Taking ARCx Cross-Chain

Though I’m pretty new around here, I have been paying attention to this project for quite a while. I stumbled upon the founder’s YouTube channel called DeFi weekly.

Go subscribe if you haven’t to Kerman’s YT channel!

Now moving on to the topic at hand: moving to a second chain. I want to first draw on a recent forum topic which is doing a Token Split. It was discussed that this would increase accessibility for investors. While there might not be agreement on that piece, I want to focus on investor accessibility, as it has prevented me from using the platform personally.

Users are a key way to get growth, and by moving to a new chain, we can access a whole host of new users with new partnerships and new synergy.

Recently, we have seen AAVE, basically the largest DeFi project, do this, making their move to MATIC network (everyone still calls it MATIC even though it’s Polygon now…). To me, this caused a huge rupture and potential for others to follow suit.

I’m not saying it has to be MATIC, but look if ARCx can pair really well with a lending platform like an AAVE and collaborate with more DeFi projects over there, I think it would certainly create a unique offering.

We all know that minting stablecoins, which ARCx has some unique features in this area, alone is not enough to get users on the platform and have that first mover advantage.

However, with AAVE setting up shop on MATIC it creates a lot of potential for a DeFi ecosystem to develop which will be friendly toward ARCx. AAVE is going to grab headlines and eyeballs. People will start to look to MATIC for the next DeFi ecosystem. That is my analysis anyway.

I do believe strongly in the network effect.

I would like to hear the community’s take on a potential move to MATIC. Yes I know of a project that can bridge from ETH to MATIC, but let’s not go there just yet. Enjoy the discussion and cheers.

2 Likes

Thanks for taking the time for such a thoughtful, detailed reply and that you’re a DeFi Weekly fan! I’m personally a cross-chain believer and completely agree with all of your points mentioned above.

In terms of execution, right now our focus is to get v3 nailed and getting the narrative around ARCx firm. Once we’ve done that exploring other nation states such as Polygon, BSC etc are all very valid dicsussions.

As part of the v3 build we’re ensuring that we can easily port the front-end/contracts to other chains so the option is there, it’s just a matter of when, not if :slight_smile:

Hope this provides some clarity and sound reasoning!

4 Likes

Polygon is an absolute dream to use. I would suggest reaching out to the Comethswap or Quickswap teams to find out if we could incentivize a pool. Getting ARCX as collateral on Aave’s Polygon market would be excellent too, but would require some effort to get through their governance.

There will be a significant advantage for those protocols who make the move to Polygon first…I wrote about this here:

1 Like

I’m sure there are other DEXs on Polygon, but those are the two I’ve used. They are Uniswap clones on layer 2 (cheap and fast as hell)

1 Like

With zksync, optimism, and starkware about to release genuine L2s by August, is it worth fragmenting our liquidity onto a side chain for ~3 months? (MATIC or xDAI etc operate as side chains, as I understand it)

I know MATIC operates a plasma L2 as well, but I don’t know what their roadmap is for sidechain → L2

What is the main benefit of a side chain? Cheaper fees which bring in smaller wallets? If so, I’d rather see an ARCx rewarded for gas fees on protocol, similar to BAL for gas

If the benefit, instead, is cheaper deployment/devops, I’d prefer a true multichain initiative to integrate FTM or SOL, the two cheapest and fastest growing in my opinion.

If, as implied by OP, the benefit of MATIC specifically is to jump on bandwagon with other DeFi protocols, maybe we should wait to see where others land (what will Compound integrate with?)… If there’s a 3 month timeline to other L2s like zksync’s zkporter, I think we should wait at least one more month (end of May) to throw our chips in.

Appreciate the thread, I just think we need to be more clear about intentions and terminology ‘multichain’ vs ‘sidechain’ vs ‘L2’

1 Like

As long as it’s EVM compatible we should be good to go with deploying our tech onto other chains. I think we’re all super switched on here with the different options but will need to adapt based on where we are in the coming weeks/months :slight_smile:

Getting listed on Pancakeswap would do a lot for the token price action and utility in the current state. There’s not really a lot of time required here just apply for multichain bridge and then apply for pancake.