Should Developers Build on Corporate Chains Like Base and Robinhood? Five Key Risks to Consider
Should developers build on enterprise chains like Base and Robinhood? While offering enticing initial benefits like user access, these chains pose significant risks due to the inherent conflict of interest when the operator controls both the platform and a leading on-chain application.
The primary lure is the promise of traffic and user distribution (e.g., through a parent company's app). However, five key risks emerge:
1. **Direct Competition**: The platform can use its exclusive data and positioning to launch competing products against third-party developers, mirroring cases like Amazon and Microsoft.
2. **Wallet Multi-Chain Reality**: Associated wallets (like Coinbase Wallet) must support multiple chains to remain competitive, diluting the promised exclusive traffic advantage for the enterprise chain.
3. **Exclusion by Platform Rivals**: Competing platforms (e.g., Coinbase vs. Robinhood) have no incentive to promote applications built on each other's chains, limiting growth avenues.
4. **Profit Squeeze**: The party controlling the end-user interface holds superior bargaining power and can capture a disproportionate share of value, squeezing developer profits.
5. **Unfulfilled Promises**: Promised traffic support can fail to materialize due to shifting platform priorities or strategic changes.
In contrast, neutral blockchains like Ethereum and Solana avoid these platform risks. To mitigate risks on enterprise chains, developers should consider strategies like securing substantial onboarding grants, obtaining formal commitments (though these have weak historical enforceability), or, most effectively, pursuing a multi-chain deployment strategy while building independent user acquisition channels. Enterprise chains may be useful for initial cold-start user acquisition, but the core goal should be cultivating an independent user base rather than long-term dependence.
Foresight News07/20 11:24
