This is an excerpt from the latest Lightspeed newsletter. To access the full editions, consider subscribing.
Corporate blockchain initiatives are making headlines.
Recent announcements revealed that both Stripe, a major payments company, and Circle, a popular stablecoin provider, are venturing into developing their own layer-1 blockchains. While this move could potentially pose a competitive threat to existing L1 blockchains, it particularly challenges Solana’s vision of consolidating all operations into a single computer.
Named Tempo and Arc respectively, Stripe and Circle’s chains are set to be EVM-based, a development that some Ethereum proponents view as favorable for the Ethereum ecosystem. However, the implications for ETH the asset seem limited to gas fees, especially since Circle plans to utilize USDC for transaction fees. Additionally, it is unlikely that Stripe will willingly incur high Ethereum gas fees. Furthermore, the emergence of these new chains could jeopardize Ethereum’s dominant position as the go-to blockchain for stablecoins.
While initiatives like Robinhood’s layer-2 solution may offer some support for ETH the asset, the argument that EVM-based L1 blockchains are inherently bullish for Ethereum appears dubious.
If Tempo or Arc gain significant traction, it could spell trouble for Solana, which has missed out on attracting major fintech companies to its platform in this market cycle.
According to mteam, the anonymous co-founder of Spire Labs, “The emergence of large corporations launching their own L1 blockchains signifies a departure from the L2 thesis, but it is even more detrimental to the Solana thesis.”
Expanding on this point, mteam stated, “The Solana thesis revolves around the idea that applications will prefer a shared state layer and opt not to launch independent chains unless absolutely necessary. The importance of either an L1 or L2 premium for apps, infrastructure, or institutions suggests that the Solana thesis is less accurate compared to Ethereum’s L2 thesis.”
In essence, if major companies opt to create their own blockchains rather than building on Solana, it suggests that Ethereum’s L2 thesis, which anticipates most blockchain activities occurring on layer-2 solutions settling to Ethereum, holds more validity than the Solana thesis.