• I've been to Royal Caribbean's private island, Perfect Day at CocoCay, three times.
• The cruise line has seen strong demand for voyages to the profitable resort-like port.
• Royal is set to debut three resorts through 2027 as it competes in the growing cruise-owned destinations market.

Royal Caribbean is poised to build a vast and highly profitable vacation network — driven not solely by its cruise vessels but by its land-based portfolio.

The company's planned three Icon Class ships are expected to launch through 2027, coinciding with the debut of its next three private ports: Royal Beach Club Paradise Island in 2025, Royal Beach Club Cozumel in 2026, and Perfect Day Mexico in 2027.

At first glance, it may seem ironic for a vacation-at-sea company to invest millions into land-based destinations.

So, to understand Royal Caribbean's real estate conquest, look at the accomplishment of its first private island, Perfect Day at CocoCay.

Jason Liberty, president and CEO of Royal Caribbean Group, told analysts in October that its continued success can be partly attributed to its highest-rated port, Perfect Day at CocoCay.

I've visited the in-demand destination three times since 2022. It's no surprise the 5½-year-old Bahamian retreat has become the inspiration for the company's quickly growing private port-folio.

I relish the thrill of ultra-planned, stress-inducing travel where my survival relies on Google Maps and Translate.

However, behind this superiority complex, I also secretly love indulging in a vacation.

Not an emotionally taxing trip — a mushy-brained break where I get to rot on the beach and indulge in frivolous luxuries like guiltless naps and sugary beverages.

That about sums up why cruisers love Royal Caribbean's private island.

Some travelers criticize CocoCay for being an inauthentic Bahamian experience. While true, and for better or worse, that was never its promise.

The island was designed as an extension of Royal Caribbean's ships — a beach resort on steroids.

CocoCay is best for travelers who crave the conveniences of an all-inclusive resort: secure confinement, glittery beaches, and easy food and beverage kiosks.

The island has options for every type of paradise-seeking traveler. And much like going on a cruise, there's no need for planning as part of your visit (save for excursions like entry to its beach clubs). It's all set out for you.

For kids, CocoCay has a waterpark, a zipline, a water playground, and easygoing activities like ping-pong tables.

For adults, the island has two pool clubs: a boozy Vegas-style party at Hideaway Beach and a pricier high-end retreat at Coco Beach Club.

For traditionalists seeking a no-frills beach day, CocoCay's sandy waterfront is lined with innumerable lounge chairs and slow-sloping banks.

Plus, the island feels relatively safe.

Several popular cruise ports are in destinations where the US Department of State has issued travel advisories, such as Mexico's Ensenada, Baja (Level 3 — "reconsider travel" ) and Manzanillo, Colima (Level 4 — "do not travel").

The agency also suggests travelers "exercise increased caution" when visiting the Bahamas, home of CocoCay.

Yet, the island felt like one of the safest places I've recently toured.

CocoCay is only accessible by Royal Caribbean Group's ships.

As such, the only people there are its staff and the ship's crew and guests.

My biggest fear there? Getting a sunburn.

That's great news for concerned parents traveling with children or folks who may have read one too many cruise-related horror stories.

Most importantly, for Royal Caribbean, it's a proverbial goldmine.

Travelers love splurging during their daylong visit. The island doesn't require third-party excursion operators, allowing Royal Caribbean to maximize these profits.

Sections like the waterpark and beach clubs cost money to enter, from about $100 per person for the former to upward of $300 for Coco Beach Club.

Free parts of the island also have eye-catching upgrades, such as snorkeling equipment and costly cabanas.

Expect more opportunities to spend big at Royal Caribbean's coming properties.

Liberty told analysts that the cruise giant is "very mindful of having sizable significant returns" as it relates to its private properties. (It recently acquired the land for Perfect Day Mexico for $292 million.)

The company is using what it learned from CocoCay to design the Mexico location, which would also have free and paid amenities.

The same can't be said for the coming Royal Beach Club Collection.

The inaugural Paradise Island resort would accommodate about 4,000 guests a day. All would have to pay to enter, which would it a strong revenue driver.

For travelers, CocoCay is convenient, safe, amenity-rich, and beloved.

For Royal Caribbean, the island is a source of demand and increased revenue.

These private ports are a win-win all around, although competition could soon be stiff.

