The story of Eclipse Chain is a striking case study in how even the best-funded modular rollup projects can falter when vision, execution, and community trust fall out of alignment. In early 2024, Eclipse Labs made headlines by raising a staggering $65 million to build a next-generation Ethereum Layer 2 solution powered by the Solana Virtual Machine (SVM). Yet, only months after its highly anticipated $ES token airdrop, Eclipse finds itself at the center of controversy: battered by a 21% price drop within hours of launch, accusations of unfair allocation, and an exodus of both users and liquidity. What went wrong?
From Record Funding to Rapid Fallout
With $65 million in funding – including a $50 million Series A led by top-tier VCs in March 2024 – expectations for Eclipse were sky-high. The project promised to bridge Ethereum’s security with Solana’s high-throughput execution, aiming to capture the modular rollup narrative just as market optimism surged around scalable blockchain infrastructure.
But cracks began to show almost immediately after launch. The initial surge in on-chain activity was largely incentive-driven: users flocked for the promise of generous airdrops and short-term yield. Metrics like gas payments, user deposits, and Total Value Locked (TVL) soared between December 2024 and March 2025 – only to reverse sharply as incentives waned. By June 2025, network fees had plummeted below $1 ETH per day, reflecting a collapse in organic demand.
Leadership Crisis Shakes Investor Confidence
No analysis of Eclipse’s troubles would be complete without addressing its leadership debacle. In May 2024, founder Neel Somani faced serious allegations of sexual harassment that prompted swift public condemnation from lead investor Hack VC. With Somani’s resignation and Vijay Chetty stepping up as CEO, the project was thrust into crisis mode just as it needed stability most.
This abrupt transition eroded not just internal morale but also investor confidence – an effect soon reflected in token markets. The ES token selloff accelerated following these events, compounding losses from already dissatisfied early adopters who felt shortchanged by the airdrop allocation.
Ecosystem Stagnation: Where Did All the Builders Go?
Eclipse’s troubles run deeper than price charts or PR disasters. At its core lies an ecosystem that never achieved critical mass. Despite ample capital and technical ambition, DeFi apps on Eclipse remained small and illiquid; only three protocols ever surpassed $2 million TVL while most languished below $500,000. Over one month in Q2 2025 alone, nearly every major protocol suffered double-digit TVL declines – clear evidence that developers were not sticking around once incentives dried up.
The lack of sticky user engagement points to broader questions about product-market fit for modular rollups chasing ephemeral liquidity instead of nurturing genuine developer communities or unique use cases.
The Eclipse saga also exposes the fragility of tokenomics when community trust is lost. The $ES token’s 21% plunge within hours of the airdrop wasn’t just a reaction to market volatility – it was an indictment of perceived unfairness in allocation and a lack of transparency. Across forums, users voiced frustration that their early support or ecosystem contributions were not adequately recognized, fueling a narrative that Eclipse’s rewards structure favored insiders over builders and genuine users.
These grievances were compounded by the broader context of 2025’s crypto market, where users have come to expect more from projects than just speculative incentives. The rise and fall of Eclipse became a cautionary tale for modular rollup teams: if your airdrop is seen as extractive or your tokenomics as opaque, you risk alienating precisely the community you need to bootstrap real usage.
Organizational Upheaval and Strategic Pivots
By mid-2025, Eclipse Labs faced existential questions. The 65% workforce reduction and pivot toward user-facing products signaled both desperation and adaptation. On one hand, these moves reflected an industry-wide recognition that sustainable rollups must deliver tangible end-user value. On the other, such drastic cuts inevitably bled technical talent and institutional memory – critical assets for any ambitious Layer 2 protocol.
The market responded accordingly: ES tokens sold off another 15% in the aftermath, as investors questioned whether Eclipse could recover its innovation edge or simply become another casualty in an increasingly competitive modular landscape.
Lessons for Modular Rollup Builders
The Eclipse Chain controversy is more than just a headline – it’s a mirror reflecting the challenges facing all modular rollup projects in late 2025. Vision alone isn’t enough; execution must be flawless across leadership, technical delivery, community engagement, and incentive design. When even $65 million can’t buy sustained momentum or trust, it’s clear that capital is necessary but not sufficient for success.
For developers exploring Celestia, Conduit, or other frameworks, Eclipse offers several hard-won lessons:
- Prioritize transparent tokenomics: Align incentives with long-term contributors rather than short-term speculators.
- Nurture authentic developer communities: Incentives can spark interest but only genuine engagement keeps builders around after the initial rush.
- Build organizational resilience: Leadership turmoil or mass layoffs can destabilize even technically sound projects.
- Focus on product-market fit: Sustainable growth comes from solving real problems for users – not just chasing TVL spikes.
The road ahead for Eclipse remains uncertain. With on-chain activity languishing below $1 ETH per day and ecosystem liquidity draining out, recovery will require not only technical fixes but also a fundamental rebuilding of trust with both developers and users. As new projects enter the modular rollup arena armed with lessons from Eclipse’s missteps, one thing is clear: in this new era of blockchain infrastructure, reputation is as valuable as code – and far harder to restore once lost.
About the Author
