crud If I understand this proposal (and the previous proposal regarding a TOKE swap) correctly, the OHM swapped will be used to feed the reactor. It will not be staked into sOHM so your fear of different yield is wrong.
This OHM will generate whatever yield LPing does for the Tokemak protocol.
If u don't try, u don't learn..
LFG! Tokemak is about a big brained as you can get, only seconded by OHM big brains. This is a smart move and honestly $3mm is not enough, but a good start!
Owning Toke is a great way for us to support our partners, and thus a great strategic asset to own. For.
I like this in the sense that we can/should do more to ally ourselves with the established and burgeoning entities of our/this economic world changing paradigm shaking endeavor. Together we are stronger and this fits the actions of a diversified treasury. Works for me.
JaLa I am particularly interested in this move in terms of voting power and leverage in Tokemak's governance.
As @crud pointed out, this move is less financially motivated. Electing $TOKE at a 54% APR over OHM staked at multiples higher seems to forfeit yield revenue.
This statement is paramount and explains the motivation:
JaLa utilize staked TOKE to vote on CORE events and to direct OHM liquidity once live.
This ability to point liquidity from Tokemak to OHM can be worth much more than $3MM alone in fees.
How do you decide this amount? Is this data based, or arbitrary, and could it be increased to have greater influence in Tokemak votes?
Are they going to keep their ohm or dump it? We need this information too.
meditator one would assume they'd stake it to a degree and then use x yield as needed to sell on accation and perhaps market buy toke hard to say - clarification would been nice
But again it should be pointed out DAO ohm is NOT staked - so utilizing it to gain governance power and some yield pretty sweet yield
other side of this is like -- I get why the DAO doesn't stake ohm itself.. as sohm but whats holding us from capturing some of the toke yield that we'd want to hodl anyway for voting powers? it's at 200% APR as of this writing for the ohm reactor?
HoweFai the OHM swapped will be used to feed the reactor. It will not be staked into sOHM
if that is correct I can say that it makes sense but I am not really sure if this is the case. Some more clarification maybe?
Baitfish We're holding a growing stack of almost 1mil OHM that needs to be put into good use slowly overtime. DAO swaps are the lowest hanging fruit to get started.
I agree with that as well but atm. we can use that ohm to feed the reactor to earn 200% APY (will go down as we put more in the reactor). I also understand that DAO swaps are a thing we need to be thinking more about but my problem is why do it with the same DAO for the second time? doesn't this give too much power to a single DAO 
fig This ability to point liquidity from Tokemak to OHM can be worth much more than $3MM alone in fees.
Yes the liquidity is really beneficial for us as well as our partners I have no questions about the opportunity and flexibility it gives. But as said before these are all hypothetical points since there is currently no liquidity being directed and no fees being earned, once protocol is activated, time will tell if that is actually the case…
fig How do you decide this amount? Is this data based, or arbitrary, and could it be increased to have greater influence in Tokemak votes?
Good points
Churchee But again it should be pointed out DAO ohm is NOT staked - so utilizing it to gain governance power and some yield pretty sweet yield
true but another way of looking at this is that OHM is currently counted as "circulating supply" or "unstaked". in the case that tokemak stakes it, it will reduce the yields of everyone else who is staking meaning we all will share a percentage of our future gov. power with tokemak do we really want that?…
Churchee whats holding us from capturing some of the toke yield that we'd want to hodl anyway for voting powers?
yes
so in general my question is: is there a better way to get more $TOKE without giving significant governance power to another protocol for second time… because so far it feels like it is more beneficial for tokemak than for us.
The $3M amount is based on the amount the Tokemak team agreed to at this point. We believe that TOKE is an important strategic asset as it will allow us to direct liquidity toward ohm as well as many of our partners in the future. The latter could be an integral part of the value prop for a comprehensive liquidity machine (OP, Launchpad, etc.).
Since our DAO OHM is not staked, this allows us to unlock value and earn yield on assets that would otherwise be idle. Tokemak will stake the OHM it receives, but this will only serve to increase the reserve of our reactor and therefore increase the amount of liquidity that can be directed to our pools.
These are fair points but i would say that the two DAOs are highly aligned and the amount of OHM going to Tokemak is not problematic in my mind from a governance perspective. In terms of dilution, the amount swapped will be less than ,1% of circulating supply and will have a de minimis impact on staking yields. That impact will be far outweighed by increasing the liquidity in our reactor 2x while giving us 2x voting and liquidity directing power on the tokemak platform.
[unknown] I see your point of view, but what Crud says is and should be concerning. We are allowing Toke to stake the 3 mill in OHMs at 7k apy, we stake 3 mill ohm in toke for 1-200%. I think crud was saying it benefits TOKE more than ourselves ( which he is correct on ), OHM makes a small return on the TOKE yield that we did not have before. And the larger point how many lopsided deals do we continue to go into that do not make the best of sense. We have funded TOKE in the past, maybe we should let that play out and look elsewhere for something that is equally beneficial to all parties involved.