Carnival Corp is also racing to expand its private port portfolio.

The competing cruise giant plans to debut its $600 million private resort, Celebration Key, in 2025 and expand its existing private island, RelaxAway, Half Moon Cay, in 2026. It's already selling 2026 itineraries that include both destinations, starting at about $350 per person for a four-day sailing.

• Branding experts have mixed reviews on Jaguar's new identity but agree it's a radical change.
• Jaguar's rebranding campaign sparked debate over its new image — and carless promo video.
• Jaguar wants to target a younger, wealthier audience as it transitions to an all-electric future.

Jaguar's controversial new rebranding campaign has stirred a ton of discussion across social media, late-night TV, and in the news.

Some conservative social media users have railed against the company as going "woke." Others have questioned why Jag's new promotional video didn't contain any cars.

But what do marketing and rebranding experts think of Jaguar's transition? Their reviews are mixed, ranging from one who called it a it a "bonkers" strategy to another who said it was a relatively "successful" rollout.

One thing they agree on: It's a radical change for a legacy brand like Jaguar.

The high-end British carmaker — Jaguar has been an icon of elegance and luxury for nearly a century — first unveiled its rebranding campaign in late November. It included a new typeface for its logo, a redesigned leaping jaguar mark, and a colorful promotional video that featured high-fashion models — and no cars.

The rebrand comes as Jaguar prepares to entirely abandon its internal combustion engines in favor of a new all-electric future.

Will Sears, the founder and CEO of Cincinnati-based marketing agency W.Bradford, said the intent behind Jaguar's new branding rollout is unclear. And he said he was confused by the decision not to include any cars in the video.

Sears, who has worked on campaigns for Eli Lilly, L'Oréal, and Vegas.com, told Business Insider that Jaguar changed too many things at once in its rebrand launch. Updating the logo is a "huge change" on its own, he said, but then combined with the conceptual ad that didn't have any cars — it could all be too much for the consumer to take in.

"So now consumers who follow this are completely unfamiliar with what they're looking at," Sears said. "What has made them a solid brand is the beautiful design and performance of their cars: That is not on display at all — in any even cryptic way. So it's very confusing to the market."

Sears added: "I think we are all hoping, or people who follow this are all hoping, that their next steps in this campaign are remedying what is kind of a bonkers rollout."

Getting attention is success on its own

Another marketing expert said the eyeballs the rebranding has attracted could be considered a win for Jag.

Jim Heininger, the founder and principal of Chicago rebranding firm The Rebranding Experts, told Business Insider that Jaguar has clearly received a lot of attention over its rebrand — and that's a kind of success in itself. (The YouTube video of the Jag rollout has more than 160 million views so far.)

"I think what they're doing is just kind of stirring up some emotions and stirring up some creative kind of look and feel of what the new brand is going to look like," said Heininger, whose 30-year career includes work for P&G, McDonald's, and Anheuser-Busch. "It wasn't necessary that they show cars. They're just trying to get our attention at this point in time, and they're doing that successfully."

It's not just the shift in Jaguar's brand identity that has gotten marketers talking — it's also the apparent pivot in what audience base Jaguar is now trying to target.

As part of the brand's positioning, the newly announced Jags are expected to be significantly more upmarket than the ones that are being phased out. Car and Driver previously reported that the brand, which is owned by India's Tata Motors, was looking toward its corporate cousin Range Rover as inspiration for where it wants to be. The magazine cited a Range Rover that costs around $400,000; most Jaguar models for 2024 had list prices of around $50,000 to $80,000.)

Chris Bowers, the founder and CEO of branding agency CMB Automotive Marketing, which has offices outside Detroit and in the UK, said he's "not 100% convinced" Jaguar's rebranding is making the right statement but said the company is clearly trying to define a new audience.

"The only thing I can guess is that they're intentionally alienating their existing customer base," Bowers said, who has decades of experience building brands for major suppliers, manufacturers, and technology companies from the auto industry.

"They want to make a break from their existing customers to attract a younger, wealthier demographic who are more interested in style and individuality," Bowers said. "They're taking a massive gamble on the existence of a market who will be interested in them — and Jaguar know they can't attract them with the old brand."

Reorienting a brand to an entirely new audience is a "massively difficult" endeavor, Heininger said.

Jaguar is signaling a significant disruption

It can also be very risky, one advertising expert said.

