It is a section from 0xresearch newsletter. To read full versions, subscribe.
We call this industry a “blockchain” industry. But people are fed up with many chains.
If you are starting a new series in 2025, expect a lot of doubt on Twitter. This is what all L1 blockchains arise in the last week, have to face it.
- Camp networkAn intellectual property-focused L1, raised $ 30 million on an evaluation of $ 400 million.
- A SVM-based L1, raised $ 14.4 million on an evaluation of $ 140 million.
- MidnA ZK rollup, raised $ 25 million (unknown assessment).
“Another series, why?”
The easiest explanation is “greed”. This is Fabled L1 premium!
View the value performance of the needle recently-What explains $ 6.8 billion-market-cap tokens almost doubled in half a month?
We can all agree that it is not based on basic things. The fees generated on the SUI are on paletry climb compared to its height in the last December.
Perhaps I am cherry-skin, and the needle is an discrepancy. Perhaps the L1 premium is dying, but it is not quite dead yet.
Till then, encouragement to launch the new L1 is still present.
The second (and charitable) clarification is that there are competitive scenes in the founders launching chains on how a series should be adapted.
How should the execution environment be designed? How is Mev caught? What data availability layer is to use? Should there be a standardized oral or gas token?
These things are not trivial. They determine where applications developers go to create or break long -term success of a series.
Expecting the protocol builders to agree is like receiving a hundred people to agree on the menu of a buffet.
It is not all technical, either – social layer ideas. Take for example WickedThe upcoming ZK rollup of @FEDE_INTERN which wants to launch a completely fair like zero VCS, insider allocation, and bitcoin.
The builders have different opinions. They launch their chains. Its as simple as that. This is economic freedom. We should celebrate it.
a solution?
Nevertheless, there may be some consolation in the fact that L1 assessments are already compressed.
Last year was a monad of the highest profile L1. The evaluation was unknown, but it was rumored to be in a unicorn situation As The pitchbook, so that the monad is put in a billion range.
Or consider initia L1, which was Important Last year at $ 350 million.
It is nothing as it was seen in the last cycle.
Conversely when the avalanche allegedly raised On the evaluation of $ 5.25 billion in 2022. Or flow, which raised On the evaluation of $ 7.6 billion.
These numbers are dramatically below for L1S.
Public markets have responded to anorexia for more chains, and private markets are correcting overtime. Free market working,
Data is examined when we zoom out. The bottom chart shows a bottom of a bottom for the total funds raised for blockchain.
For those people “
There is also an underlying desire to see more applications tied to that frustration.
Funny facts: Consumer apps irony is that in 2013-2017 received the lion part of Venture Funding vs. Infrastructure (Joel Monigro Fat protocol thesis Was written in 2016).
Of course, today the flip is done. Is there any reason why the application funding has fallen in favor of VCS?
Take it from 1kx, which Claim Being one of the most active investors in consumer apps.
1kx partner Peter Pan told me: “Applications live and die from their traction and follow it-that is an immediate response loop. While with infrastructure, you can continue to detect money in a pre-launch state based on the current market, and can move forward further.”
Peter said that there are some examples of Pudi Penguin, Axi Infinity, of the Grid, Rodio and Layer 3 apps that have completed that feedback loop, said Peter.
Application revenue is also collectively extracting the revenue of the underlying protocol (measured by RV) on most series today.
If free markets worked to correct the L1 overvilitation, perhaps may also be for reverse application funding.
Get news in your inbox. Explore blockwork newsletters:
