115 and Google team-drive rentals
Netdisk and pan · 1 record · JSON
115 and Google team-drive rentals (the resale market) Netdisk and pan
paidcardcardRrequest-rate
| Free tier | not a free tier: a rented Google team drive at CNY 20 per month, six months minimum, with unlimited space, a 400,000-file cap and a 750 GB per day upload cap unit unlimited; metered on uploaded-bytes |
|---|---|
| Price | none stated |
| Per-object cap | 400,000 files per drive, stated by the seller |
| Retention | the drive lasts as long as the underlying tenant does; the seller states no refund if the plan disappears, and one thread carries a buyer reporting that the drive vanished |
| Egress | downloads are stated as unlimited by one seller; uploads are capped at 750 GB per day per drive |
| Identity | card CNY 20 per month, six months minimum, paid to an individual seller; the identity gate is the payment, not a registration |
| Limits | |
| Binding | request-rate The space is nominally unlimited and the file count is 400,000; what actually bounds a day's work is the 750 GB per day upload cap, and what bounds the arrangement is that the tenant belongs to somebody else. |
| Interface | rest, rclone |
| Tooling | a Google Drive API client or rclone; the rental is a permission on a shared drive, not a new protocol |
| Composes with | the cheapest route to a pooled tenant that already exists, and the clearest evidence that an 'unlimited' Google quota is a quota being arbitraged by somebody else |
| Reliability | The underlying tenant is the failure point and the renter does not control it: one thread's own replies describe unlimited Workspace space as a bug-based expansion, and another carries a buyer reporting that the team drive vanished. No refund on a mid-term exit is stated in every listing read. |
| Notes | Recorded as a signal, not a purchase route. Four listings on one forum between 2024-05 and 2026-10 quote CNY 15 to 20 per month for unlimited Google team-drive space with a 400,000-file cap and a 750 GB per day upload cap, and two of the threads argue about whether the space is a genuine plan or an expansion bug. Where a rental market exists, the underlying unlimited quota is being arbitraged, and the arbitrageur's account is what fails. |
| Evidence rung | reported the date on each evidence row is the day the post was read (2026-10-22); the post's own publication date is carried inside the proved string, because a forum post describes a moment and its age is a property of the claim and not of the reading |
| Checked | 2026-10-23 (live); stale on 2026-11-06 |
| Parsed numbers |
|
Evidence (4)
| date | source | what it proved |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-22 | www.nodeseek.com/post-963458-1 | a seller offers '20 元/月，半年起租', '无限空间，单盘最多 40 万个文件', '每天上传额度 750 GB', and a whole rented domain at '每个域每天上传额度 2.5 TB' (posted 2026-10-04) |
| 2026-10-22 | www.nodeseek.com/post-805440-1 | the same seller's earlier listing at the same price and the same caps, 110 days before, so the offer is repeatable and not a one-off (posted 2026-07-03) |
| 2026-10-22 | www.nodeseek.com/post-353802-1 | a different seller at '月付20块，半年起付' with '文件个数40w个，每天上传流量750G，下载不限', which corroborates both caps independently (posted 2025-06-01) |
| 2026-10-22 | www.nodeseek.com/post-805440-2 | a reply argues '200T的workspace都是卡bug扩容的', so at least one buyer believes the unlimited space is an expansion bug rather than a plan (posted 2026-07-13) |
More fields (6)
{
"access_mode": "paid-pan",
"market": "nodeseek.com transaction board",
"listings_seen": 4,
"price_range_cny_month": "15 to 20",
"file_cap": 400000,
"upload_cap_gb_day": 750
}