"It's a risk to so radically divorce a brand from its inherent equities," Greg Andersen, the CEO of Omaha-based creative agency Bailey Lauerman, told Business Insider. Before joining Bailey Lauerman, Andersen worked for brands, including Google, Levi's, Burberry, and Axe — and also on several automotive campaigns, including Cadillac and Toyota.

"But at the same time," he said, "I think this work could eventually make sense if their vehicles are going to take the brand and the category in a completely different direction from the norms and dogma of the past. It's obviously a signal of significant disruption."

While the relevance and relatability of Jaguar's rebranding campaign have been much debated, each expert concluded that it represents a massive change for the brand — and change can be hard to accept.

But change is exactly what Jaguar said it wants as it heads into its EV-only future.

"Our brand relaunch for Jaguar is a bold and imaginative reinvention and, as expected, it has attracted attention and debate," the company said in a statement to Business Insider. "The brand reveal is only the first step in this exciting new era, and we look forward to sharing more on Jaguar's transformation in the coming days and weeks."

Jaguar said it would announce more details about its new branding strategy in December, though it's not clear whether that will include specifics about any of its forthcoming electric vehicles.

• Dating apps like Tinder, Bumble, and Hinge have new competition.
• A slew of new apps have launched in 2024 and are taking on swipe fatigue and dating-app burnout.
• Business Insider has interviewed several founders of the newest dating startups entering the ring.

Dating apps are in for a shake-up.

Many users are tired of swiping, dating app giants like Match Group (which owns Tinder and Hinge) face headwinds, and new startups are launching left and right.

Business Insider has interviewed several founders jumping into the dating-app arena as incumbents lose their luster.

Read: Meet the founders behind 11 dating startups

The new crop of dating apps is tackling various pain points in the online dating experience.

Some, for instance, are experimenting with new ways to discover and meet singles (aka not swiping). That includes startups offering users only a small batch of profiles to review each day, such as the New York-based app Pique Dating.

Others are testing how to successfully incorporate artificial intelligence into dating, like Sitch, which offers a chatbot and matchmaking feature powered by AI.

Matchmaking, whether through AI or by friends and family, has also become one of the hottest buzzwords in the dating-startup world.

There's also a wave of IRL-focused startups that forgo the experience of a dating app entirely with in-person events bringing singles together.

Read: The loneliness epidemic has given rise to a new crop of startups aiming to help people connect in real life

Meanwhile, social startups that aren't branded around dating — like Posh, 222, and Pie — are also breeding grounds for new friendships in person that could lead to love down the line as young adults seek to meet people in more organic settings. (Several of these IRL-social startups have also raised venture-capital funding this year.)

Even Big Tech is getting in on the action, with Facebook continuing to expand its Facebook Dating feature and Instagram's long-standing role as a digital flirting mechanism.

Read more about new dating startups launching to compete with Tinder, Hinge, and Bumble:

• Fourplay, a dating app that lets people go on double dates.
• First Round's On Me, which prioritizes setting up dates over DMs.
• Several new dating startups, like Cheers, Sitch, and Arrange are launching apps with matchmaking features.
• 222 is not branded as a dating app, but sets up strangers on group dinners in New York and Los Angeles.

• I spent three nights on Royal Caribbean's latest cruise ship, Utopia of the Seas, in mid-November.
• The company's second-largest ship exclusively operates short voyages in a bid to entice new cruisers.
• My favorite amenities include nighttime mini-golf and an immersive bar.

Royal Caribbean's latest vessel, Utopia of the Seas, is enticing first-time cruisers with quick three- and four-night voyages.

Good luck fitting everything you want to do in those short few days.

The 1,186-foot-long, 236,473 gross-ton floating resort offers a buffet of activities, from rock climbing walls to a zipline. If you have decision paralysis, have fun choosing between the more than 40 restaurants and bars.

Feeling overwhelmed? You're not alone — I spent my three nights on Utopia the same.

If you need a digestible guide to the mega-ship, here's a list of my eight favorite amenities, including a 295-foot-long dry slide and a bar with a talking parrot.

1. The mini-golf course at night

Mini-golf has become a popular cruise amenity. As such, Utopia of the Seas' nautical-themed course can amass a crowd of eager participants during the day.

For a more unique experience — and to avoid a long wait — go back at night.

