Actually you can - with a card, issued by some exchanges, however, it’s offtopic.
We do not discuss here should companies or individuals use crypto to buy a service or a product.
We are trying to bring ideas, how to use STORJ tokens more widely, for what cases and how it may help to customers and/or Storj.
You already suggested the idea to remove the STORJ token at all, especially advocating for paying in fiat to SNO, which is not the case at all and likely will not be implemented and it’s also not related to the topic, because it’s not an improvement, it’s a fall back to the legacy payment system which also is too expensive to support micropayments. You may not argue with me on that, me and you will just not agree on that.
The STORJ token is very problematic. If used only for payments, then a stable value would be the best for both sides, the seller and the buyer. At least that is how I see it.
Storj tries to mitigate that by converting customer funds immediately to USD and transfer SNO funds at market prices. But there is still a huge spread and potential volatility.
The STORj token comes with unpredictable transaction cost. A token with fixed or zero transaction cost could potentially solve this. Or at least the presence of Storj exchange accounts where crypto currencies can be moved between customers of the same exchange without cost.
For other things the STORJ token has been used (or should we say abused?) a high value would be favorable. A high value would mean for the company that their reserves last longer to pay SNOs and salaries etc. So in the past it was a failure not to take steps to keep the value high or maintain it at a certain level at least.
For such use cases of the token, increasing prices would be even better. But volatile prices come with their own drawbacks: There will be speculation and volatile purchasing power will limit use cases. (I don’t want to spend all my crypto for a new BMW today when tomorrow at market prices I could buy 2 for the same amount of crypto).
All of this limits its real usability and this is why I am saying it does not make any sense to stick to it. A stable coin with fixed low or no transaction cost would eliminate these problems completely. Plus with an established coin, an already existing ecosystem would be opened up for Storj instead of trying to build a new one.
I agree. This is the minimum if they want customers to pay with crypto.
I doubt that it could be done unnoticed thus the price would increase dramatically.
But the word lock in triggers another idea: What if the token could be used to lock in current storage prices for the customer or to reserve capacity?
I am just brainstorming here but if the value of 1 token was 1 TB of storage and not the equivalent in USD, a company could secure its storage needs at todays prices for long time in the future completely independent from price fluctuations either from a tokens price or Storj price changes for their storage.
Just an idea…
If the price rises or if there is at least market expectation that they will rise, there will be no use for customers paying for the company services with the token. Then the token is prone to speculation.
Also SNOs will not sell their received tokens if they expect higher and higher prices. They will hodl if they can.
And if prices rise company must secure the tokens they need for paying their debts at higher prices as well. This will be a problem if markets become volatile due to speculations.
Yes. I support that and I am wondering too if there is any progress on that and where we stand with that. There is no doubt that the certifications for the network would help.
I think the biggest hurdle with Storj Token is you need to spend Ethereum to do anything with it. It makes it cumbersome for anyone new to manage the token because they have to buy Ethereum so they can spend ST. I would imagine the majority of SNO’s are simply sending their tokens to exchanges directly rather than owning the wallets, so they can avoid this headache. Some may send to Storj Labs directly so they can spend the tokens on storage. And a handful use their own wallets or use the L2 process to get gift cards, etc. None of this helps liquidity of the Storj Token.
The only way I can really see making Storj Token useful, is to build a smart contract around it and tie it into the product offerings in some way. It would have to be something useful that can’t be accomplished through easier FIAT methods.
So you want to keep paying SNOs in Storj Token and you want an increased demand for the token, to mantain or increase it’s value.
The only way I see it is to try to convince the clients to buy the token and pay for all your services, which you do at the moment, but the fact that it’s not working is because the 10% discount is too small to convince anyone to switch from fiat to the ethereum/storj headache.
Icrease the discount to at least 25% and the problem is solved. Personaly, I don’t consider anything below 25% discount worth my attention, when I buy something. Full price or 10% discount it’s pretty much the same thing.
It would also be useful to try convincing SNOs not to sell the token in the moment they received it, but to hodl, and for that some sort of bonus/staking would help. Or as andrew2.hart sugested… offer the option to skeep a number of x months of payments and give some interest to those SNOs.
Right. I could also buy a gift card and use that. But that was not what I was talking about. As I am aware there is no way that I send my crypto directly to one of these companies.
If you want to solve a problem that Storj appearantly has then you have to analyze it and finde the cause. Only then you will be able to work out a solution.
