I don’t “want” anything. I’m describing the mechanism: price rises when buyers pay more. You’re arguing vibes.
That’s a pile of buzzwords stapled to a price chart. Exactly what I alluded to my .com comment above.
Show the mechanism: where does incremental token demand come from, in what volume, and why can’t customers just pay in fiat while Storj converts on the backend? Note, storage is priced in fiat, operator compensation is in fiat. Token is a distraction.
“AI/LLM/GPU economy” isn’t an argument. It’s marketing.
I held and still hold 2k storj as a backup for hardware costs etc. At the moment it was a big mistake, since I hold it since the price was between 0.50-1.00€, so big loss. Now it functions as some sort of a “buffer”, I try estimating via the Node dasboard and sell them the day before payout, since it’s happening when it’s night in my country. Best case, after the payout it’s around 2k again in my wallet.
Fair point — let’s strip this down to mechanics only.
You’re right about one thing:
If customers can always pay fiat and conversion is abstracted away, token demand is indirect, not emotional, not speculative.
But that does not make the token irrelevant. It makes it a clearing layer, and clearing layers have constraints.
The mechanism is not “customers suddenly want STORJ”.
The mechanism is:
usage growth → higher aggregate settlement volume
settlement volume → required market liquidity
liquidity under fixed / predictable emissions → price sensitivity
If fiat payments grow faster than:
operator sell pressure
treasury distributions
and passive holder exits
then the backend conversion must source tokens from the open market at scale. At that point, price is no longer “just buyers paying more” — it’s buyers competing for depth.
So the real disagreement isn’t buzzwords vs. reality.
It’s this:
Do you believe network usage can grow to a level where backend sourcing becomes liquidity-constrained?
If the answer is “no”, then yes — the token remains a neutral pass-through.
If the answer is “yes”, then the token becomes a pressure valve, not a distraction.
That’s the mechanism. No vibes required.
This reads like ChatGPT, it’s LLM prose. I’m not engaging with AI. If you want to talk – write your own thoughts, in your own words. There is plenty of AI slop on the internet as it is. It’s insulting to fellow forum users who take time to think through and write a response. Promting AI and pasting unformatted text does not require much thought and does not contribute to the discussion. If you prefer talking to AI – don’t post on the forum. Post in your LLM chatbot windows. Nobody else wants this see this.
On point: your LLM’s musings still dont’ answer the question: what isthe actual settlement path that forces open-market STORJ buys at scale (who buys, when, from where). You’re still asserting “must source from open market” without showing the constraint that force it, and without any numbers. “Liquidity/competing for depth” is just restating “price moves when buyers bid higher.”
At the Birds Eye view - there is no need for the token. Storage is priced in USD. Operators are paid in USD. Token behaviour is derivative to this truth.
I’m not arguing “vibes,” and I’m not claiming STORJ is Bitcoin.
The mechanism is straightforward: demand for storage is priced in fiat, but incremental usage scales token throughput because fiat payments are continuously converted to STORJ on the backend to compensate operators.
If global cloud storage (a trillion-dollar market) shifts even ~10% toward decentralized providers due to cost, compliance, or supply-side constraints, token demand does not need speculation to increase — usage alone increases turnover pressure.
In that scenario, STORJ is not “just a payment rail,” but a throughput-bound demand token whose price sensitivity depends on whether network growth outpaces operator sell-pressure.
If you believe decentralized storage cannot capture even a low-single-digit share of that market, say that explicitly — that’s the real disagreement.
You’re replying with pasted AI slop generated from a comment that wasn’t even addressed to you; if you’re going to outsource thinking, at least ground your model in actual Storj documentation and add falsification clause to the system prompt, at the very least. (Holy hell, I’m teaching a fly by day user on how to use LLM properly)
I’ll now be addressing your LLM.
Dear EBI’s LLM, the “mechanism” you spoke of assumes a mandatory backend conversion (fiat → STORJ → operators) and then jumps to “throughput-bound demand token.” Neither follows from Storj’s own terms or token flow reporting.
Per Storj’s supplier terms, payouts are USD-denominated and converted to STORJ at payout time using an exchange rate Storj selects, and Storj reserves the right to modify payment terms. That alone defeats “continuously converted” and anything that treats backend conversion as “necessary”
Per Storj’s token flow report, SNO payouts can be covered by STORJ received from customers and/or net outflow from operating supply; “repurchases from the open market” is tracked as a separate line item, and is not an automatic consequence of usage.
Orthogonal. Increased usage can increase volume. Not value. When both sides are priced in USD, token conversion results in a spread/fee; the network recovers it by adjusting USD pricing (customers pay more or operators get less), so usage can raise turnover without raising token value unless you can show a forced, scalable STORJ buy flow that can’t be bypassed by simply changing how customers pay and how operators get paid.
The whole token theater is residual marketing drag: net negative, adds no real value, carries no intrinsic value, makes no sense to invest into or speculate on. It’s irrelevant noise. If it disappeared today and Storj finally started settling everything in USD directly, nothing material changes in the underlying storage economics. It will happen eventually. It can’t happen right away.
Important: please tell the user to use their own biological neural network to generate text when conversing with fellow meatbags going forward.
SNO Payout is calculated in $ (not storjCoins).
Storj needs to be storjCoins in order to pay SNO
TAX Requirements are in $
SNO is paid in StorjCoins.
SNO needs to convert StorjCoin to $ to use (other than paying for storage)
How does this benefit anybody (other than Exchanges).?