At sundown, the nine holes light up like a colorful Christmas tree. The veins of the giant octopus cascade a bright rainbow, while the coral-like blobs become a pinball machine that lights up when hit by golf balls.

2. The 3 waterslides

Almost every Utopia of the Seas itinerary includes a stop at Royal Caribbean's private island, Perfect Day at CocoCay. There, guests can spend their sunny afternoon at the 14-slide waterpark, where tickets can cost more than $100 per person.

Or, just stay on the ship and entertain yourself with the three free waterslides.

Two are racing slides, perfect for couples and siblings, while the other brings riders around a bright orange toilet bowl-like funnel.

3. The 295-foot-long dry slides

Don't enjoy waterslides? Why not try dry ones, known as the Ultimate Abyss?

The dual racing slides span 10 decks — starting on deck 16's open-air activities area and ending on the Boardwalk.

Throughout the roughly 19-second descent, riders experience twists, turns, transparent tubes, and 300 twinkling LED lights.

It was my favorite way to travel from the ship's upper to lower decks. If I had it my way, I would've spent all afternoon on it.

4. The caged-in tennis tables

Table tennis? One of the most common cruise ship amenities?

Hear me out — the ones on Utopia of the Seas were the best I've seen.

There's nothing worse than running after one of those elusive white balls or trying to play against a windy day.

To prevent both, the new ship's three ping-pong tables are surrounded by tall glass walls, shielding them from the elements while keeping the balls contained in the "arena."

It's a small but thoughtful design, great for novice players who spend more time running around for the ball than actually hitting it (like me).

5. The new bar with a talking parrot

The mega-ship has 16 bars, many of which you can find on other Oasis-class ships.

The one exception to this is Pesky Parrot, a new tiki-themed watering hole.

A few "Teqkil-ya Zombie" and "Pain Chillers" drinks in, and the dollar bills hanging from the ceiling, frozen drink machines, and brightly patterned decor will make you forget you're on a ship.

And yes, there's actually a pesky robotic parrot quipping sassy one-liners.

Cocktails cost $10 to $14, with most on the pricier side. Wines run between $8 and $16 a glass, while beers and seltzers start at about $7.50.

6. The 3 shows

I don't often enjoy cruise shows. Yet, Utopia of the Seas had some of the best entertainment I've seen at sea.

If figure skating is your favorite winter Olympic sport, you'll enjoy the "Youtopia" show on ice. The rink is small — maybe dangerously so — but it still delivers twirls and jumps, along with projections that turn the ice into an ever-evolving set.

Speaking of jumps, if you prefer watching the summer Olympic diving event, head to the Aquatheater for "Aqua80too." The swim, dance, and dive show — set to a nostalgic hit 1980s soundtrack — also sprinkles in some impressive slackliners and tightrope walkers.

Even the "All In" song-and-dance production was better than expected, bolstered by the unexpected acrobatics, detailed costumes, and a high-tech set.

7. The hidden gem of a buffet

When the breakfast lines at Windjammer buffet are too long, head to the Solarium Bistro. There, you'll have the same food options while contending with fewer crowds.

The dining tables also extend into the neighboring adult-only Solarium, mimicking an al-fresco dining experience.

At night, the restaurant adopts a Mediterranean and Californian-inspired menu with options like hummus, Greek salad, and chicken kebab.

8. The café in Central Park

The ship has 27 dining venues, from the poolside ice cream kiosk to the $150 per person omakase.

The cafeteria-style Park Cafe is what the kids might call a "sleeper hit."

At first glance, its soups, sandwiches, desserts, and build-your-own salad bar might not seem craveable. Yet, I found myself repeatedly stopping by, seeking a light afternoon salad to counteract the ship's otherwise heavy meals.

Grab a table outside — Park Cafe is located in Central Park, a calm, plant-filled neighborhood removed from the chaos of the pool deck.

• Some journalists are leaving their jobs and starting one-person subscription businesses.
• Jason Koebler and three other veterans of Vice Media wanted to build something bigger: an actual news site.
• They launched 404 Media in the summer of 2023. Today, it looks like a sustainable success story.

Lots of people dream of quitting their jobs and going into business for themselves. Jason Koebler and three co-workers actually did it. It looks like it's working.

