> Massive payouts provide incentives, but is $340M such a greater incentive than, say, $100M Yes, it can be. At least the general principle of not capping upsi

> Massive payouts provide incentives, but is $340M such a greater incentive than, say, $100M Yes, it can be. At least the general principle of not capping upside. For someone with $0, sure, I'd agree that $100M is approximately within the same region of desire as $340M, and maybe even $1B. But if a founder had already made $100M, the prospect of making only another $100M will ensure that you'll have fewer repeat founders. You'll still have people like Elon Musk, who I think would have started SpaceX/Tesla even if he knew he couldn't become a billionaire for tax reasons, but some founders would be dissuaded from starting new companies after their initial $100M gain, if there wasn't the prospect of making billions on their next venture. Ironically, at some point in time Elon Musk went broke spending his money on his post-PayPal ventures, and was borrowing money from friends. If he had made less money from PayPal, we would not have Tesla/SpaceX, or at least he would have sold them early.