Oh I’m far from a pro in that sense. I only buy expansions if the ROI checks out and with money already earned from Storj. And I use hardware that is already online. One mitigating factor is that I use this HDD to expand an array that is mixed use. Though admittedly the Storj usage has grown a little out of hand. Used space on the array is now 60% Storj, 40% other stuff. But should Storj ever disappear, I will be filling up that space with other uses eventually. So I don’t see it entirely as a sunk cost.
Damn… I want prices that low… mine are approaching 50 cents. Though next year there will be a ceiling price. Not sure what it is yet though. I should probably look that up.
Considering the responses to me suggesting $5 for egress on this topic. I think something like that would cause mass exodus.
Storj is still very small. I would say it’s definitely too early. You want Storj to be a “household” name before increasing prices or lowering payouts. And even then, you have to do it gradually.
So since you called me a pro earlier, let me just say this. I would likely stick around, though I would think twice about buying expensive new HDD’s. It would depend on how the economics work out. But since I’m using always on hardware anyway, my running costs are low, so I could easily stay with the capacity I already have.
Implementing FIAT payouts worldwide is a massive undertaking and may not even be possible everywhere. Plus it would devalue token reserves in an instant. Hurting both Storj and node operators who are still holding on to their tokens. I think the issues you outlined can easily be fixed by better communication around those topics. Plus there are successful web3 customers on the Storj network as well.
And reduce payouts significantly to compensate for that… I don’t think anyone wants that.