In the summer of 2023, Koebler, who used to edit Vice Media's Motherboard tech section, and three former Vice co-workers launched 404 Media, a tech news site they co-own. Each of them kicked in $1,000 to get it off the ground.

Fast-forward to today, and Koebler says the company is already generating something in the $900,000-a-year range, funded almost entirely with subscriptions. Even after tech and legal costs, that's enough to call 404 a success. And that allows them to write whatever they want: Like this recent piece looking at Elon Musk and Twitter/X's involvement in the Alex Jones bankruptcy case.

This self-funded business model isn't going to work for everyone and everything. But in a grim climate for media in general and journalism specifically, it's great to hear about things that work. You can hear the entire conversation I had with Koebler on my Channels podcast; what follows are edited excerpts from our chat.

It seems like you guys are making a real business here: You can pay the four of yourselves grown-up journalism salaries.

We are. It's going better than I could have ever imagined. We're also at a point where I think we'll be able to bring new employees on.

When you launched, what did you think you'd need to do, at minimum, to keep this afloat? Did you think about a scenario where it's working, but you needed to have side gigs?

When we decided to do this, we launched in August 2023, and we told ourselves that we would do it until January.

And right after we launched, in the first couple of days, we got like 600 subscribers. We fell into this kind of middle ground — enough people signed up that there was clearly an audience, but not enough signed up where [we knew this was] definitely going to work.

It was unclear whether it was going to survive, even though the response was amazing.

But then the really cool thing was every time we had a big scoop or a big story, we got new subscribers.

Your structure is egalitarian. I'm assuming you're all getting paid equally.

We're all the same. We're all 25% owners. The management of the company has been easier than I thought that it would be. I think that if we were to grow, we would probably have to figure out how to manage new hires, and what ownership would look like then.

What happens when you guys have a throw-down and then the vote is two vs. two?

There are no votes. We told each other from the outset that anyone can veto anything. So, if any one person is like "I hate this idea," then we just don't do it.

I wanted to ask you about this great piece you wrote recently: "The Billionaire Is the Threat, not the Solution." It's a personal story about your dad who worked on the printing presses of The Washington Post for decades. And about Jeff Bezos and the non-endorsement story. Your argument is that you're going to continue to have these problems as long as you're looking for billionaires to own your media.

I agree with you. I don't think we can rely on billionaires to fund our media. And this model that you've built works for you and your three coworkers and co-owners. But it can't work for everything. What kind of journalism does your model support? What does it not support?

This sort of subscription, independent model works for us. We've created four journalism jobs. Other independent media companies have created a few dozen more. But it's still like a tiny, tiny drop in the bucket.

My theory is that there can be a lot of them. I really do think that. 7,000 people have subscribed to us. The market can support a lot more of these.

But what are the kinds of stories and projects you can't do because you don't have apparatus, staff, whatever?

I think that there's the "spend three, six, 12 months on an investigative story and then publish it and maybe it wins an award and tons of people read it — or maybe no one reads it" is a model we're not even trying to do. I think that's an important model and maybe one better suited for nonprofits and The New York Times and Washington Post.

I think the reason that it's working for us is we are breaking stories, we are telling stories, that you can't find elsewhere.

• A Chinese invasion of Taiwan must focus on seizing a port to bring in tanks and supplies.
• Commercial or industrial ports are prime targets that would allow for rapid offloading.
• Taiwan may have the weapons and obstacles to turn its ports into fortresses.

There are two requirements for a major amphibious invasion. The first is storming the beach.

The second is no less important — seizing a port. Without docks and cranes to unload reinforcements — especially armored vehicles — and supplies, everything has to be brought in over the open beach or flown in by helicopter. This can result in a race against time: can the invaders reinforce a large enough beachhead before the defenders try to push them into the sea?

As it contemplates an invasion of Taiwan, China is well aware of this problem. It knows full well that Taiwan will desperately defend its ports.

Chinese military journals "argue that the success or failure of an invasion of Taiwan likely would hinge on whether Chinese amphibious-landing forces are able to seize, hold, and exploit the island's large port facilities," naval analyst Ian Easton wrote in a new book published by the China Maritime Studies Institute at the US Naval War College.

