Mulling the creation of "meta-prizes."

When thinking about how to achieve big things in the long-term with few resources in the short-term, invariably the answer is to do in microcosm what you hope to eventually do on a much larger scale. This led me to the concept of Meta-prizes - a small prize competition where the objective is to come up with the best idea for a significantly bigger (but still small) prize competition. E.g., I've been thinking about, say, offering a $20-$50 prize to come up with the best idea for a $100-$500 prize. These are very small amounts compared even to the N Prize, but you have to start somewhere.

What are your thoughts about this concept? And what level of prize do you think would be appropriate for generating the best idea for another prize? Please don't respond by advising that we pursue an infinite regression of meta prizes - obviously I don't have the resources to do that, or I wouldn't be starting with so little money.

I like this, a lot. I have plenty of ideas, but as for the monetary value, it depends on the scale of a design, and how much will have to be pumped into making it bear fruit. A science fair level fuel pump turbine for a liquid rocket sounds like about $100.00. $10 bux sounds like a new high contact surface fastener head. (Like a Torx nut.) Somebody actually designs a workable small scale Liquid-gas oxydizer/solid fuel hybrid rocket engine as a college project? Give that boy at least $500.00 to $750.00 to put towards the next semester.

Prizes don't work bottom up likeat. What do you need, and how much is it worth to you? Set up a site with design criteria, and I'll get to work. You got an actual shop where I can prototype, test, and the funding for materials? Tell me where, I will move there, work for free, and camp on the lawn. Pay me in food, and coffee, I'm already packed.

Sounds interesting. How do you decide which submitted idea is the best?
I wouldn't mind incorporating a prize system into freespaceships. It might be a good motivator for participation.