When you try to sell a product/service, the name is also important, aka the sound of it.
Anything I would add would be speculative. While there have been employee departures, this is not new to Storj. After a merger it is somewhat common. The reason it hasnât been formerly announced is likely due to ongoing reorganization and resourcing inside a small company. Also, Iveniam may not be as open to share details like Storj has historically. Once the dust settles and there is positive news, I am sure the company will share details. Everything is up and operational and SNOâs are being paid on time, so best to just wait until they are ready to announce something if they feel it is warranted.
It just showed again with the new partner https://shelterone.io/pricing:
Is storage included?
Yes. Every plan includes Shelter Storage â 1TB on Nomad and 20TB on Studio.
Yay! 
Is ShelterOne SOC 2 compliant?
Yes. ShelterOne is SOC 2 compliant
â Select. 
Great for Storj. Not so great for SNOs.
Initially there was information on compliance progress announced for
So yes, unless the Global network is SOC2 compliant by now or Storj stores SOC2 data on the global network anyway (as Select is US only and for such a product the Global Tier seems to be the right choice) it seems that the new partnership is again not for us SNOs and SOC2 certification for the Global network urgently needed.
Seems like the Inveniam website received an update.
On https://www.inveniam.io/company/global-ecosystem there is information about their global eco system including Storj:
Inveniam acquired Storj to enhance decentralized storage capabilities within its data infrastructure stack. Storj provides distributed cloud storage that ensures secure, scalable, and verifiable storage of private market data. This supports data provenance, auditability, and accessibilityâkey requirements for AI-driven analytics and trading systems. Storj underpins Inveniamâs vision by enabling trusted, decentralized data layers necessary for systematic trading and data marketplaces.
Just read about:
It seems token costs are rising left and right and I was just wondering if this could affect Inveniam business as they rely a lot on AI like Claude and others? Wouldnât they need to pay them as well for increasing AI usage?
Providing hardware/software for AI â using AI 
Since demand for it is growing, why not offer it?
Moreover, these capacities can also be used for science (various researches for the treatment of complex diseases, space exploration, etc.)
But they are using AI and they are relying on AI:
https://inveniam.vercel.app/solutions#data-architecture
Inveniam applies AI to extract and structure information from complex documentation.
https://inveniam.vercel.app/solutions#agents
Inveniam supports the deployment and management of AI agents across their full lifecycle.
The platform is designed to support both internally developed agents and third-party agents, with most client use cases involving external agent integrations.
This ensures institutions can adopt and scale AI capabilities without being locked into a single vendor or model.
https://www.inveniam.io/solutions/ai-ready-infrastructure#future-markets
Through Inveniam infrastructure, digital assets become accessible to analytics systems and AI agents.
So the basic question remains: If use of AI get prohibitvely expensive, what will it mean for Inveniams business case?
Since Inveniam can do whatever they want with Valdi capacity⌠maybe theyâre hosting local models for their internal or customer work? They may be using frontier subscriptions sparingly.
For consistency it may even be better if they control the models. A provider canât retire one and force them to use another (and get different results).
As tokenized ecosystems continue to evolve and more value is created through enterprise adoption, AI infrastructure, and tokenized assets, how does the team envision the long-term value proposition for both STORJ token holders and node operators?
Do you see their role becoming more important over time, or primarily remaining limited to the network functions they serve today?
Today⌠STORJ tokens are meant to be sold as soon as you receive them.
However in the past they were also meant to be sold as soon as you receive them.
And in the future, if weâre fortunate, theyâll also gain the ability to be sold as soon as you receive them.
In the beginning, I held. I grew my holdings to around âŹ2000, and I felt like a king. Then the token started dropping. I thought âyay, I now get more token pr. month - I will be an even greater king, when the token raises againâ. For a year, I then held, and had âŹ2000 in StorJ. Every monthly payout I increased StorJ, but the token price dropped, and I stayed around the same euroamount.
When my holdings started losing value quicker than I added to it, I decided to just convert all to EURC, and do that the same month. I donât understand, why I have not done so before - Every month I get around 100 EURC, and I donât care what the token price is at any given moment. EUR is strong, and I can use it for whatever I want
Imagine if everyone sells storj immediately and storj keeps dropping and so everyone keeps selling.
Eventually if someone wants to buy storj (for storage or to pay noders) they will have to buy so much storj that the price has to go up.
What do you do then? If you sell straight away you might miss out when that buyer has to buy next timeâŚ
Maybe you assume there will be no buyer ever? Who will you sell to then?
So no, this always sell straight away meme is a bad one.
How about this meme instead?
STORJ is a stable coin worth $1. Anyone who sells for less is a fool or desperate!
