What interested me specifically about this: they call out the preferred participating stock. Is it rare? In my experience, not really - not common per se, but n

What interested me specifically about this: they call out the preferred participating stock. Is it rare? In my experience, not really - not common per se, but not necessarily rare. And being frank, most common stock holders are at a fair disadvantage through growth phases. I wonder if they apply this type of thinking for other potential-high-net-worth founders, who are likely to have most of their potential-worth tied up in a single organization. Surely this rule about treating the net value of such stock as being very low unless/until there was some kind of public sale or it had otherwise been crystallized somehow means that this type of founder will never feature in the rich list going forwards?