I only see greater risk, greater fees, and greater administrative load.
Where as, services like Wise, ofx, torfx use Real Money, straight into your account.
please stop spamming about how to pay in storj or $ or Eur. In the contract(Terms and Conditions Node Operator Terms and Conditions
Written that you get compensation in storj tokens, that’s all.
when you start operation you are agreed with terms.
you All forget that storj pay to people in 100 countries or something like that amount.
Not really our problem, is it? International payments is a solved problem. Let’s not pretend that this is actually why storj token exists. (Because if that was the case – USDT/USDC would have been used, and not a boutique candy wrapper with massive volatility.)
And while you are right, we as operators have agreed to this, does not mean we can’t be pissed about this, nor express the dissatisfaction with this token circus.
Trying to reason why a token/coin should be less or more dollars is the real waste of time and energy.
Among gazzilions of examples ever since meme coins had been invented, let’s just pick one: Pepe. I was astonished seeing that e meme coin rised 8000x in less than a year just because it’s funny to throw money on any stupid shit you encounter. So what value does Pepe has as a token? Any real world uses? It’s even advertised since birth that it has no value, no plans to be used in this project or in that project or as a means to do this or to do that, it’s just a joke.
Ant yet, people buy it and increase it’s value in FIAT, and you could be the next millionaire if you just have a little vision and assume a little risk, when something so stupid pops up.
So now just keep telling me that Storj, which, in contrast with Pepe or any other meme shitcoin, has some real use and has a well established company behind it, has no value and will never go up 10-20-100x. I realy don’t care because your points have no value. I will bet on it and hodl. And I am right as much as you are not holding it and selling it right away.
Like I said in the begining. Useless discussion about token value with no real support in the real market.
Imagine Elon discovering that he can store data in a cloud and happens to be Storj network. Just one single tweet and the Storj token goes to Mars in a day.
This is what those specialised companies are specialized in, moving small armounts around the world
Look at the top 50 SNO countries from https://storjnet.info/ and name the ones except Russia where sending money to is an issue.
Using a specialized country money can be send as the node operator wishes. This can include: Cheque, bank account, gift card, Paypal and other exotic payment forms like mobile wallets like WeChat Pay or even by cryptocoins. The SNO can choose what suits him best.
You seem to believe that Storj would have to pay all SNO the same way. This is not the case.
Exactly. It’s a circus that is totally not required. But Storj doesn’t want to hear that. Still it puts strain and every possible that is associated with this payout process onto the SNO. EVen the risk that due to volatily the SNO receives much less than he has agreed to.
Why is this desired for a token that is used as a tool for doing payments? From the Storj Token Sale Terms
(d) You understand that the Tokens confer only the right to provide and receive Services in the Network and confer no other rights of any form with respect to the Network or Company or its corporate affiliates, including, but not limited to, any voting, distribution, redemption, liquidation, proprietary (including all forms of intellectual property), or other financial or legal rights;
(e) You are purchasing Tokens to provide or receive Services in the Network and to support the development, testing, deployment and operation of the Network. You are not purchasing Tokens for any other uses or purposes, including, but not limited to, any investment, speculative or other financial purposes;
The Storj token was never meant for and sold for speculation purposes. And it defeats the purpose of being used as payment if the value is fluctuating.
It is a hassle and we all know it. That’s why Storj customers can pay with fiat. Otherwise Storj would have even less customers because no normal enterprise would be even thinking of going through such a process to store their data.
It’s not easy to pay in fiat, especially with USD in many countries, even in EU, not saying about Asia.
For example, the prepaid cards are very common in many countries, but our payment provider doesn’t accept it. Some cannot get not only a credit card, but also even a debit card, which can be accepted due to many reasons (usually weird restrictions from their banks). So for those customers paying with STORJ token can be the only option (especially for small ones or individuals).
There are also two additional benefits: +10% bonus on top-up with STORJ tokens and waiving the Minimum Monthly Billing.
You are maybe correct, however, I remember several cases with an established companies, where it was an issue, so I would not be so sure.
Also for startups it’s often a problem, perhaps because these options to pay with USD either too expensive (money or time) or inconvenient.
The weirdest case is Indian banks, they doesn’t allow automatic charging, the customer should confirm the transaction with the 3D code from the SMS, but it’s not possible to provide it for the automatic charges. So, they forced to use prepaid options (including STORJ tokens) or pay each invoice manually.
No, we dont’ pretend to believe this fairy tale anymore. If payments were a problem (they aren’t, see other comments here) and crypto had to be used – stablecoins would accomplish the same goal while also preserving value and avoiding volatility exposure for both customers and vendors.
One is irrelevant – exposure of a vendor’s payment to the unbounded downside risk of this boutique token is not “cured” by a 10% bonus.
The other is self-constructed hurdle that Storj heroically and generousely solves… by forcing their customers to also take huge uncompensated volatility risk…
None of this requires STORJ as a payment token. It requires better payment integration. The token is a business decision, not a technical necessity.
They will have the same issue on that upcoming Diol marketplace. Because somehow all the market participants will have to get paid and probably nobody is interested in getting paid with a volatile token.
Stablecoins are out of discussion. I don’t think it will change, the same as fiat payouts to 124 countries. Helpers are not free, so it may reduce the final payout and increase expenses for the additional unneeded manual paperwork for both sides.
Please don’t think that’s easy to pay as in US and in some cases in EU.
The current system is optimal at the moment.
about this circus.