Can Changing Chains Really Change the Game?

Author: momo, ChianCatcher

Recently, several projects have announced their migration to new public chain ecosystems. Unlike previous migrations driven by trends or security issues, this time, the project teams are also undergoing business transformations, essentially starting anew in a different environment.

However, the response from the crypto community regarding these migrations seems less than optimistic. After Secret Network announced its plan to migrate to Arbitrum, its token plummeted over 30% within 24 hours.

Base and Arbitrum Become New Hubs for Established Projects' "Re-Entrepreneurship"

In this wave of public chain migrations, Base and Arbitrum have become destinations for many established projects seeking new growth opportunities.

Sophon, once an L2 project within the ZKsync ecosystem, aimed to create consumer-grade blockchain infrastructure through zero-knowledge proofs. In June, Sophon announced the closure of its own chain and migration to Base, shifting its focus to consumer applications and launching apps like Pyre. The official reason given was straightforward: maintaining a single blockchain incurs annual costs exceeding $3 million, and migration could reduce operational costs by about $3 million annually.

Moonbeam, an early important EVM-compatible parachain in Polkadot, was a crucial entry point for Ethereum applications within the Polkadot ecosystem. In July, Moonbeam announced the migration of GLMR to Base and adjusted its development direction towards decentralized AI agent communication and settlement networks.

On the other hand, the star privacy project in the Cosmos ecosystem, Secret Network, announced plans to migrate to Arbitrum and convert SCRT to ERC-20, exploring the integration of privacy infrastructure with AI and other directions in the future. Following the migration announcement, the token of Secret Network dropped 30% within 24 hours, reflecting the crypto community's pessimism.

It is noteworthy that these migrating projects share a commonality: they are all public chain networks, and after migration, they are seeking application scenarios and market narratives that combine with AI and real consumer needs.

The welcome from Arbitrum's officials for the migration of Secret Network is also worth pondering. In a time when significant innovative projects and phenomena from previous bull markets are hard to find, attracting mature projects from other chains may be a compromise.

It is worth mentioning that Polkadot and Cosmos, once dubbed the "cross-chain duo," have fallen silent, becoming key areas for project migrations.

The crypto community humorously remarked, "Seeing the term Polkadot really gives a sense of nostalgia. The last time I heard of it was when Manta left; now, it’s another major ecosystem leaving." On the Cosmos side, projects like Noble, Nillion, and Akash have also adjusted their directions, with some migrating to Ethereum and others turning to Solana or independent EVM ecosystems.

Can Changing Chains Really Change the Game?

Changing chains is not a new phenomenon. For many projects, while the technical ecosystem migration comes at a cost, moving to a public chain ecosystem that better fits technical development needs, has more traffic, or is more secure is a pragmatic choice.

However, changing chains often only adds a little extra value; the difficulty of truly "changing the game" may be significant. There are numerous cases where the response post-migration was lukewarm, leading to repeated migrations or even a return to the original chain. For instance, y00ts NFT announced its migration from Solana to Polygon at the end of 2022 and received millions in grants, but just a few months later, y00ts regretted it and returned the grant, announcing a migration back to Ethereum mainnet in mid-2023. Although the real reasons were not disclosed, it was clear that the effects of the chain change did not meet expectations. Synthetix, after deploying on multiple L2s, ultimately reverted to the mainnet, as the multi-chain strategy increased complexity without delivering the expected synergies.

Moreover, in the current crypto market environment, the difficulty of "changing the game" through chain changes may be even greater. In the early bull market, there were airdrops, narrative bonuses, and user enthusiasm, making it easier for projects to chase trends and receive subsidies. However, as crypto increasingly integrates with traditional finance, many narratives have been preliminarily debunked, leading to more rational users.

Public chains themselves also face numerous challenges, with Ethereum undergoing significant layoffs and frequently being criticized. The prediction market project World sought refuge in Solana, but soon after the launch of Roobinhood Chain, it abandoned Solana for Roobinhood Chain, reflecting the broader challenges faced by traditional crypto public chains.

Compared to project teams attempting to change chains for rebirth, public chains also face difficulties in attracting "washed-up" projects for growth. Today's competition is no longer just about "who can take on more projects," but rather about who can truly offer application scenarios and retain users.

Disclaimer: This content is provided for general branding and informational purposes only and doesn't constitute financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Any events, rewards, online events, or related information mentioned herein should not be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or invitation to purchase, sell, trade, or otherwise deal in any crypto assets or to use any services. Crypto assets are highly volatile and may result in loss. WEEX services and online events may not be available in all regions and are subject to applicable laws, regulations, and eligibility requirements. You are responsible for ensuring that your use of WEEX services complies with local laws and for carefully assessing the risks before participating in any crypto-related activities.