Let's talk about the elephant in the room: The Storj economic model (node operator payout model)

I understand this. Tesla doesn’t sell their cars 80% under their competition. Not even their first one. If you offer the same like Amazon AWS dont ask 80% less for it. Instead market it cleverly.

You know… there was a second part of that message all about how car markets and tech markets are not the same.

But lets set that aside for now… lets have a look at Tesla.
image

Oh my… it sure looks like they only had losses for a long time. I guess they did sell their cars for less than they cost after all.

Yeah and mean time did tesla reduced the payment of their workers?

There is no company that survived who marketed as cheaper than the competition, regardless the industry. No one does that. Stand up for something.

I wouldn’t go there with Elon Musk at the head, haha. Probably… yeah. At the least they demanded unpaid overtime. (also node operators aren’t workers, but suppliers)

And you can point to Amazon, sure that’s an 80% difference. But people WILL also be comparing Storj to backblaze and wasabi. Both of which are only slightly more expensive. And the argument that Storj is better than those holds less water if you don’t have a name yet. So grab that market share first, THEN compete with the services that provide similar quality.

In the mean time… take a look at this page: https://www.capterra.com/backup-software/compare/155180-175835/Backblaze-for-Business-vs-Storj
That’s the kind of site people use to compare these services. Can you tell from that that Storj is better? Similar customer ratings, less features listed. Nothing about performance. People only give Storj a serious look with such comparisons if it’s also cheaper. It’ll get there, but right now, they need to grow market share and convince people.

2 Likes

Your math makes a mistake here, I’ve done this before myself when calculating things. You properly pointed that Storj makes 50k per month, and then stated that this wasn’t enough to cover one developer. That’s because you likely thought of that 50k as yearly income. It is monthly, so the income based on your math would be 600k. Which covers more than one developer and then some.

Also, consider all of this onboarding that is going on with new customers. They are potentially bringing their data into Storj. Some are evaluating, some are fully on boarded, and many are in process of transferring their data into Storj. That takes time when you are dealing with large data sets and narrow bandwidth on their end. Data continues to grow. Revenue will as well.

John stated he wants Exabyte storage availability. This isn’t because the company wants that much empty storage lying around. There is a plan here that we’re going to NEED that much storage, and then some. We are just in a growth phase. If you look where we were a year ago, and where we are now, you can pretty easily see where we are headed. A lot of very smart and dedicated people are working night and day to make Storj great.

The numbers are going to change. We know that. We’ll have to wait and see what the plans are for SNO’s. Revenue though, it is growing. Stay tuned.

11 Likes

Whenever there is talk about payouts on a forum, the tread tends to become huge :smile:
I’m on the positive side too. If I didn’t belive in the success of the project, I wouldn’t invested almost 7000$ in it.

2 Likes

I Agree, people will be comparing but not on price… Backblaze is far ahead of Storj on S3 api compatibility, the price isn’t the highest priority. I Agree with the other poster, that cost is a race to the bottom.

S3 is now increasingly the standard for data tier applications, and it’s come about really quickly - That’s a really exciting opportunity for Storj given the estimated throughput and redundancy that can be offered, but…

Storj S3 implementation is fine for basic backups, but it’s missing soooo much of the S3 api specifically versioning, and more on the multi-part that it’s not a simple migration for apps using these features.

Furthermore, the point of my comment was when you compare the backblaze S3 support

to things like this in Storj Github maybe I read wrong, but it reads like S3 API development is shelved, pending individual requirements to implement, they have also dropped out of the roadmap, like the ability for the community to run their own Satellites was under Dev, and now it’s like it’s not happening any time soon.

Please fix the S3 gateway, it will open up more opportunity’s - I understand the technical issue around that, but it has to be addressed at some point ? or not.

:heart: CP

2 Likes

You are right. @John has even admitted in one of their Twitter spaces that they had a totally wrong idea about getting customers:

i remember early on we had a a theory that our hypothesis was that it would be hard to find people to contribute capacity but it would be easy to find people who would use the space and we actually had it exactly backwards right it was new technology so people were very reticent to adopt it from using it to store their data perspective but anybody we found it very easy to get people to contribute space

But that has obviously changed we see a lot more effort to attract new customers than before. Still there are tons of things that could be done.

Such sites are very good and helpful, but Storj would need to keep track of them and check if information listed is accurate so they remain informative. Sometimes information is false or outdated.
Another thing is that that there are a lot of articles written or sometimes even partners that spread false information, babbling about blockchain storage which is not only outright wrong, but can also repel potential customers. I would say that at the current state of cryptocurrencies, most serious (enterprise) customers don’t want to have anything to do with blockchain or cryptos.

Here are 2 examples of that. Storj should invest some effort to ensure that information is correct:

https://drivex.com/

Users enter into peer-to-peer (P2P) smart contracts on blockchain-based decentralized storage node.

https://www.coingecko.com/research/publications/the-state-of-decentralized-storage

Some decentralized storage networks may charge different fees for uploading (ingress) and retrieving (egress) data. For example, Storj charges a fixed price of $7 / TB to upload or download, while Sia costs $0.41 / TB to upload and $2 / TB to download.

