---
type: claim
domain: internet-finance
description: "Hybrid vesting structures balance investor liquidity needs with long-term alignment through split allocation"
confidence: experimental
source: "MetaDAO Proposal 8 (Ben Hawkins OTC trade), 2024-02-18"
created: 2026-03-11
supports:
- "{'IslandDAO': 'Implement 3-Week Vesting for DAO Payments'}"
related:
- Convex founder compensation with market cap milestones creates stronger alignment than linear vesting because payout utility must exceed reservation wage utility plus effort cost
- "IslandDAO: Implement 3-Week Vesting for DAO Payments"
reweave_edges:
- Convex founder compensation with market cap milestones creates stronger alignment than linear vesting because payout utility must exceed reservation wage utility plus effort cost|related|2026-04-18
- "{'IslandDAO': 'Implement 3-Week Vesting for DAO Payments|supports|2026-04-18'}"
- "IslandDAO: Implement 3-Week Vesting for DAO Payments|related|2026-04-19"
---

# Vesting with immediate partial unlock plus linear release creates alignment while enabling liquidity by giving investors tradeable tokens upfront and time-locked exposure

The MetaDAO Proposal 8 OTC structure allocated 20% of purchased META tokens immediately to the buyer's wallet and placed 80% into a 12-month linear vesting program via Streamflow. This hybrid approach addresses two competing objectives: the investor needs some immediate liquidity to manage position risk and demonstrate commitment, while the DAO needs long-term price support and protection against immediate dumps.

The 20/80 split represents a specific calibration point. The immediate 20% provides enough liquidity for the investor to hedge, rebalance, or demonstrate skin-in-the-game to their own stakeholders. The 80% linear vest over 12 months creates sustained buying pressure absence (the tokens can't be sold) and aligns the investor's interests with long-term token performance.

This structure differs from all-or-nothing approaches:
- 100% immediate unlock: no alignment mechanism, pure liquidity
- 100% vested: no immediate liquidity, may deter large buyers who need portfolio flexibility
- Cliff vesting: creates sell pressure spikes at unlock dates

The linear component is critical. Unlike cliff vesting (which unlocks chunks at intervals), linear vesting releases tokens continuously, preventing coordinated sell events. The 12-month duration is long enough to span multiple market cycles and product milestones, but short enough to remain credible to investors.

However, this mechanism assumes vesting creates real alignment. As noted in [[time-based token vesting is hedgeable making standard lockups meaningless as alignment mechanisms because investors can short-sell to neutralize lockup exposure while appearing locked]], sophisticated investors can hedge vested positions through derivatives, making the alignment mechanism weaker than it appears.

The proposal's failure (despite acknowledged liquidity problems) suggests the market either:
1. Rejected the specific price terms (max(TWAP, $200) when spot was $695)
2. Doubted the buyer's ability to provide sustained liquidity
3. Feared dilution outweighed liquidity benefits
4. Distrusted the vesting mechanism's enforceability

The structure itself—20% immediate, 80% linear over 12 months—represents a design pattern that other DAOs have adopted for large token sales, suggesting it addresses a real coordination problem even if this specific instance failed.

## Evidence
- MetaDAO Proposal 8 specified "20% of the final allocation of META to Ben Hawkin's wallet immediately and place 80% of the final allocation of META into a 12 month, linear vest Streamflow program"
- Proposal failed 2024-02-24 despite stated liquidity need
- Price formula max(twapPass, $200) with spot at $695.92 created significant discount
- Expected circulating supply increase: 2-7% (284-1000 META depending on price)

## Challenges
- [[time-based token vesting is hedgeable making standard lockups meaningless as alignment mechanisms because investors can short-sell to neutralize lockup exposure while appearing locked]] — vesting may not create real alignment if hedgeable
- Proposal failure suggests market rejected either the structure or the specific terms
- No evidence this structure outperforms alternatives in practice


### Additional Evidence (confirm)
*Source: [[2024-03-19-futardio-proposal-engage-in-250000-otc-trade-with-colosseum]] | Added: 2026-03-16*

Colosseum's META acquisition uses 20% immediate unlock with 80% linear vest over 12 months via Streamflow, executed through a 5/7 multisig with members from both Colosseum and MetaDAO. The structure was explicitly designed to show 'commitment towards future collaborations' while providing immediate liquidity.

---

Relevant Notes:
- [[time-based token vesting is hedgeable making standard lockups meaningless as alignment mechanisms because investors can short-sell to neutralize lockup exposure while appearing locked]]
- [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window]]
- [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements]]

Topics:
- domains/internet-finance/_map