jammerdan, I would like to invite you to check that approach
@jammerdan I would like to invite you to check approach, where lowering the price, is supposed to make you increase your earnings, and would like to hear from You what You think, here
jammerdan:
john:
Storage (per TB Mo)
$1.50
$0.75 - $1.00
Egress (per TB)
$20
$1.50 - $5.00
Audit / Repair traffic (per TB)
$10
$1.50 - $5.00
I hope Storj is aware that this can turn into a kill switch for Storj. I am still figuring out if this is viable for me as SNO but it looks really really bad.
A lot of time has passed since you have initially announced changes to the economic model but you have also asked what signals would SNOs require so that Exabyte scaling is possible. Well with these payout amounts I don’t think it is.
I really wished Storj would have started the changes to the economic model on their own responsibility rather than simply pushing the problem to the SNOs. I don’t see your suggestions for price increases or technical optimizations and I fear with that new payout you will see higher node churn, higher repair cost and at the end more centralization than ever with less nodes. A minimum node with 500GB will never be interesting with these payouts.
So what I would like to see from Storj:
Changes in cost structure
Tune RS settings as proposed by @BrightSilence to limit repair
Work on the incentive structures to keep old nodes on the network
Work on the incentive structures to limit repair due to exit without graceful exit
Decentralization of repair service
Decentralization of Edge services if possible
Remove test data or at least start paying less for it
Incentivize customers use of native integrations
Limit free tier (Timed Trial only, delete unused accounts, none or limited gateway services) unless user is high prospect. Maybe there should be a harder distinction between “personal” and a “business” account where the business account comes with higher price but gateway services included.
Limit use of token where required. Gateway costs are always $. So if a customer can pay by token for that even with a discount this sounds like a disadvantage for Storj.
Generating more revenue
Increase price to $5 / $10 (Storage/Egress) per month. Rather apply discounts for fitting customers or customers with huge data demand if necessary. There have never been better times for a price increase as prices go up everywhere.
Charge for gateway services. It is very understandable that Storj DCS low prices can only be achieved if the customers use the low cost decentralization structure. If customers want centralization then they have to pay the price for it. Not the SNOs!!! The SNOs are not at fault for those incurring costs. They deliver their job as they should.
Develop use cases that could justify higher prices. Let me link to one Wasabi example: Pay-go Pricing FAQs - Wasabi , they charge $10,99 for their “Surveillance Cloud”. I made the suggestion to Storj to look into this market years ago. There would have been plenty of time to develop similar cases.
Technical certification or certification for legal or other specific compliance can also justify higher prices and bring more customers. Why is there no ISO, DIN, TÜV, GDPR, HIPAA, CJIS, FERPA, MPA certification until today?
Specific data storage requirements like geo-fencing (but also other use cases like specific distribution of pieces) could also justify higher price models.
RauchenwaldC, but this is the point
@RauchenwaldC but this is the point, they couldn’t get any serious customers anyway, so mayby really low prices approach, will knock the doors down and start a REAL revolution and liftoff! so SNOs can be well compensated, i wrote about it here
Tony_boy_32, Dont leave, support this idea, here
@Tony_boy_32 Dont leave, support this, here
Tony_boy_32:
I all,
Vadim, thats a good, clear example,
@Vadim thats a good, clear example, thank You very much, please check different approach i wrote about, here , and tell what do You think.
Vadim:
here is my calculation.
today i get around 700$ a month. if it will be only 1/4 of it it is 175$ a month I will not be able to invest to hardware if something go broken. So consideration to end it will be big.
striker43, exactly, ''Seeing this, for a developer it’s much easier to just use the hosted gateway.''
@striker43 exactly, “Seeing this, for a developer it’s much easier to just use the hosted gateway.” So until those things are fixed, there must be REALY something, to make them want to use it, how about unmatched affordability? what will also secure SNOs payments, i explain here
striker43:
Ah thanks a lot, I didn’t know this. But seeing that it was last updated 2-3 years ago and it’s a third-party wrapper does not really convince me to prefer this over the hosted gateway. Also the installation is much more complicated. It looks like I need to install C-compiler, the GO-stuff and libuplink…
Buganu, not necessary the prices, but the sales, but if they was unable to do so for 2 years?