Storj-the-company has either already exhausted their pile of treasury tokens, or theyâre very close. For the last two months weâve seen strong buys just before payouts: so someone is buying 
If Storj NEEDS TO BUY to have tokens to send as payouts⌠why would you suggest scenarios where there âwill be no buyer ever?â.
The buy/sell loop can run forever: it doesnât matter what the token price does: even if it trends down.
Iâm trying to understand the long-term token economy from a sustainability perspective.
If enterprise customers continue to adopt Storj services and the broader ecosystem around AI, data infrastructure, and tokenized assets continues to grow, but those enterprise customers do not directly acquire or hold STORJ tokens, where is the long-term demand for the token ultimately expected to come from?
Today, liquidity appears to be supported by a combination of token holders, traders, market makers, and node operators. However, if over time a significant portion of passive holders and speculative participants leave the ecosystem, what mechanism is expected to sustain healthy liquidity and price discovery?
In that scenario, would the ecosystem effectively become one where Storj is the primary buyer (through buybacks and network-related demand) while node operators remain the primary sellers as they receive rewards?
If not, what future role do you envision for STORJ token holders and node operators as enterprise adoption grows and more value is created at the infrastructure layer?
Iâm not asking about short-term market conditions, but rather how the team sees long-term value flowing through the token economy as the ecosystem matures.
Storj is just another commodity S3 provider: and theyâre in a crowded market. The average enterprise customer doesnât care about the token: they get billed in fiat and pay in fiat. Simple.
Knowing thatâŚ
I think it is that simple. Sellers are SNOs, and buyers are StorjâŚand a small number of customers looking for the 10% token discount. There is no grand vision of disrupting global financial markets - thereâs no need to look for complicated motivations
This framing is an actual problem. It is not a commodity s3 provider. itâs a fast, geo-distributed by default, high throughput, low-carbon, modern storage provider, that has no alternatives for specific workloads, (Alexey described them ad nauseum already). It also supports S3 as a side gig.
The way to win this is to not play. As soon as you are âjust another S3 providerâ your only leverage is price. And Storj is not in commodity S3 business, nor is it in cheap storage business.
It will have very few, but very large volume customers, that actually require the features storj offers, and are willing to pay for them. To capture the rest of the market â S3 will continue to be offered, but this is in no way primary value proposition. Therefore it shall be (and probably is) marketed to a high value customers as a unique solution, that looks like bespoke one answering their needs exactly.
On topic of token â it will die, once everyone stops losing their minds in the search of a greater fool.
This explains $50 fee. This explains discount for token payments. Itâs very obvious.
Thatâs quite the comical statement, Iâm not even inclined to lift a finger to debate that; normally youâre far more analytical and bring the receipts AR.
@EBI,
Donât expect any of your queries to be answered by any authoritative corp. representatives here; the only directional token support theyâve provided in the last several years is a weak monthly ~$5-6,000 USD token buyback program for an as yet to be determined staking incentive. Such purchases have only been announced once regarding a catch-up purchase of 3-4 months late last year.
However, a large block of shares were exchanged for their last major aquisition, after they liquidated/burned ~$30-35M of treasury (after each lock-up period expired over several years) (-their operational cash burn) for the cash portion of that aquisition.
In other words, I suspect garnering info through this forum is likely a dead end in respect to determining financial prospectus/information you may be seeking.
Having said that, you never know maybe something develops. Although do note, in essence, the company likely has zero substantive ownership/equity of the float at this time.
2 cents,
Julio
My original question was actually about the long-term role of STORJ holders and node operators, but the discussion seems to have shifted elsewhere.
The point I am still struggling to understand is liquidity.
If STORJ were ever delisted from Binance, a very large portion of the tokenâs liquidity would disappear overnight. In that situation, it would no longer matter whether node operators receive 100 STORJ or 10,000 STORJ per month for providing services.
Without active traders, market makers, investors, and sufficient exchange liquidity, who would ultimately be buying those tokens?
A healthy token economy requires both sellers and buyers. Node operators are natural sellers because they receive tokens as compensation and often need to convert them into fiat to cover real-world costs.
So my question is:
If long-term holders, traders, and market makers gradually leave the ecosystem, what is the mechanism that ensures sustainable liquidity and price discovery for the token?
I am not asking about short-term market conditions. I am asking what the long-term design is for maintaining a functioning market where node operators can reliably sell the tokens they earn.
The only available information is published on this website specifically for STORJ tokens:
Buyers â possibly Storj, definitely clients and traders; sellers â SNO and traders. The tokenâs value is not tied to Storjâs performance, as it is not a security, stock, share, or investment in the company. The market may attempt to tie them together, of course, because traders will trade, but this does not change the STORJ tokenâs role as a utility token in the Storj ecosystem. The STORJ token was never intended for investment: 2017 Token Sale Terms - Storj Docs.