"By themselves, Taiwan's beaches and coastal airports are too small to land enough [People's Liberation Army] troops, tanks, and supplies to secure a solid lodgment ashore," Easton wrote. "Because these sites lack purpose-built infrastructure for unloading large transports and because they occupy inherently exposed positions, PLA researchers fear that Chinese landing forces could be encircled on the beaches, showered with defensive fires, and overrun by Taiwanese counterattacks.^"

Chinese analysts worry that Taiwan will turn its ports into fortresses against sea assault, including mines and obstacles, sink containerships to block shipping channels, and set the waters alight by pouring oil into them.

The People's Liberation Army, as China's military is officially known, sees six options for taking Taiwan's ports, all of which have disadvantages, according to Easton. A direct assault runs into the teeth of port defenses. Landing on either side of a port with armor in a pincer attack is time-consuming. Quick surprise attacks with troops in hovercraft and sea-skimming helicopters suffer from limited transport capacity. Large air assaults with helicopter-carrying troops are threatened by Taiwanese air defenses. Special operations forces may be too lightly armed to seize ports. And beach assaults like D-Day come with the risk that Taiwanese troops could bottle up the attackers.

Based on Chinese military writings, Chinese planners seem to be leaning towards a mix of these options, per Easton. An invasion would begin with heavy air, missile and naval bombardment, followed by commandos to knock out coastal defenses. "After beach obstacles and coastal fortifications have been destroyed using direct fires, large amphibious forces will make landings from the sea, supported by troops arriving by helicopters, hovercraft, and ultralights," Easton wrote. "Once ashore, amphibious-assault units will conduct pincer movements from the beaches, surrounding port zones and isolating defenders into pockets of resistance."

Once ashore, PLA troops will attack areas near the port from two sides at the same time as other assault units in low-flying helicopters and hovercraft strike at the port directly. Once it is captured, Chinese forces will dig in to resist a counterattack, while engineers repair the docks and clear the shipping lanes.

The ports most likely to be attacked are those "that could support the rapid off-loading of main battle tanks and other heavy equipment. The ideal candidates for attack would be well-developed commercial or industrial ports flanked by beaches and river deltas in relatively flat and lightly urbanized areas," wrote Easton. The port of Taichung on the west coast of Taiwan is the most probable candidate, followed by Kaohsiung, Mailiao, Anping and Taiwan's capital Taipei.

Would this Chinese strategy work? Historically, armies and navies have avoided attacking heavily defended ports directly ("A ship's a fool to fight a fort," said the legendary British admiral Horatio Nelson). The most infamous example is the disastrous raid on the port of Dieppe in northern France by 10,000 Allied troops (the majority of them Canadian) in August 1942. Intended as a test operation for D-Day, the attackers suffered 5,000 dead and wounded, or about the half of the assault force. The lesson was so stinging that the Allies opted to make the Normandy invasion over the beaches, and then go on to capture a port.

The challenge isn't just seizing a port, but also getting it in usable enough condition to allow tanks to be unloaded. As the Allies discovered while taking fortified ports such as Brest and Cherbourg in 1944, the Germans made such effective use of demolitions that the port facilities were inoperative for months.

Easton suggests that Taiwan can beef up its port defenses, including missiles and mines, as well as units specially trained in urban warfare. Easton also believes that a first step could be removing the Chinese presence from Taiwanese ports, despite China accounting for 40% of Taiwan's exports. "Taiwanese leaders could close [Chinese Communist Party]-controlled representative offices," Easton wrote. "They could remove and replace critical port infrastructure that is linked to the Chinese military."

In the end, the fate of an invasion of Taiwan turns on which side controls the ports. "The imagination-crushing dimensions of a PLA amphibious operation against Taiwan — the moving of millions of humans and machines — all rely on robust logistics lines," Easton wrote. "Without them, everything else quickly crumbles and falls apart."

Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.

• Amy Zhang has faced five core struggles since quiet quitting her corporate job to start a business.
• Zhang says navigating the current economy and finding the right clients were among the roadblocks.
• Zhang says entrepreneurship involves making mistakes, but it has redefined her idea of success.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Amy Zhang, a 31-year-old founder based in New York City. It's been edited for length and clarity.

I spent eight months "quiet quitting" my corporate job, which started in June 2022. I then launched a company focused on growing small businesses. I've developed an appreciation for all the ways people can become successful.

But my learning hasn't come without issues. These are the five biggest struggles I've experienced since actually quitting and starting my own business, and what to keep in mind if you're considering it.