Here one of the causes is that crypto is not used widely as it is still a niche. That’s what my examples show as the big companies don’t even touch it. People and companies are still using credit cards, Paypal and banks. So the question is, if it is worth for Storj to put any effort into that niche instead of focusing on growth in customers and revenue. As it is a niche whatever amount of resouces are spent, the outcome will be small.
Here are some:
Allow and promote payment in STORJ for GPU compute
Allow and promote payment in STORJ in Storj store (if it still exists)
Allow and promote payment in STORJ for Object Mount
Allow and promote payment in STORJ for all other products that Storj offers.
Offer higher discounts for payment with STORJ. Something like first bill off 25% when paid with STORJ.
Promote the STORJ token (I think I have never seen the STORJ token mentioned on Storjs LinkedIn page for example)
Improve the token website and name swap services that are hassle free to use
Integrate Swap service into website
Partner with swap services and exchanges
Make potential users like customers with minimum fee aware of STORJ token usage instead
Make a customer survey and ask the if they are aware of the token, the benefits and if they are, why they are not using the token
Offer token rewards in communites and on Github for issues or for PRs.
Offer kickbacks for resellers in STORJ
Make a survey among resellers and partners if they already accept crypto and suggest to them to accept STORJ as payment for their services as well.
Make every partner or reseller who accept STORJ a preferred partner and offer additional benefits to them (blog mention, case study, preferred coding and integration support)
But again, you have to analyze and find the root cause for the problem. And it may be that the root cause is using the STORJ token at all. You should not spend your time and resources to find a problem for your solution.
Not implementing something only because you believe it is a legacy is a terribly weak argument.
I am wondering that you are failing to see the improvements from my suggestions. Let me tell you that from my perspective as a SNO it would be a huge improvement for me if I could receive my payouts into my bank account and not have to touch crypto at all. It also would be cheaper for me as well as for Storj. Why do you think this would not be an improvement?
I am advocating to remove the STORJ token because it is expensive to send, because there is a huge spread when selling it, because its value is not stable and it is prone to becoming a risk for Storj when they are forced to buy it back. Removing these issues would be an improvement for customers, SNOs and Storj itself. Don’t you see that? This suggestion does not necessarily advocate for using fiat. It advocates for removing the failures that the STORJ token has built in.
Additionally by using a different and stable coin this would also open the door for Storj to already existing crypto eco systems. How is this not an improvement? There would be effectively more users, businesses, exchanges etc. that use already e.g. USDT. The whole ecosystem of an existing and established coin would open up for Storj. More places to buy, more places to spend, more places to sell, less volatility, less spread, potentially lower transaction cost, easier to handle. How is this not an improvement?
My main suggestion though is to make use of a service provider who is specialized in doing such payments and let the SNO choose how they want to get paid. With a payment provider Storj would be able to let the SNO choose if they want to get paid in crypto or to their bank account or Paypal or whatever at stable and predictable transactions cost. No more worries for the SNO if gas prices are going crazy and they might not get paid. How is this not an improvement?
As the transaction costs with such a provider are low, let the SNO bear the cost. This would mean zero transaction cost for Storj and as said in a previous post less than 2 USD for me to receive the funds into my bank account I would happily bear. How is this not an improvement and cheaper than the current solution?
With such a payment provider Storj would be able to distribute their payments at a mouse click to SNOs worldwide how they prefer it and SNOs would even receive an invoice. How is this not an improvement to the current situation?
I see that you are failing to see the improvements of my suggestions.
But what I am doing is to look at other companies that are facing the very same challenge like Storj: To conduct micropayments to a globally distributed workforce, cheap and efficient. I don’t see other companies doing it the Storj way. Instead they rely on specialized providers so they can focus on their core business. This naturally raises doubts that the Storj solution is the superior one.
If you really believe that the current solution is the best and cheapest to do your payouts, why don’t you make a stand-alone product out of it and offer it as Storj payment service to companies that face the same challenge? Of course it would be easier to contact payment providers first to discuss your issues and find out how they can help and at what costs. Then Storj could compare if their system is better. I doubt that Storj is doing what those provider do cheaper and more efficiently.
Yes. The root cause is the STORJ token itself as its features are not aligned with what the company wants it to be used for today.
I have suggested already when the minimum fee was introduced to make it easy to buy STORJ and send it to the Storj account for payment buy naming swap or exchange service who provide that without the hassle of opening an account, KYC or also buying ETH first:
I know some providers that can even be integrated into the Storj website and I am sure there are many more that would be suitable.
