Osmosis has been one of the most important products in Cosmos, and many of us, myself included, have used it and benefited from it for years.
My concern here is strategic, not emotional.
Under Cosmos Labs’ leadership, the Hub seems to be moving toward a more institutional future. If that is the direction, I’m not convinced absorbing Osmosis is necessary for ATOM’s long-term success, even if it may look attractive in the short term while everyone is searching for a clearer path to value accrual.
To me, these are two very different paths:
-
The Hub tries to become the economic center of Cosmos by owning the main DEX.
-
The Hub becomes the neutral layer that major Cosmos chains, institutions, and governments use to verify cross-chain activity, coordinate between chains, and move large amounts of value across the ecosystem.
I think the second path may be more differentiated, more durable, and more aligned with where Cosmos is going.
Victor recently shared a very interesting proof of concept here:
https://forum.cosmos.network/t/interchain-events-cross-chain-state-verification-on-the-hub/16830
To me, it points toward a future where the Hub creates value by helping large chains coordinate and transact with each other, rather than by trying to own the main app layer itself. I also suspect there are people in this ecosystem who can think much more deeply than I can about how this kind of technical change could translate into real value accrual for ATOM.
That deserves much deeper attention.
My concern is that this proposal may be trying to solve ATOM’s value accrual problem through the most familiar path, not necessarily the best long-term one.
Osmosis may have been the clearest expression of a previous phase of Cosmos. That does not automatically make it the right foundation for the next phase, especially if that next phase is driven by institutions launching Cosmos SDK chains and using the Hub as neutral infrastructure between chains managing much larger pools of capital.
I also think the current price being asked is too high relative to the uncertainty around long-term revenue durability, liquidity retention, and how much value would actually survive a migration to the Hub.
And there is no reason to rush a decision of this size. If this is truly the right long-term move, it should still be the right move once we have more clarity, less NDA opacity, and a better understanding of what Cosmos Labs is building.
This is not a rejection of Osmosis as a product. It is a question of whether the Hub should spend this much treasury capital, governance attention, and strategic focus on owning a beloved app, instead of doubling down on the role that may give ATOM the most durable long-term value.
At this stage, caution feels like the better posture.