer transactions. More and more, consumers are discovering that they’re functionally renting their belongings—even those they purchase outright.

Moreover, increasingly common corporate norms including restrictive warranties, a lack of affordable or non-subscription options, and functionality tied to new purchases all contribute to our rapidly-growing e-waste problem. The tech industry is pushing us toward creating more waste at every step of the transaction: repairing, reselling, and repurchasing. With the increase in unexpected fees plus the increase in toxic metals sent to landfills, consumers, public health and the environment all pay a price.

Topics
Authors

Stephanie Markowitz

Designed to Last Campaign, Associate, PIRG

Steph works on the Designed to Last Campaign, where she conducts policy outreach to build expert and public support, researches industry wide product disposability, and writes about the cycle of disposability and manufacturers' role in unnecessary consumer spending and e-waste. She lives in the New York suburbs with her family and spends her free time doing the crossword, scrolling through Goodreads, and following the cat from room to room.

Lucas Gutterman

Director, Designed to Last Campaign, PIRG

Lucas leads PIRG’s Designed to Last campaign, fighting against obsolescence and e-waste and winning concrete policy changes that extend electronic consumer product lifespans and hold manufacturers accountable for forcing upgrades or disposal.