This way users can buy STORJ token and send them to the Storj account address only by using their credit card.
In general I agree that using Ethernet with at least volatile gas prices and basically having to manage 2 crypto currencies to be able to use STORJ token was a bad decision for the todays intended use cases. A stand-alone blockchain where whatever crypto is the only means of payment with e.g. fixed transaction costs would better suits todays requirements.
If I remember correctly the smart contract idea was one reason named in the past why Ethernet was chosen in the first place. But it seems that nothing in that way has been done or either it was not working out well. At least I am not aware of anything using smart contracts and STORJ.
I agree that with todays situation where you can achieve the same result with fiat as with token but with less headache, there is no strong incentive to touch the STORJ token.
This is what it looks like. Hopefully, a VC investor from whom they want money will pull this tooth out of them.
Introduce meta-transactions where users can sign a transaction, but the gas is subsidized by Storj Labs (or deducted in STORJ). This eliminates the need to hold ETH.
Reduces friction Encourages actual use, not just dumping
2. Liquidity Mining for STORJ Pairs
Launch short-term LP incentives for STORJ/ETH, STORJ/USDT, and STORJ/L2 tokens (like ARB, OP) on DEXs like Uniswap, Sushiswap, or Balancer.
Rewards users for adding liquidity Generates volume and visibility
3. Enable STORJ-as-Payment for Partnered Services
Expand the token’s use case beyond storage — e.g., allow STORJ for:
Cloud CDN credits
SaaS developer tools
Affiliate marketing tools
Referral commission to normal users than limiting it to just partners
Integrate STORJ into BitPay, NOWPayments, or Shopify crypto plugins.
Adds spendability Converts users into holders
9. Build a Data Bounty Program
Allow developers to offer STORJ for access to certain datasets or storage of dApp logs, usage data, etc.
Encourages utility Circulates tokens
10. STORJ-Stablecoin Swap Router (Internal UI)
Make an official bridge or smart swap UI that allows users to swap STORJ ↔ stablecoins or L2 tokens inside the Storj app — abstracting wallets and DEXs.
These sound like great ideas and suggestions and I mean it.
But what if all the resources that are required for this end like:
Literally every time when it is suggested to change e.g. SNO dashboard, fix an issue add a feature, we hear that it is not worth it to assign developer time to that. Low priority because it will not bring revenue.
So the question is absolutely valid and crucial: Is it worth the effort? Or are there other and better solutions or ways?
It would be very interesting to see how much storj (token) customers are using to pay for services. Not looking at an exact figure, just a percentage of storj (token) vs USD payments by clients, would be just fine.
If it’s less than 1%, there isn’t anything more to waste brain power on, it’s simply not used by customers. If it’s not used by customers, then there isn’t anything else to brainstorm on, storj (company) either continues down the path of depleting the reserves until they run empty, then begin to buy back tokens hence the only use for the token is to be circulated back to the company, or storj (company) accepts that the only thing they need to dedicate “programmer time” on is to change a single variable from 0xB64ef51C888972c908CFacf59B47C1AfBC0Ab8aC to 0xA0b86991c6218b36c1d19D4a2e9Eb0cE3606eB48 if the SNO has “usdc” in his preferred payment method. The rest is simply figuring out which exchange to use for the customer USD > USDC conversion.
The existence of this thread itself proves that it is worth the effort. I can guarantee that Storj has the resources to look for this itself but they don’t want the backlash it created from the previous changes it made without consulting the users. Also I too strongly believe that there is no harm to just ask for ideas.
Trying to be in the shoes of a project manager here. Every user request is important because a user or users are interested in using it. When you have a finished product then you can certainly dedicate time for it . When you are still not 100% decentralized cloud storage company, considering no community satellites or delegating repair work to SNOs or satellites being centralized then you have to prioritize certain aspect of the project.
Since we are at a stage where the tokens need utmost attention, Storj would be glad to dedicate resources to it because now its on high priority.
I think the best way going forward would be to get feedbacks from customers through the portal itself.
Have a Feedback button on the right side of the page, on every page. Users can give feedbacks on any page they get a problem on right away instead of registering for github or filing support tickets.
You could even have a poll where users could be asked if they would prefer paying via Storj token or card or others (where users could explain other options that we don’t know).
Also here I fully agree to a seemingly simple solution of many of the todays issues.
I did not mean the efforts to create such a thread. I mean the efforts to implement your suggestions resp. basically any effort in coding and implementing to push the token for more usage.
