Can changing chains and starting a new business really "reverse fate"?

Author: momo, ChianCatcher

Recently, several projects have announced their migration to new public chain ecosystems. Unlike previous instances where projects simply switched chains for hype or security issues, this time the project teams are also undergoing business transformations, essentially starting anew in a different place.

However, the response from the crypto community regarding project chain migrations and new beginnings 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 Docks 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 in 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. The official reason given for launching applications like Pyre was straightforward: maintaining a single blockchain incurs annual costs exceeding $3 million, and after migration, operational costs could be reduced by about $3 million per year.

Moonbeam is an early important EVM-compatible parachain in Polkadot, which 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. After the announcement of the migration, the token fell 30% within 24 hours, indicating a lack of optimism in the crypto community.

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 consumption.

The welcoming of Secret Network's migration by Arbitrum officials is also worth pondering. In a time when it is difficult for the crypto space to see the phenomenal innovative tracks and projects of past bull markets, attracting mature projects from other chains may be a compromise.

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

The crypto community jokes, "Seeing the word Polkadot really gives a feeling of being in a different era. The last time I knew about it was when Manta left; now I hear about it again, and 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, others turning to Solana or independent EVM ecosystems.

Can Changing Chains Really Change Fate?

While changing chains is not a new phenomenon, for many projects, migrating to a different technical ecosystem, even at a cost, is a pragmatic choice if it means moving to a public chain ecosystem that better fits technical development needs, has more traffic, or is more secure.

However, changing chains often only adds a finishing touch; "changing fate" may be quite challenging. There are numerous cases where the response after a chain change was lukewarm, leading to repeated migrations or even a return to the original chain. The y00ts NFT announced its migration from Solana to Polygon at the end of 2022 and received several million dollars in grants, but just a few months later, y00ts regretted it and returned the grant, announcing a migration back to the Ethereum mainnet in mid-2023. Although the real reasons were not disclosed, it was clear that the results of the chain change did not meet expectations. Synthetix previously deployed on multiple L2s but ultimately reverted to the mainnet, as the multi-chain strategy increased complexity without delivering the expected synergies.

Moreover, under the current crypto market environment, the difficulty of "changing fate" through chain migration 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. But now, as crypto increasingly integrates with traditional finance, many narratives have been preliminarily debunked, and users are more rational.

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 predicament of traditional crypto public chains.

Compared to project teams attempting to change chains for rebirth, public chains attracting external "outdated" projects for growth also face a tough road. Today's competition is no longer just about "who can take on more projects," but rather who can truly offer application scenarios and genuinely retain users.