1. You have to be able to work alone for days on end

The transition from working with a team to being completely independent has been isolating. The socialization that used to be guaranteed is now a task that falls completely on me, and sometimes I don't leave my house for days.

Being an entrepreneur requires hustle and struggle, which makes it tough for me to put my computer down and stop working.

I make sure to maintain my routine at my gym, where I have a group of people I talk to. I also try to say "yes" to invitations from friends even if it's easier to say no and keep working.

2. You must be prepared for stress, mistakes, and ambiguity

When I started my venture, I realized I was the only one to blame for poor decision-making. The pressure to not make any mistakes plagued me in the beginning, so I've been learning to forgive myself.

One of the biggest mistakes I made was figuring out what tools and technology systems to spend money on and when to make the purchase. I purchased based on referrals and quickly learned that buying tech solutions too soon and solely based on recommendations can be a waste of money.

I also made the mistake of subscribing to annual contracts for discounts. Looking back, I realize the flexibility to cancel month-to-month contracts would've been more financially responsible.

Despite these mistakes, I know that having patience with myself is important for not burning out and giving up.

3. The economy is different now than five years ago

I've noticed that those who started their business five years ago relied heavily on networks and word of mouth to jump-start their companies.

In my experience, right now, I feel like prospective clients need more convincing, touchpoints, and trust to go into business with someone. I've been able to show my commitment through time spent, being active and responsive, and through action — putting my money where my mouth is.

4. Clients might want more time

I thought working as a consultant would benefit companies — it's cheaper for them to hire me with part-time pay, the ability to cancel at any time, and no health insurance. However, many businesses hesitated to work with me because they wanted full ownership of my time.

Don't get me wrong — the clients I work with now are awesome and completely get it. They like having the flexibility and quality of work at a fraction of the cost of a full-time hire.

There's just something about having full control over an employee that I think some businesses still latch onto.

5. Others will try to rank you by title

There's a social bubble — especially in the corporate world — that defines success by titles, promotions, and company prestige.

Even in social circles at events and parties, when I was introduced to someone, the default second question after asking my name was, "So what do you do for a living?" That question used to feel like a way to rank myself among my peers.

Since quitting and starting my own business, I've realized there isn't just one way to be successful, happy, or make money.

If you've "quiet quit" your corporate job and would like to share your story, please email Tess Martinelli at [email protected].

• TikTok recently hosted an invite-only creator summit in LA where it shared tips and best practices.
• Employees and creators shared advice on how to increase engagement and earnings.
• Here are 10 ways to produce higher-quality content on TikTok, according to one of its staffers.

TikTok isn't showing any signs of slowing down in advance of a potential US ban — or even acknowledging it. Instead, the platform is running business as usual for creators, and sharing tips and advice on how to make better content.

One of TikTok's creator managers, Norissa Samuels, recently shared 10 best practices for posting on TikTok in a keynote presentation at an invite-only creator summit in Los Angeles.

The conference's presentations left out any mention of the divest-or-ban bill, which could see TikTok removed from US app stores as early as January 19.

Instead, the speakers, including Samuels, zeroed in on one phrase: "high-quality content."

They defined it as content that drives growth and showcases an in-depth understanding and expertise. At the event, the company said that this type of content performs better on TikTok's horizontal video tool for longer videos. TikTok also said that, in general, "high-quality content" is a key to getting more views and making more money from the platform.

Samuels shared in a presentation 10 tips for creating better content and mastering storytelling:

1. Have a clear beginning, middle, and end.
2. Like an elevator pitch, keep an audience engaged throughout the video.
3. Engage, then explain. Grab the viewer's attention in the first five seconds with a strong hook.
4. How to craft a strong hook: Answer a question, tease the end result, or create a funny moment.
5. Move locations, use trendy sounds or music, voice-over, or lean into effects and text.
6. Go in-depth and make people learn or feel something new.
7. Solve a problem, bust a myth, share a hack, elevate the everyday, share an inventive idea, or teach step-by-step.
8. Prioritize production value with high-quality visuals, edit with quick cuts and captivating shots, and use transitions and fast-paced storytelling.
9. Think like a director: Prep costumes, lighting, sound, and framing beforehand.
10. Be intentional with your aesthetic. Stick to one that will reflect your brand.

