If the Token economy of Starknet is successful, it will inevitably promote the Token issuance of ZK projects such as zkSync, Scroll, and Linea.
In the past few days, Starknet has launched a massive airdrop campaign targeting a total of 13 million addresses and distributing over 700 million STRK tokens. This airdrop has benefited participants at every level of the ecosystem, which is quite impressive.
So, how should we view the subsequent impact of this Starknet airdrop? Let me share my thoughts:
1) The standards, scale, and coverage of Starknet’s airdrop have always been uncertain, leading to various rumors and speculations. Some even thought they would be left empty-handed. In this context, the sudden announcement that over 13 million addresses and 700 million STRK tokens were eligible for the airdrop came as a pleasant surprise to many.
Indeed, as a popular project that has faced criticism, it is challenging for Starknet to design the airdrop standards. It requires balancing the interests of various parties and avoiding excessive selling pressure caused by the airdrop. Therefore, it is difficult to achieve absolute satisfaction. In the end, Starknet chose to benefit early contributors to ECMP, GitHub open-source developers, and Starknet users on a larger scale.
This is also likely the ultimate choice for projects like zkSync and LayerZero. When the brand influence reaches a certain level, conducting a transparent airdrop becomes the wisest move.
The difference lies in which “empty-handed” participants are filtered out and which direction the projects prefer. For example, Starknet clearly favors developers and early ECMP contributors. Doing business by “empty-handed” tactics may increase risks, lose the input-output cost-effectiveness, and continue to spiral downwards.
2) Previously, I mentioned that Starknet’s airdrop is a “redemption action.” This is because ZK Layer2 projects have been stuck in the narrative stage of technical advantages for a long time, with disappointing results in terms of developer resources, ecosystem projects, TVL, user count, and user experience.
In this situation, offering tokenomics incentives is more about further building and strengthening the ecosystem market. Clearly, both Starknet and zkSync are concerned about this.
Especially when the overall lock-up data of Layer2 has exceeded 25.5 billion, and the top 5 Layer2 projects in terms of brand reputation account for less than 0.2 billion. How can such data instill confidence in secondary market investors?
Subsidizing developers and users with token issuance can quickly make up for this shortcoming. If you don’t believe it, tokenomics has such great power. Just look at Blast, which has already accumulated over 1.8 billion USD TVL without any technological implementation.
Personally, I believe that tokenomics will bring continuous momentum to the ZK ecosystem, especially when STRK is used as a gas fee subsidy in project development and user interaction. There is still a lot of room for imagination.
3) The Cancun upgrade has a much greater impact on the ZK-Rollup market than the OP-Rollup. If the Cancun upgrade is considered a bonus for OP-Rollup, then it is definitely a game-changer for ZK-Rollup.
As I analyzed before, with the same blob block capacity, ZK Layer2 can increase the upper limit of Layer2 TPS and lower the gas amortization cost. In addition to the upcoming gas subsidy war, theoretically, more developers and users will flock to the ZK ecosystem for building. Under normal circumstances, the Cancun upgrade will be a turning point for the ZK ecosystem to surpass OP in an all-round way.
Starknet launching tokenomics before the Cancun upgrade undoubtedly expresses their determination to fight against all odds after the upgrade. If the Token economy of Starknet is successful, it will inevitably promote the Token issuance of zkSync, Scroll, Linea, and other ZK projects.
Moreover, the potential of ZK technology ultimately relies on “applications” to drive it. The market needs a few explosive applications to further prosper the Starknet market ecosystem.
4) The current competition in the Layer2 landscape has become complex and intense. Projects like Arbitrum, Starknet, and zkSync, which have first-mover advantages in terms of technology and brand reputation, are under significant pressure to deliver results. However, the stacking strategy is still based on the traditional VC narrative thinking, which lacks sufficient appeal to attract secondary market investors.
At the same time, a large number of emerging challengers trying to break the Layer2 landscape have emerged. For example, Metis is attempting to surpass others with its decentralized sequencer and native token economy. Manta, ZKFair, Blast, and others are using market, operation, and capital forces to make a comeback.
In addition, modular thinking continues to introduce new variables to the Layer2 market, with projects like Celestia, Altlayer, and Espresso. The current Layer2 market can no longer rely on established advantages such as technical strength and capital background to secure market positions. In the face of successive market shocks and competition, the surviving Layer2 projects will be those with balanced comprehensive strength.
Within a year after the Cancun upgrade, market competition will intensify, and perhaps a new set of “Layer2 Four Heavenly Kings” will emerge.