Rari Capital Community Call ft. Carson Cook


Carson Cook (Liquidity Wizard) jams with the team at Rari Capital to discuss how the two projects can work together.

Notes from the call:


  • token level
  • e.g. not specific pairs
  • users deposit ASSET
  • earn TOKE
  • single-sided
  • liquidity power based on number of TOKE you control
  • shrimps and whales have same power-per-TOKE
  • reactor pulls equal USD value from ETH/OTHERSIDE pool

IL Protection

  • IL protection is paid via underlying
  • system never triggers market selling or buying
  • sidelined reserve (not deployed as liquidity) just for the purpose of IL
  • TOKE ‘slashing’ local to specific reactor
  • never sold
  • TOKE paid back to reserve
  • e.g. if ASSET is underwater, pull from reserve
  • multiple levels of backstop
  • LPs always get back 1:1 single-sided asset


  • Tokemak deployed to v2
  • chatted with Visor
  • good lego
  • add Uni v3 support via Visor

Launch Integrations

  • Uni v2, Sushi, Balancer, 0x, later add Uni v3 via Visor

Could TOKE Wars pump bags?

  • free market will decide
  • “probably not”
  • the more TOKE a DAO has, the more power they have to direct their liquidity
  • likely DAOs will have a dedicated LD
  • 20 DAOs in contact


  • who decides which reactor to launch?
  • proxy-to-community control
  • long term, anyone can request reactor, e.g. creating pools on sushi
  • 30-35 projects as candidates
  • TOKE holders will vote for reactor
  • week long game to vote-in first reactors
  • top 5 will launch
  • within a month, launch more
  • establish reserve to turn on reactor
  • needs gov votes
  • if a winning reactor backs out, go to no. 6

NFT Tokens

  • tNFT tokens?
  • mid-term goals yes
  • any-to-any protocol
  • could have single NFT pools


  • direct swaps OTC TOKE->ASSET
  • another model: if neither party wants to diversify
  • 2-way lending agreement
  • lend TOKE, lend ASSET
  • put Fuse pools between DAO and Tokemak
  • both can borrow corresponding assets
  • doesn’t need partnerships/agreements
  • permission-less, offline (no comms between parties)


  • PCA
  • rewards pay out in TOKE
  • internalizing revenue
  • at first, inflationary; quickly stop being inflationary
  • have a large enough reserve that the protocol itself is the liquidity
  • replace TOKE emissions with PCA-generated revenue/fees
  • no longer need 3rd party LPs
  • PCA is large enough that Tokemak has enough liquidity to handle any needs within DeFi
  • at the beginning, TOKE value is derived from ability to direct liquidity
  • post singularity, TOKE value is also backed by PCA, DeFi-weighted index
  • evolve from TOKE emissions to siphon from PCA revenue
  • LPs are lenders
  • get to the point where you don’t rely on 3rd party lenders (LPs)
  • link in other protocols, DAOs, with reserves
  • achieve singularity faster than expected


  • addressable market: Every token, all of DeFi
  • move upstream, market is even bigger
  • e.g. Fuse -> Tokemak integration allows mint tokens earlier than usual


  • one of first reactors
  • if voted in, Rari community will vote to move liquidity to from Sushi distributor to Tokemak

Will LDs who find better rewards be rewarded more?

  • each reactor will have its own APR based on supply/demand
  • LDs don’t get rewarded extra, everyone in reactor is even
  • profit is a side effect

Three Stages of Singularity

  • at beginning, you incentivize LPs by paying in TOKE
  • lower emissions as bootstraps
  • (APR will be attractive for a while)
  • after singularity, the rewards are lowered to LPs
  • (vote?) to decide to payout fee revenue vs. adding to PCA
  • eventually you don't need external LPs
  • spreads turn to 0 once you don't need LPs
  • liquidity turns into bandwidth
  • “broadband moment”
  • move liquidity around at “speed of light”
Share twitter/ facebook/ copy link
Success! Your email is updated.
Your link has expired
Success! Check your email for magic link to sign-in.