Update: the numbers, and one change to the denominator
Thanks for the comments so far. Here is what was asked for.
The measurement is done. Each BAL redeems against $0.1579 of treasury at today’s prices, above the $0.1487 that BIP-919 priced the buyback at in April. @0xMaha, this is the figure you asked for.
Everything below is read on-chain on 18 September, priced at DefiLlama at 14:00 UTC. It is my own measurement, not an audited figure: the method and every address are here, so anyone can check it, and the opening snapshot is audited before round one.
| Distributable base, non-BAL | $9,959,416 |
| Redeemable BAL | 63,068,821 |
| Per BAL | $0.1579 |
This is already net of the winddown budget, which lives in the OpCo Safe and sits outside the base. Today’s value, not a promise: every line is re-measured at the opening snapshot at the end of May 2027.
Where it sits
| Treasury Safe (kpk) | $9,127,957 |
| v3 buffers, owned by the Treasury Safe | $397,709 |
| Innovation Fund | $155,692 |
| MerkleRedeem LDO (BIP-922) | $137,709 |
| BizDev | $74,196 |
| Onchain Ltd | $66,152 |
The MerkleRedeem LDO and BizDev figures are under review until 30 September and may move.
Two things sit outside that base and can add to it. The OpCo Safe holds $763,010 and is the operating account: it carries September and October under BIP-918 and then the winddown budget, with the residual returning to holders. And the treasury keeps earning until round one.
One change: the denominator
The proposal says the denominator is BIP-919’s: total supply minus the treasury and the two BLabs safes. Measured properly, that leaves DAO-held BAL in other safes redeeming against the DAO’s own treasury.
So it becomes total supply minus all BAL held by the DAO and its entities, minus the BAL behind the Tetu permalock, which can never be withdrawn, plus the BAL paid from the treasury to tetuBAL holders, which does redeem. About 9.3M BAL does not redeem, and the effect is to raise the value per BAL. I am flagging it as a change rather than folding it into the arithmetic.
One conditional line: the 600,000 BAL on loan to Amber under BIP-664 is excluded because it returns before round one. If it has not returned by the snapshot, it is circulating and redeems.
On converting to stables
@0xDanko is right that a claim across a dozen tokens is expensive for the holder and to audit. My inclination is to keep the distribution as it is written, in kind. Approving a conversion does not fix when it happens, and somebody would still have to choose the moments to sell over months, with no mandate on price. Distributing what is there keeps that decision out of the winddown.
What the proposal will say either way is consolidate for cost. Before round one the smaller and less liquid positions are consolidated so the claim is around six tokens; round two and the final sweep are consolidated where that reduces the cost of distributing them.
This one is worth hearing from holders before the vote. @0xMaha, @Fernando, it affects you more than most.
On holders who do not follow governance
@Mr_Po is right that this matters. From this post to the close of round one is fourteen months, six of them with the claim open, announced on the forum, on X, in the interface and directly to partners, when it opens and again before it closes.
There is a window at all because an open ended claim means a live contract and a live multisig, indefinitely, which is the opposite of a protocol that depends on no one. And the treasury share that goes unredeemed is not kept by the DAO or set aside for anyone. It is distributed in round two to whoever redeemed in round one, on the same pro rata basis, me and any contributor who holds BAL included.
Three things I have not covered here and will answer properly when asked: the work is front loaded so almost nothing is left after October, with the OpCo coordinating from November; the votes the proposal defers are not open items but the rule that nothing is handed to anyone by default; and everything the DAO owns beyond the treasury, IP included, falls under item 3.
I am editing item 7 in the proposal with the denominator change and the consolidation, and noting the edit.