Questionable, but I do ok 
I went for 2 of these:
SABRENT USB 3.2 5 Bay 3.5" SATA Hard Drive Tray Less Docking Station (DS-SC5B)
You can do a 10 bay, but I opted for 2 5s just to spread out the heat a bit. Not sure it was needed, but I went that route. Figured splitting the USB connections would be nicer as well.
A few days ago, they responded to my ticket asking for their ToS, and here it is: Quotaless Terms of Use - Knowledgebase - Quotaless
Very short and to the point, and everything seems reasonable. I like it.
hi. former google drive user.. are there any unlimited alternatives that work with rclone? i have about 200TB from google i need to transfer
The short answer is no.
200TB is going to be expensive to store. €€€ per month.
I've just migrated out of Google too. I managed to get a 14 day extension followed by another 7, was told I'd not be getting anything further than that. Got the last of my important data out about 8hrs before my account was suspended and I lost access to my data. Have now cancelled that subscription.
I've only got about 35TB worth, so I ended up creating 3 x DIY NAS units (one offsite) using rclone to keep them in sync. As I don't have a massive amount of data I think I'll just use SATA drives to create archives.
200TB is going to cost a lot regardless of cloud or local. Assuming there isn't a great deal of scope for purging unimportant/replaceable data, you'll be best storing your master copies locally. Look for deals on used high capacity drives, I managed to get 8 x 16TB EXOS disks with pretty low usage for only $120USD each. Alternatively if you don't need immediate access to your data, LTO media offer big and reliable storage at a reasonable cost. Their drives are a very large cost of entry there though.
ouch. do you know which rclone compatible service offers the most storage?
"the most storage"? I think you mean "the most storage for the least cost", ie the lowest cost/terabyte, specifically for the amount of data you mentioned (200TB).
There are a ton of alternatives, but the reasonably reliable ones (eg iDrive e2) are hovering about or just below $2/TB/month (with promos available for a discount on first year, etc).
So, you're going to have to pay about or just below $400/month total eventually (once the discounts run out, etc) to store your 200TB with some assurance you will be able to continue to access it in the future.
Much less than that and you're risking losing your data (eg, Teledrive). But if tha't s not a problem for you (and you, for some strange reason, don't want to just archive it to /dev/null 
), then there's a ton of options, have a look at the posts above and pick your poison.
If you want reliable storage and don't want to spend at a few hundred bucks a month, then your only option is to set up your own. For that, also have a look above, some folks (notably and most recently @Animosity022) have posted some details about that.
oh i see. so services like box unlimited would not actually support 200TB? or it just doesn't work with rclone?
i could probably get my storage down to 100TB. i only have 200TB because i believed it was truly unlimited and collected some junk.
reliability isn't the biggest deal to me as my files are all recoverable if the worst happened. but my plan was to find two unlimited cloud services like box and backblaze, and backup twice for redundancy. one for rclone and one to restore if something goes wrong. is something like this possible?
The only affordable services that support such massive volumes of data are backup services which don't support rclone. You have to use their own client, which means you must keep a local copy of all the data.
Just a little FYI, Blomp is working on fixing their RClone integration, and currently has a working BETA.
I was going to check it out.
What's your username for referer? DM if you wish
Thanks
Thanks for keeping us posted! Looking forward to an affordable rclone-compatible cloud storage provider!
thanks. going to give this a shot.
and thanks to all who provided helpful info/recommendations
$10/month for 10TB? How is Blomp so cheap?
Jottacloud offers 5TB for about the same price, although you can go over that limit at reduced upload/download speed. That offer started years ago, so given that prices have fallen it's not beyond the realms of possibility that it is profitable for them.
Simple - they don't expect the average buyer to use much of the 10TB.
Prices go up per TB with the 50TB and the 100TB plan - where they expect customers to actually begin using some of the space 
This is 100% correct, and almost the exact wording I received from their support when I asked about the higher pricing on the higher tiers.
Sorry if I'm saying the quiet part out loud, but -- isn't that just plain stupid? What's stopping people from just buying multiple accounts and union'ing them together and paying the lower per-TB cost?
I guess that would depend on how much effort you'd want to put into it. Logically, it would make sense to buy the smaller plans, under multiple emails. However, a little less effort, for a little more money, may be compelling to some.
Larger plans are only more expensive when billed monthly - yearly billing is the same (per TB) for all plans.
I see logic here - they want some cash upfront to provision more space:) Monthly paying users are PITA.
E.g. for 100TB it is $1139.89 per year - enough to get disks to support it from the start. If they have some wholesale disk prices.
I think it is possible to make business with this price. Tough. But doable.