4 Likes

That is not what I am talking about. My example was something different. Lets assume I only wanna backup my TrueNAS. I don’t wanna operate as a Node and I don’t wanna be part of a disk space exchange.

If I just backup my TrueNAS, why not use Backblaze instead of STORJ?

You will never be profitable. This is the reason why even STROJ themselves recommends against buying hardware.

100%! That is what I mean when is say ditch the web3 buzzword bingo bs.

Maybe you do want to pay 1 USD/TB less.

yeah, well… knowing the biggest retarded ever (Ellon, who else?), there might have been reduced payments along the way. If not reduced payments, working overtime with severe exposure to covid certainly happened. Not the best example, man… let’s find another one. Maybe not from the US of A?

Not enough. If I backup a medium business, they use around 5TB. That is 60$ per year, which is basically nothing for any company. If I need to reconfigure the S3 endpoint because STORJ goes belly up, the labor costs succeed these savings by far. Even worse would be if the whole system suddenly collapses and I am unable to transfer to another S3 provider.

But don’t get me wrong, I am not arguing, that STORJ has to become way cheaper than Backblaze for me to consider. 20% cheaper is sufficient. I am more concerned with the longevity part of the equation! Because atm STORJ does not stand on a solid foundation. It is all based in VC money and subsidies. I guess that STORJ can become self-sustaining in the future, but that still has to be proven! Because right now, it is not. Until then I consider the chances of survival lower than the competition.

Are you saying this is unlike backblaze? Backblaze Earnings & Revenue 2012-2022: (NASDAQ: BLZE) Earnings Date | WallStreetZen
image

4 Likes

Yes, unlike backblaze.
No, I won’t dive into the discussion with you about numbers, venture capital or growth curves.

In the end it doesn’t even matter what you or what I think. We are just two random dudes on a forum :smile:

It matters what the customer thinks.

You’ve blown me away with your counter argument… I don’t know what to say…

Anyway, yes, Backblaze is further along in their growth. But no company gets to just skip that phase. And yes, it doesn’t matter what you and I think. I’ve argued several times that Storj has more to prove. This just isn’t the right argument.

Why should it be cheaper than Backblaze at all? Backblaze is cold storage, Storj is hot storage. It should more clearly position itself as such and not try to compete on all markets.

Coldstorage is probably a much bigger market, but hot storage is more profitable. But that is also the issue with the customers. Because they can’t estimate how much they have to pay at the end of the month. That’s why many large companies moved their data from S3 into their own infrastructure.
These customers are gone for Storj, they already manage their own infrastructure, they won’t move. The difficulty is to find those companies which are still using S3 (or comparable), but are hesitant to build into their own infrastructure. Those might happily accept the savings in cost that Storj offers.

2 Likes

I’m working in a small business who has ~50 TB of storage to back up. Apparently saving around 1kUSD yearly (including differentials) would already enough… if we didn’t have an el-cheapo version in form of the boss keeping offline backups at his home :person_shrugging:

Tesla wasnt my example but lets keep looking at it in the money making perspective.
We establisht that already big brands doesnt really give away free stuff neither offers discounts. I mean you can take a tesla for a test drive but thats for a day or so. You dont see tesla commercial on tv or anywhere else where tesla paid for marketing. So how is it possible everyone knows about it?

Its called product oriented marketing. You are focusing to make the product so good it sells itself. You throw in the mix some referral program then people are actually selling it for you.
So just from this how can you make STORJ better? Throw away the 150gb free storage instantly and make a referral program. People who pay for storage can intive 1-3 persons ( depending how much they pay ) and get 50gig free storage with the same limitations like now.
People will feel more exclusive because its invite only, creates a demand. PAYING customers have paying friends usually as rich people have rich friends. More chanche that free STORJ space will be converted to a paying customer.
Imagine trying to convert a cheapo student who came for the free 150gig space :wink: its like google to try ask money for gmail.

So I think “retarded” Elon is onto something here.
Then there is how he creates demand for the cars. Stupid things like you can change the horn for babyshark and you attracted an another 100k customer who thing this is “cool” or different.

STORJ needs to find his “cool”.
Prices need to go up, no discounts, just clever marketing.

That discussion leads to nowhere. It is like discussion religion or $tsla stock prices.

Great that we can agree on that one. Let us focus on that one. What do you think does average SMB CEO think has a higher chance of survival 5y down the road?

I don’t know where you get that idea. Backblaze doesn’t even offer cold storage. Backblaze is probably even hotter storage than STORJ :joy: (according to other people in this forum and my personal testings)

The reason why big companies do that, is because they think they will save money by doing so. Example for that would be Apple and Dropbox moving away from AWS.

What I wanted to say is that it’s marketed as a backup solution. Cold storage, for data that is not downloaded often, in best case only uploaded. You can also see in their pricing 10 USD/TB for Backblaze compared to 7 USD/TB for Storj. Even storage itself is more expensive 5 USD/TB (Backblaze) compared to 4 USD/TB for Storj. But as mentioned before they have the “bigger” name. That’s why I said Storj should not even compete with them and market itself for hot storage (data that has more egress). Every SNO would be also happy to provide more egress.

That’s exactly what I said in the next paragraph after your quote.