@Buganu not necessary the prices, but the sales, but if they was unable to do so for 2 years? Come up with a proposal to a proposal, that should make sales much easier, here
Abernathy, Well said.
@Abernathy Well said. Got idea for different approach, You may want to look at, and tell if You would support it?, here
Abernathy:
So let me try to understand.
Storj is struggling to make the economic model that Storj created work, so Storj intends to solve the problem by taking the money from the SNOs that built the network Storj relies on to function?
Storj then added (multiple) edge services, despite many of us having symmetric gigabit fiber, or better. Today you are telling the SNOs that these same edge services cost so much that you need to reduce our compensation?
Storj proposes to do this by forcing loyal SNOs, individuals that have supported your network for years, into unprofitability right away. However, you will employ “some sort of surge payout” so SNOs don’t recognize the inevitable until you’ve found some way to (presumably) centralize the Storj network more so that it does not collapse as SNOs abandon the network, as you have abandoned them. This may not help the STORJ token price, part of the implied reason for the change(s).
My feedback is that this may negatively affect the relationship you have built with your SNOs, and that you might want to find a solution that is more balanced. Quite simply, in the 36 hours since I read this, I have been struggling to understand why I should keep my ~20TB of data with Storj, and not just fill it with data I personally care more about.
zanerv, then say if You see a solution in that:
@zanerv then please check the proposal to the proposal and say if You see a solution in that? here
zanerv:
This means that newer or smaller nodes don’t have a chance, so even if the signup is still open, it’s not worth it any more.
I really hope that storj finds a way to be profitable cuz I wanna get those 20Tb drives
MattJE96011, Well said. Despite all that, i still can see how Storj be profitable.
@MattJE96011 Well said. Despite all that, i still can see how Storj be profitable. i presented it, here
MattJE96011:
The real bottom line here is that nobody will run nodes at these prices. Money makes the world go round (so to speak) and if there’s no money in it for SNO’s, Storj’s world stops “going round”. People will do things that are profitable, even if it’s small… but doing things to essentially break even is no more than a hobby… and trust me, people get bored of hobbies.
Besides that, there isn’t enough “extra” storage space in the world to support what Storj is trying to do here. And even with the extra that IS out there, how many of those people know about Stroj? And how many of them have even basic enough skills to run a node? And of those, how many will essentially do it for free? I mean c’mon… Who in their right mind will want to shorten the lifespan of their drives for basically no reason? But for those that do, the first time their drive fails and they loose their personal data or simply have to pay for a new drive, they’re going to think twice about doing it again. People do this because it’s profitable, plain and simple. No profit, no Storj. Furthermore, things have continuously been moving to the cloud, people are moving to smaller and smaller devices such as laptops and tablets instead of desk PC’s… does Storj really think this will change? All of a sudden everybodys going to go back to desktop PC’s that are on all the time and have all sorts of “extra” space to give away for next to nothing?
Decentralized storage is a great idea, but the truth is Storj doesn’t charge enough to begin with to account for a “middleman” (Storj) taking a cut especially with a 2.8 expansion factor. The proposed pricing will only really be somewhat profitable for very large SNO’s. I don’t believe large SNO’s are bad though because let’s face it… if Storj wants to grow to compete with other large providers they will need large SNO’s. However, due to the /24 limitations this is obviously not what their going for. Now the whole “don’t buy any hardware for Storj” thing is nothing more than a loosly worded legal disclaimer so people don’t try to blame Storj if things go south… like if someone can’t do math… or if Storj fails… or a rug pull… Now I’d hate to think something like that last one, but the way it’s starting to look with all these things considered it kida looks like Storj want’s to eventually phase out SNO’s for a more centralized model. This is of course my opinion, but I simply can’t see any other way for Storj to be profitable. As I’ve stated in another post, even if SNO’s gave away their space for free it would not make Storj profitable… not for a good while anyway, and that sure isn’t going to happen.
I really don’t understand the direction Storj is going. To many things just don’t make sense. I won’t go into any more detail about that here as I have in other threads. Besides, it appears many have brought up similar things throughout this thread. Some will understand what I mean and some won’t. It saddens me to say, but it kinda feels like Storj doesn’t really want us anymore. I mean how did they think we would all react? I was obviously expecting cuts, but this? All I have to say is… lol.
@john all those feedbacks up to now, speaks for itselfs.here .