Yes. You would need feedback from customers who already use token as well as customers who are not using it to gather reasons. If the reason is that it is their “policy” not to touch crypto then it looks bad for any effort to change that.
But I suggest to ask also resellers and partners.
There have been discussions in the past that the Heldback system and vetting should be reworked.
As an idea to get people to buy Storj tokens:
In order to run a Storagenode, Storj tokens must be bought and locked as collateral. The heldback could therefore be waived.
In the event of a graceful exit, you will receive your Storj token back minus the transaction fee.
When the Storagenode has been started, the sattelite could check whether enough Storj tokens have been locked for the amount of storage you want to offer.
You can lock Storj tokens as collateral by sending the tokens to a predefined Storj address that is owned by Storj. The node ID could be specified as a memo for identification.
People would have a reason to buy Storj tokens if they want to run a Storagenode.
If someone sets up a Storagenode and simply turns it off after a few weeks, the repair costs can be paid. The remaining amount minus transaction fees can be refunded.
Storj automatically receives new Storj tokens and can use them as capital or to pay Storagenodes.
Some Storagenodes are currently set up with minimum storage for 6 months in order to achieve a minimum of heldback. If the hard drive breaks, Storj is stuck with the costs. If you want to offer a lot of storage, you now have to buy a corresponding amount of Storj tokens.
Vetting is no longer necessary and new Storagenodes can receive 100% bandwidth immediately.
I see some problems when the value of the storj token changes.
If the storj token loses value, more storj tokens are needed to pay for the repair.
To avoid this, Storj could sell the Storj tokens immediately or use them to pay for Storagenodes. But if the Storj token price increases and someone makes a graceful exit, Storj has to buy the Storj tokens at a significantly higher price.
An idea draft that came to me after reading this not very encouraging thread.
Every month Storj Inc. publishes an indicator on what part of Storj Inc. “syndicated” services (so, no custom solutions, no special contracts, just the regular offer for a regular Joe Hacker) was paid with Storj token within the previous 12 months.
If the number is below some threshold (let say, 5%), Storj Inc. increases the discount for paying with the token by some small amount (e.g., by 1%) starting from three months later to avoid short-term volatility. If the number is above, again, Storj decreases the discount. Worst case, the discount grows so much that it doesn’t really pay for the cost of services—but given it would only affect 5% of the paid service, maybe this would be acceptable for Storj Inc.
This way Storj Inc. would be transparent in the sense of both token use and the effect on tokenomics they desire. At the same time, the discount would show how the market values the effective difficulty (or “convenience”, if discount goes negative) using the token vs. just paying with fiat.
I may be the only one that feels this way in terms SNO payments, but I would much rather pay and be paid in XMR (Monero). Network transaction fees are low, privacy is very good, and it’s not to hard to acquire (through mining yourself or other means) and transacting to fiat is easy. I know there are regulatory issues with XMR, but in terms of the network I find it a very good blockchain.
I"m like most SNOs who receive StorJ. It transacts directly to an Exchange wallet. If I perceive the high possibility of it rising, I hold for a bit and then dump it to USD. Otherwise I dump it right away. For me individually it doesn’t have much utility and I don’t see that changing.
Here are two ideas probably too unpopular to be actionable:
Pay SNOs in a nominal amount of STORJ instead of USD-pegged. Now SNOs will have to participate in price action instead of just creating monthly sell pressure.
Mint a new STORJv2 token, with double/10x/whatever total supply, issue STORJv2 1:1 with STORJ so that the money printer remains alive once Storj runs out of STORJ tokens. Lots of opportunity here to leverage AI buzzwords to justify the new token.
You both are missing the point. Storj in not in business of selling air, they sell storage, and not for fake coins, but USD. Node operators are also compensated in USD. The token is a utility token, used only to transfer value. It value is not related to a company valuation in any way. Holding it is silly. You can have significantly better return in casino. Switching to another token is insane. This has been discussed many times, and repeating the same sentiments won’t change the answer.
+1. My exchange sends email when an incoming STORJ transfer is detected: and I take it as a personal challenge to be logged in by the time the minimum number-of-confirmations is hit: so I can immediately sell.
Maybe if Valdi started selling hosted GPUs for tokens (like Silicon or something), I’d want to hold some for awhile. But for now STORJ is like a hot potato: something you get rid of as fast as you can…
Not necessarily. Storj needs to buy coins for cash to pay operators. Which operations sell back for cash. There is always demand for tokens, and therefore non-zero value.
Reduces friction
