---
# System prepended metadata

title: 'Some info ahead of CTP for community on what is being / has been discussed:'

---

# Some info ahead of CTP for community on what is being / has been discussed:

Background from @Bobruisk:

- Temple reports use cash accounting - i.e. revenue and expenses are reported at the moment tokens move, not when revenue is generated or expenses occur.

- No payments were made in 2021 so 2021/3 - 2022/1 expenses are reported as 2022 expenses over-stating costs run-rate (2x?)

- All equity compensation (including founder reverse-vested equity) is treated as cash expenses leading to further over-stating of operating expenses (further 2x?)

- "Dev expenses"  are reported when money is moved from the "TeamPayment" contract. Note that this leads to spiky short-term end-of-epoch expenses and under-states expenses long-term since not all tokens get claimed right away and they do not get claimed instantly (for a variety of reasons - vesting, people choosing not to claim etc)

- Token exchange ratio gains/losses are reported when they occur (i.e. CVX price going down decreases farming revenue when it occurs)

- Combined these accounting choices lead to dramatic (5x)? over-stating of expenses and under-reporting of income on "naive run-rate" basis

Proposals - details are in logic enclave:

A) Re-classify Master tokens as reverse vesting of founder equity 
B) Re-state 2021/2022 expenses to better match when expenses occurred and when they are reported
C) Change expense reporting to better match time periods on accrued basis 


# Community Questions for CTP21


1.  We are now one month into the “three month” period for deciding if “success parameters “ have been met. Can I ask the team how close they feel they are meeting such “targets” after a third of the allocated time? - @foot licker flicker 

- re Point 1 - worth adding that a number of the temple team are claiming vaults are a success e.g. dariox/bob. Given the significance of the issue, and the representations being made (by what seems like senior team members) - there needs to be official communication provided on this as well as timelines otherwise there is no end in sight for this issue. 

2. Could we get clear communication of all the key success metrics asap (should have be done before launching vaults) - @Julz2 

3.  Can we have borrowing facility against temple through other protocol like FEI or Inverse or any other , bcoz the way things going in templedao it will take 6 month to build one - @lord Og 

4.  Bob mentioned a slowly rising IV / buyback instead of staying at 65c. Can we learn more details about this and how soon it’ll be implemented. - @DCF GOD

5.  Can we have a budget of team planned expenses. Is temple planning on using the entirety of the team pool? When will temple start reducing staff and managing costs? Temple has already built infrastructure of vaults, yet expenses are still so high. When does temple plan to get to a stage where RFV is not being drained i.e. yield net of team costs is not resulting in a net dilution of holder value. At the moment yield is paid out 100% and team payments are draining rfv. This is not a sustainable model (other protocols pay out yield net of expenses where as temple is paying gross yield) - @Julz2

6.  Could we get clarity on mechanism that will be adopted to deliver holder value i.e. increasing defend gradually, Paying out part of RFV or full RFV etc and definite timelines here post the 3 mth window of when such a process could commence. - @Julz2 

7. Is there a contingency plan in place in the event of Frax de-pegging? - @suss

8. APY is generally understood to be the annual percentage increase in value for an investment. The vaults show an APY of 10%, but this figure is not the real APY, which should include the decrease in treasury value due to expenses over the same time period. In order to increase transparency, would the team please display both a gross APY, and an estimated net APY? - @yieldchad

9. Would the team please start to pay for team expenses in FRAX rather than Temple so as to better reward long term holders? $1 worth of Temple from the treasury at current market prices costs long term holders more than $1 worth of FRAX from the treasury - @yieldchad

10. wen $stax, final tokenomics, is there any prefarm / bonus for early tvl that trusts and uses the product early, when max lock, are we max bribing yet? @DCF GOD

11. Can we get clarity on how Temple is looking to use STAX on a longer timeframe? To my knowledge Temple was not planning to put a large portion of liquidity into STAX locked LP (instead we are defending peg), so we wouldn't be earning STAX on the majority of our LP position which seems to put us in a bad spot. Assuming STAX is governance token it seems like something we would want to accumulate to push FXS emissions towards our LP. @Strife 

12. historically I’ve always found demax to have good takes and seems to have good answers on CTP. General chat has turned to a borderline clusterfuck so I’m curious if leadership reads it - if so could you chime in maybe once per day yourself w clear answers for people. Think it would go a long way and only take 30m / d @DCF GOD

13. the temple medium said that the revenue share to the vaults comes from liquidating different farmed tokens into temple.) it says "To accomplish this, all base revenue is first liquidated to $FRAX and $TEMPLE tokens are then market bought from the Temple AMM and subsequently distributed to stakers.". my question is where are those transactions for the first vault? as in, where are the transactions liquidating farmed tokens and buying temple from the amm? which wallet should we be following to ensure that this is happening?
