Authors: momo, ChianCatcher
Recently, several projects have successively announced migrations to new public chain ecosystems. Unlike the previous chain-switching driven by hype or simple security reasons, this time project teams are also undergoing business pivots alongside the migration, essentially restarting their ventures in a new environment.
However, the crypto community doesn't seem optimistic about projects switching chains to re-entrepreneur. After Secret Network announced plans to migrate to Arbitrum, its token plunged over 30% within 24 hours.
Base and Arbitrum Become New Docking Ports for Established Projects to "Re-entrepreneur"
In this wave of public chain migration, Base and Arbitrum have become destinations for many established projects seeking new growth opportunities.
Sophon was once an L2 project within the ZKsync ecosystem, aiming to build consumer-grade blockchain infrastructure using zero-knowledge proofs. In June, Sophon announced the shutdown of its own chain, migration to Base, and a strategic shift towards consumer applications, launching Pyre among others. The official reason was straightforward: maintaining a blockchain costs over $3 million annually; migration could cut roughly $3 million in operational costs each year.
Moonbeam was an early and important EVM-compatible parachain in Polkadot, serving as a key gateway connecting Ethereum applications to the Polkadot ecosystem. In July, Moonbeam announced the migration of GLMR to Base, adjusting its development direction towards a decentralized AI agent communication and settlement network.
On the other hand, Secret Network, a prominent privacy project in the Cosmos ecosystem, announced plans to migrate to Arbitrum, converting SCRT to an ERC-20 token, and exploring the integration of privacy infrastructure with AI and other directions. Following Secret Network's announcement, its token plummeted 30% within 24 hours, reflecting the crypto community's pessimism.
It's worth noting that these migrating projects share a commonality: they were all public chain networks. Post-migration, they are all seeking application scenarios and market narratives that combine AI with real-world consumption.
Arbitrum's official welcome of Secret Network's migration is also noteworthy. With the crypto space currently lacking the phenomenally innovative tracks and projects seen in previous bull markets, attracting mature projects from other chains might be a pragmatic move.
Furthermore, Polkadot and Cosmos, once dubbed the "Cross-Chain Duo," have fallen silent, becoming key sources for project emigration.
The crypto community jests, "Seeing the word Polkadot really feels like a lifetime ago. The last time I heard about it was with Manta's departure; the next time I hear about it, it's another top project leaving." Regarding Cosmos, projects like Noble, Nillion, and Akash have previously adjusted their directions, some migrating to Ethereum, others turning to Solana or independent EVM ecosystems.
Can Switching Chains to Re-entrepreneur Really Change One's Destiny?
Chain-switching isn't new. For many projects, even with the costs of technical ecosystem migration, moving to a chain better suited for technical development needs, with more ecosystem traffic or greater security, is a pragmatic choice.
However, chain-switching often serves best as the icing on the cake; truly "changing one's destiny" is likely much more difficult. Cases of projects switching chains with lackluster results, repeatedly migrating, or even returning to their original chains are not rare. In late 2022, the y00ts NFT project announced a move from Solana to Polygon, even securing a multi-million dollar grant. Yet, within just a few months, y00ts regretted the decision, returned the grant in mid-2023, and announced migration from Polygon back to the Ethereum mainnet. While the real reason wasn't disclosed, the switch clearly didn't meet expectations. Synthetix deployed across multiple L2s before ultimately pulling back to the mainnet, as the multi-chain strategy increased complexity without delivering the anticipated synergy.
Moreover, in the current crypto market environment, the difficulty of "changing one's destiny" through a chain switch might be greater. In early bull markets, there were airdrops, narrative dividends, and user enthusiasm, making it easier for projects to chase hype and secure subsidies. But now, as crypto increasingly integrates with traditional finance and several narratives have been preliminarily disproven, users have become more rational.
Public chains themselves face significant challenges. Ethereum has undergone large-scale layoffs and downsizing, frequently facing bearish sentiment. Shortly after the prediction market project world defected to Solana, it abandoned Solana for the newly launched Roobinhood Chain upon its launch, a microcosm of the challenges facing traditional crypto public chains.
Compared to project teams trying to find a new lease on life by switching chains, the path for public chains to achieve growth by attracting external "has-been" projects is not smooth either. Today's competition is no longer just about "who can take on more projects," but about who genuinely has application scenarios and can truly retain users.
