All I’ll say. Prices are set at the margins. You don’t need a trillion dollars to come in to get a trillion dollar market cap. If one house is sold on a street for $500k then the market cap of that street will be worked out on the last house sold and the potential value of each house from that basis.
3 Likes
What might be considered a fair price in USD or GBP for 1 MB of storage on automomi?
2 Likes
I need to go, but some thought by @mav from a few years ago:
I only skimmed very quickly the beginning of it, so I’m sorry if that does not lead to anywhere. Wanted to leave it here as a starting point anyway.
3 Likes
If they are not being traded then the price could just keep going up. I don’t mind wales not releasing funds to trade them 
I think everyone has a price target at which they would consider selling (a bit). The more the price goes up the more liquidity will enter the market. 50ct just isn’t going to cut it for me though.
5 Likes
To get back to 0,0002 we need 3000% gain from current value.
In recent weeks we moved from -99,4% to -97,2% from MAID/BTC ATH.
At that time 1BTC = 4000 MAID, today 1BTC = 135 000 MAID
3 Likes
It appears that 4000 sats was acting as bottom for about 4 years since the public sale before being “forgotten”, so that naturraly making it the first target for recovery.
In that period, the BTC price was $200 - $20,000.
Anyway, this is still a microcap valuation…
1 Like
When, not if … but when it happens, it won’t be traded for anything anymore and something else will supplant it. Hyperinflation is the definition of the destruction of a currency.
People confuse hyperinflation with high inflation, but these aren’t the same thing. Hyperinflation happens when people give up on using a currency and switch to something else and hence the price of that fiat drops to a level that is less than useless in most cases. Recent examples being Zimbabwe, Venezuela, & Lebanon.
1 Like
The way I think:
The fair price is when node operators and clients are both willing to keep using the network. This is fully in FIAT and depends on other options available on the market. Four years ago @TylerAbeoJordan came to the conclusion that it would be:
I realize it may be lower now, but as a ballpark figure that’s good enough. So for 1 MB that would be 14c / 1000 =0.014c.
If that would be an average fair price, it would be interesting to know how upload activity behaves around that point- to draw a curve based on observed upload behaviour. There’s of course nothing to observe, but I guess we have some folks here that could have theoretical insight about how customers behave when price change.
Anyway my guess is that the price of upload in FIAT is pretty stable, maybe slightly increasing over time when the network proves stable and useful. And I mean increasing compared to other options, not necessarily as an absolute number, as the cost of storage media should drop.
The network token price has it’s effect too. I think uploaders are thinking more of just the current price, as they have the need to get their data stored somewhere. Node operators may me willing to operate at some degree of loss in hopes of the token getting more valuable over time.
In my opinion the next exercise is to get the pricing curve set so, that the “fair price” would be around some decent fullness point. If it would be around 5% full, then the amount of empty space would be wasteful. If it would be around 95%, the network would not tolerate sudden upsurge of upload. Though I guess the curve can actually prevent that happening by going to infinity just before the network getting stuffed. So I think the pricing curve can be designed so that the “fair price” keeps nodes quite full.
3 Likes
There are some other considerations there.
- As that was 2019, it would be lower now.
- This is the cost of early permanent data. Data added at a later date would get a lower cost.
- This was the cost of the hardware and didn’t account for network redundancy, which is 5? copies now?
- Pre-existing hardware costs are hard to factor in - people will likely take a loss to get their foot in the door, so maybe this lowers the cost/GB.
- Deduplication … not sure how to estimate that effect.
So, taking those into account (minus #5) let’s say it’s more like USD 0.10/GB. And that a chunk is .5MB
So I come up with USD$0.00025/chunk as initial price-point. Stated another way, 50 cents per GB.
4 Likes
Thanks, good points!
1 Like
An unfathomable question, but one which could keep the price low and encourage use, is how many, for one reason or another will not be sensitive to earnings.
I imagine there could be a lot of people who regard running a node as fun, a good thing to do, or just like buying a lottery ticket each week. Because the cost of being a part of this game is so low, many will get their reward just from playing.
We should encourage that, because it could be the baseload of the storage system at the same time as keeping storage costs competitive.
6 Likes
MAID > eMAID
$0.7 vs $0.55
2 Likes
Today maid was on 0.89? Lol
aaaand it’s gone…
2 Likes
USD $0.10 per GB would mean $100 per TB. I think that seems more feasible than $0.50 per GB, which would mean $500 per TB.
2 Likes
It may seem like it, but the math is the math. There are 5 copies stored on the network, so it must be multiplied. This is for permanent data, not temporary local or cloud storage, but forever. Even if storing locally forever, you’d need to buy a new drive at some point due to wear and transfer it over (rinse wash and repeat forever).
The difference is an incremental cost versus a one-off payment. There are advantages to each. One of the advantages for 
is deduplication, which should lower the cost on the network relative to local storage by a considerable amount into the future, but hard to guess specifically how much of a difference that will make - only that it will make a large difference over time.
2 Likes
I was looking at some hdd’s a little while ago and found out that the new Toshiba drives reported mean time between failure were set to1 000 000 hours, above 100 years.
1 Like