Former Balancer contributors want up to 6 million BAL tokens to launch a new protocol. If approved before the wind-down snapshot, this could shrink the payout for current holders.
A fight is breaking out over Balancer's treasury. A group of former contributors, now calling themselves MAXYZ, wants a huge grant-up to 6 million non-circulating BAL tokens-to start a new fork. If these tokens go out before Balancer's planned wind-down snapshot, the value of each BAL token for current holders could drop sharply.
Redemption math and dilution risk
The main issue is timing and who gets to redeem. Balancer's wind-down plan lets BAL holders swap their tokens for a share of the DAO's leftover assets. The eligible supply is set by a snapshot, now proposed for the end of May 2027. If MAXYZ gets its tokens and they become eligible before that date, more tokens will chase the same pool of assets. That means less money per token for everyone else.
The MAXYZ fork proposal would transfer up to 6 million BAL as seed funding, with Balancer Treasury receiving 10% of the new token's fully diluted value at TGE or exit.
On-chain data from September 18 (not audited) shows Balancer's treasury held $9,959,416 in non-BAL assets and 63,068,821 redeemable BAL. That worked out to about $0.1579 per token. If 3 million more BAL became eligible, the value would fall to about $0.1507. If the full 6 million entered, it would drop to $0.1442-almost 8.7% less than before. These are just examples. The real numbers will depend on the final snapshot and asset values when the wind-down happens.
MAXYZ's fork proposal and trade-offs
MAXYZ wants half the grant up front and the rest after tetuBAL holders-who have their own claims on non-circulating BAL-are paid. The group points to about 3.5 million BAL in the DAO treasury, 1.6 million in a Balancer Labs fundraise safe, and 928,000 in a Labs team safe as possible sources for the grant. In return, MAXYZ offers a deal: if the forked protocol ever holds a token generation event or similar liquidity event, 10% of its fully diluted supply or equivalent value would go to the Balancer treasury. This is only a promise for the future, not an asset today, and it does not count toward current redemption math.
The official proposal says the fork would move liquidity, team, partners, users, and intellectual property to the new protocol. The fork's treasury would not be part of any future Balancer Treasury redemption. MAXYZ would get two out of seven seats on the new treasury council, giving them a say in the fork's finances. More details are on the Balancer governance forum.
The Balancer shutdown roadmap sets a withdrawal-only mode and a six-month redemption window starting at the end of May 2027, with pools and treasury operations maintained until at least Q2 2027. These measures are designed to ensure an orderly wind-down and fair asset distribution among BAL holders.
MAXYZ also wants a perpetual, nonexclusive license to Balancer's intellectual property, with a shot at an exclusive assignment if the entity dissolves. The proposal does not hand over code, trademarks, or other rights automatically. Each would need its own governance approval and legal review.
Operational and governance hurdles
The wind-down plan, led by a contributor named Marcus, would pause most Balancer pools for withdrawals only by October 30. Some v3 pools could stay open until November 30. MAXYZ, on the other hand, wants vaults and pools to stay open until at least mid-2027 unless there's an emergency. They argue that ongoing revenue or a $220,000 reserve could cover the $5,000 monthly maintenance cost. If this spending isn't covered by revenue, it would eat into the assets left for redemption.
Governance is another sticking point. The MAXYZ plan pulls tokens from both the DAO treasury and two Balancer Labs safes. Forum posts don't make clear who can approve transfers from these safes. MAXYZ says its two Treasury Council members would step down before any grant is sent, lowering the signing threshold. But council signatures alone aren't enough. The full DAO must approve, and legal ownership of the assets has to be clear.
What's at stake for holders
For BAL holders, the big question is whether the possible upside from a future fork is worth taking a smaller share of Balancer's current treasury. The fork's offer is just a promise for now. The dilution from more eligible BAL is real and can be measured. The wind-down proposal is set for a DAO vote from September 25 to 29. Any fork grant or IP transfer would need separate votes.
Until those votes happen and the final redemption snapshot is set, BAL holders' claims are still up in the air. The only sure thing: the more tokens become eligible for redemption, the less each one is likely to be worth-unless the fork's future value makes up for the dilution. For now, the fate of Balancer's treasury and the value for holders depends on a string of unresolved governance and legal issues.
As of the unaudited September 18 data, Balancer's treasury held $9,959,416 in non-BAL assets and 63,068,821 redeemable BAL. The proposed grant could add up to 6 million tokens to the eligible supply, possibly cutting per-token redemption value by nearly 8.7% if all are included. The final numbers will depend on the audited snapshot at wind-down and the results of ongoing governance votes.
Redemption in decentralized protocols like Balancer is meant to split leftover assets fairly among holders, but it's rarely simple. Rules on eligibility, treasury management, and governance all shape the outcome. When new proposals add more tokens or future promises, holders have to weigh the certainty of what's there now against the hope of future gains. In this setting, knowing how dilution, redemption, and protocol governance work is key for anyone holding or thinking about governance tokens in DAOs that are winding down.
