Solana Developers Accuse Base of Diverting Capital and Lack of Collaboration in 2025

• What Sparked the Solana-Base Conflict?
• Is the Bridge Really Bidirectional?
• Who Stands to Gain More?
• FAQs: Solana vs. Base Bridge Controversy

The crypto world is buzzing with the latest clash between solana and Base, as tensions escalate over Base's newly launched bridge to Solana. What started as a rivalry has now turned into a full-blown debate about capital flows, ecosystem alignment, and whether Base is playing fair. Here's the inside scoop on why Solana builders are calling foul and what this means for both blockchains.

What Sparked the Solana-Base Conflict?

The drama began in September 2025 when Aerodrome co-founder Alex Cutler boasted at Basecamp that Base would "revolutionize Solana." This caught the attention of Solana advocates like Mert Mumtaz (CEO of Helius Labs), but the real fireworks started when Base launched its Solana bridge on December 4, 2025. The bridge, built using Chainlink's CCIP infrastructure and Coinbase's tech stack, allows asset transfers between Base and Solana—with early integrations including Zora, Aerodrome, and other Base-native apps.

Jesse Pollak, a key figure at Base, framed the bridge as "bidirectional pragmatism," but Solana builders weren't buying it. Vibhu Norby (founder of DRiP) fired back on X: "These aren't partners; if they could, Solana wouldn't exist." The criticism? That Base deliberately bypassed Solana Foundation for launch coordination and is essentially running a "vampire attack" to siphon value from SOL's ecosystem without reciprocating.

Is the Bridge Really Bidirectional?

Pollak insists the bridge benefits both chains by granting mutual access to each other's economies. He claims Base reached out to Solana teams as early as May 2025, though Norby and others counter that launching without Solana Foundation's involvement suggests ulterior motives. Akshay BD from Superteam Solana put it bluntly: "Calling it bidirectional doesn’t make it so. This is a one-way capital import dressed as infrastructure."

Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko ("Toly") weighed in skeptically: "Migrate Base apps to Solana if you want real alignment. Otherwise, this is nonsense." His concern? That Base could turn Solana into a "feeder chain" for Base DeFi—where SOL's meme coin traders and NFT speculators generate activity, but fees and execution value stay locked on Base.

Who Stands to Gain More?

Here’s the breakdown:

• Base's advantages: Immediate access to Solana's retail-friendly ecosystem (think: meme coins, NFTs) and positioning as a "neutral" interoperability layer.
• Solana's risks: If the bridge primarily funnels SOL assets into Base without driving developers or liquidity back to Solana, it could erode SOL's long-term value capture.

Pollak argues collaboration and competition can coexist, pointing to meme projects like Trencher and Chillhouse that opted to integrate. But with heavyweights like Toly and Norby unconvinced, this bridge might remain a battleground well into 2026.

FAQs: Solana vs. Base Bridge Controversy

Why are Solana developers upset with Base?

Solana builders accuse Base of launching its Solana bridge without proper coordination with Solana Foundation, calling it a veiled attempt to divert capital from SOL’s ecosystem to Base’s.

What does Base say about the criticism?

Base’s Jesse Pollak claims the bridge is bidirectional and that Solana teams were contacted during development. He acknowledges communication missteps but denies any "conspiracy" to harm Solana.

Could this bridge hurt Solana’s ecosystem?

If the bridge primarily imports SOL assets without reciprocating value (e.g., fees, developer activity), Solana risks becoming a "feeder chain" for Base. However, bidirectional flows could benefit both networks.