Author: momo, ChianCatcher
Recently, several projects have announced their migration to new public chain ecosystems. Unlike the past where projects simply switched chains to chase trends or due to security issues, this time, the projects are also undergoing business transformations, akin to starting anew in a different place.
However, the response from the crypto community regarding project chain migrations seems to be pessimistic. After Secret Network announced its plan to migrate to Arbitrum, the token plummeted over 30% within 24 hours.
Base and Arbitrum Become New Docks for Established Projects' "Rebirth"
In this wave of public chain migration, Base and Arbitrum have become destinations for many established projects seeking to find new growth opportunities.
Sophon was once an L2 project within the ZKsync ecosystem, aiming to build consumer-grade blockchain infrastructure through zero-knowledge proofs. In June, Sophon announced its closure of its own chain and migration to Base, shifting its focus to consumer applications, launching apps like Pyre. The official reason provided was straightforward: maintaining a single blockchain costs up to over $3 million annually, and after migration, operational costs could be reduced by about $3 million each year.
Moonbeam is an important early EVM-compatible parachain within Polkadot, which once served as a crucial gateway for connecting Ethereum applications in the Polkadot ecosystem. In July, Moonbeam announced the migration of GLMR to Base and has 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 its plan to migrate to Arbitrum and convert SCRT to ERC-20, exploring the combination of privacy infrastructure with AI and other directions in the future. After announcing its migration, the token plummeted 30% within 24 hours, indicating a lack of optimism within the crypto community.
Notably, 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 consumption.
The welcoming of Secret Network's migration by Arbitrum officials is also worth pondering. In a time when crypto is struggling to find prior bull market-style innovative tracks and projects, attracting mature projects from other chains may be a compromise.
It is worth mentioning that Polkadot and Cosmos, once known as the "cross-chain duo," have gone quiet and have become key areas for project migrations.
The crypto community jestingly comments, "Seeing the word Polkadot really feels like a distant memory. The last time I heard about it, it was due to Manta's exit; now again, it's top ecosystems leaving." On the Cosmos side, projects like Noble, Nillion, and Akash have also adjusted their directions sequentially, with some migrating to Ethereum, while others are turning to Solana or independent EVM ecosystems.
Can changing chains really change fate?
Although changing chains is not a new thing, for many projects, the cost of migrating technology ecosystems may be significant, however, going to a public chain ecosystem that better matches technical development requirements, has more traffic, or is safer is also a pragmatic choice.
However, chain migration often only adds icing on the cake, and "changing fate" may be quite challenging. Cases of mediocre responses after chain migrations, and instances of repeatedly migrating back to the original chain are not uncommon. y00ts NFT announced its migration from Solana to Polygon at the end of 2022, receiving several million dollars in grants, but shortly after, y00ts regretted it and returned the grant in mid-2023, abandoning Polygon to migrate back to the Ethereum mainnet. Although the real reason was not disclosed, it is evident that the chain change did not meet expectations. Previously, Synthetix deployed on multiple L2s but ultimately reverted to the mainnet due to the complexity added by a multi-chain strategy not yielding the expected synergy.
Moreover, under the current market conditions, the difficulty of "changing fate" through chain changes may be even greater. In earlier bull markets, there were airdrops, narrative dividends, and user enthusiasm, making it easy for projects to chase trends for subsidies. But now, as crypto increasingly merges with traditional finance, many narratives are being initially debunked, and users are becoming more rational.
Public chains themselves also face numerous challenges, as Ethereum undergoes significant layoffs and is frequently met with skepticism. The prediction market project world quickly shifted to Solana, but soon after the launch of Roobinhood Chain, it abandoned Solana in favor of Roobinhood Chain, reflecting the broader plight of traditional public chains.
Compared to project teams trying to change chains to seek rebirth, public chains also face challenges in attracting external "outdated" projects for growth. Today's competition is no longer just about "who can take on more projects," but rather who can truly offer application scenarios and retain users effectively.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
