Author: momo,ChianCatcher
Recently, multiple projects have announced migrations to new public chain ecosystems. Unlike the previous simple chain changes for chasing trends or due to security concerns, this time, project teams are switching chains while also undergoing business transformations, which is equivalent to starting over and restarting their venture in a new location.
However, the crypto community does not seem optimistic about projects switching chains to restart. After Secret Network announced plans to migrate to Arbitrum, its token plummeted over 30% within 24 hours.
Base and Arbitrum Become New Destinations for Veteran Projects to 'Restart'
In this round of public chain migration wave, Base and Arbitrum have become destinations for many established projects seeking new growth opportunities.
Sophon was once an L2 project in the ZKsync ecosystem, aiming to build consumer-grade blockchain infrastructure using zero-knowledge proofs. In June, Sophon announced shutting down its own chain, migrating to Base, and shifting its focus to consumer applications, launching products like Pyre. The official reason given was straightforward: the annual cost of maintaining a blockchain is over $3 million, and after migration, about $3 million in operational costs can be saved annually.
Moonbeam, on the other hand, was an important early EVM-compatible parachain in the Polkadot ecosystem and served as a crucial gateway connecting Ethereum applications within Polkadot. In July, Moonbeam announced the migration of GLMR to Base and adjusted its development direction towards a decentralized AI agent communication and settlement network.
Meanwhile, Secret Network, a star privacy project in the Cosmos ecosystem, announced plans to migrate to Arbitrum, converting SCRT to an ERC-20 token, and exploring future integrations of privacy infrastructure with directions like AI. Following Secret Network's migration announcement, its token plunged 30% within 24 hours, indicating low community optimism.
Notably, these migrating projects share a commonality: they are all public chain networks. After migration, they are all seeking application scenarios and market narratives that combine AI with real-world consumption.
The fact that Arbitrum officially welcomed Secret Network's migration is also worth pondering. At a time when the crypto space temporarily lacks phenomenally innovative tracks and projects seen in past bull markets, attracting mature projects from other chains to join might be a compromise.
It is worth mentioning that Polkadot and Cosmos, once known as the "dual giants of cross-chain," are now experiencing a quiet period, becoming key areas from which projects are migrating.
The crypto community jokes, "Seeing the word 'Polkadot' really feels like a lifetime ago. The last time I heard about it was when Manta left; the next time I hear about it, it's another top ecosystem project leaving." As for Cosmos, projects like Noble, Nillion, and Akash have also adjusted directions recently, with some migrating to Ethereum and others shifting to Solana or independent EVM ecosystems.
Switching Chains for Another Venture: Can It Really Change One's Fate?
While chain migration is not new, for many projects, even with the costs of migrating a technical ecosystem, moving to a public chain ecosystem that better fits technical development needs, has more traffic, or is more secure is a pragmatic choice.
However, switching chains can often only provide a finishing touch; actually "changing one's destiny" might be quite difficult. Cases of lackluster responses after migration, repeated migrations, or even reverting to the original chain are not uncommon. The y00ts NFT project announced a move from Solana to Polygon in late 2022, even securing a grant of several million dollars. But within just a few months, y00ts regretted the decision and, in mid-2023, returned the grant and announced a move from Polygon back to the Ethereum mainnet. While the real reasons weren't disclosed, the chain switch clearly didn't meet expectations. Synthetix, after deploying on multiple L2s, eventually withdrew back to the mainnet because the multi-chain strategy increased complexity without delivering the expected synergy.
Moreover, in the current crypto market environment, the difficulty of "changing one's destiny" through chain migration might be even greater. In the early bull market, there were airdrops, narrative dividends, and user enthusiasm, making it easier for projects to chase trends and receive subsidies. But now, as crypto integrates more into traditional finance, many narratives have been preliminarily disproven, and users have become more rational.
Public chains themselves also face significant challenges. Ethereum is undergoing major layoffs and downsizing, frequently criticized. Soon after the prediction market project world sought refuge with Solana, with the launch of Roobinhood Chain, it abandoned Solana and joined Roobinhood Chain—a microcosm of the overall predicament facing traditional crypto public chains.
Compared to project teams trying to find new life by switching chains, the path for public chains to achieve growth by attracting external "past-their-prime" projects is not easy either. Today's competition is no longer just about "who can take on more projects," but rather about who truly has application scenarios and can genuinely retain users.
