Been thinking about Plasma's plan to expand beyond their own chain and something doesn't add up
The stated strategy:
make Plasma available cross-chain to reach more users, increase adoption, expand the ecosystem
sounds logical. capture value wherever users are, not just on one chain
but here's the problem:
if XPL works just as well on Base or Ethereum as it does on Plasma's native chain, why would anyone use Plasma's chain at all?
you're basically admitting your L1 isn't compelling enough on its own
cOmpare to successful L1s:
SOLANA keeps everything on Solana because the experience is better there
Ethereum is Ethereum - everything important happens on mainnet
even Polygon eventually realized being "Ethereum's sidechain" was limiting
the value capture question:
if I can use XPL functionality on Base (where I already am), why would I bridge to Plasma chain?
if developers can build on Base with XPL features, why would they deploy on Plasma?
if users never touch the actual Plasma chain, what's the point of the L1?
Maybe cross-chain is necessary:
chains that refuse to go cross-chain get isolated and die
being available everywhere might be survival, not strategy
but then you're basically a token/protocol, not an L1
Or maybe I'm wrong:
perhaps the native chain has advantages that matter (lower fees, better integration)
perhaps most usage will still happen on Plasma even if cross-chain exists
perhaps being on Base is just for discovery, not primary usage
honest review:
feels like they're trying to have it both ways - be an L1 but also be everywhere
history suggests that rarely works. either you're committed to your chain or you're a cross-chain protocol
don't know which Plasma actually is yet
