I agree with both of you, and side with Katherine on the rejection rate side of things. We want to publish high-quality papers of broad interest to the developmental biology community, and therefore by default we have to have a high(er) rejection rate. And indeed it is more about the scientists, and their institutions. But the journals have a role to play in facilitating this change. Let's see how it goes....

But here's the thing: these are PRIZES, not research grants. They cna buy a car and pay off the mortgage with these, as with a Nobel, Shaw, Gairdner Prize. Statements such as "a new source of funding for biomedical research", "standard process of application and review to emerging labs, researchers, and initiatives", "seem to be allowed to spend the money any way they want to," implies that these are research grants, for their lab. They are not, they are cash prizes that accompany a recognition of success. So it has nothing more to do with "only awarding the top talent" than any other research prize, big money or not.