• It won't be hard to find a deal on a car this holiday season.
• The best deals will be concentrated in the EV market.
• It might be your last chance to get a really good deal on an EV.

This holiday season could be your last chance to get discounts worth thousands of dollars on electric vehicles.

Holiday car deals overall are expected to be generous this year, as several brands face oversupply. Edmunds data said brands with some of the deepest discounts in November include Stellantis's Ram and Volkswagen's Audi, both of which have struggled with slow sales this year.

But the best deals will likely be concentrated in the EV market, where car companies are looking to offload the last of their oversupply before pulling back production next year in response to slower demand.

This holiday season is likely to be the last gasp for the big EV discounts that dominated the market in 2024, according to Ivan Drury, an automotive analyst for car-shopping website Edmunds.

It has been a topsy-turvy year for the EV market as companies scrambled to adjust their offerings to meet changing demand. The wealthy early adopter buyer base dried up, and was replaced by bargain-hungry shoppers more willing to compromise with a hybrid.

That has been a problem for many car companies, who are just now rolling out big, expensive EVs.

An ongoing price war in the segment has led to a buyer's market for EVs, particularly when it comes to leasing. Access to a $7,500 EV tax credit has also helped car companies by further lowering purchase prices and stimulating demand.

These discounts could end in the near future, as President-elect Trump has vowed to dismantle them.

Here's what you need to know when hunting for an EV deal this holiday season.

EV discounts should be bigger than gas-car deals

Look no further than the EV market if a great deal is all you're after.

Manufacturers and dealers have spent most of this year trying to offload slow-moving EVs, which means that the discounts are much deeper than other car segments.

For people purchasing an EV, the average discount on an electric vehicle in November was more than $3,560 off the sticker price, according to Edmunds. That's compared to an average discount of $1,885 on gas-powered vehicles.

Any EV will likely cost more overall than a comparable gas-powered alternative, however, even with these discounts (and a potential $7,500 federal EV tax credit).

Discounts included, the average price of an EV last month was $59,228, or about $12,000 more expensive than the average price paid for a gas-powered car in the same period.

Focus on the monthly payment

If you want a deal and you're on a tight budget, leasing may be the way to go.

Thanks to a mix of discounts and government incentives, a good lease deal can help you get a lower monthly payment for an EV than a gas-powered car.

EVs with sticker prices under $50,000 in November leased for an average of $44,570 when including discounts offered by the dealer or manufacturer, according to Edmunds. With downpayments around $2,400, the average monthly payment on these EVs was $428. That's $144 a month cheaper than the same segment of gas-powered cars.

EV leasing has taken off in the second half of this year as dealers and manufacturers take advantage of a loophole in the tax credit rules. Leases now account for a majority of EV purchases, according to Edmunds, as green-car shoppers prioritize affordability.

Dealers and manufacturers like these leases because more of their vehicles can qualify for the additional $7,500 EV tax credit. Restrictions that went into effect in January made it harder for EV purchasers to qualify for this credit, but lessees are not held to the same standards.

Leasing is a lower-stakes financial commitment in general, as the lessee is only responsible for the depreciation during the lease term.

The monthly payment on a lease is also more malleable than on a financed car because it is calculated with somewhat squishy numbers. The lender subtracts the estimated residual value of the car from the current value and dividing that by the lease term (plus taxes and fees, of course).

• Jaguar's founder started in the motorcycle sidecar business before building his first Jag in 1935.
• The luxury carmaker is rebranding with a new logo and controversial ad campaign.
• Here's a look back at the British carmaker over the last century.

Luxury British carmaker Jaguar has come a long way from its humble beginnings in the early 20th century.

The company's founder started making motorcycle sidecars in the 1920s before creating the first Jaguar car in 1935. Over the next few decades, Jaguar became synonymous with elegance and power. It's been used in racing, as the preferred vehicle of the British royal family, and by several villains in James Bond movies.

Today, Jaguar is preparing to launch its all-electric vehicle lineup, set to come out some time in 2026. And in preparation for its next generation, Jaguar unveiled a new branding campaign — complete with a new logo, redesigned leaping jaguar mark, and a promotional video that's stirred controversy online.

Here's a look back at the company over the last century, and surprising facts you might not know about its history.

Early days as Swallow Sidecar Company

In 1922, Sir William Lyons — who later became known as "Mr. Jaguar" — co-founded the Swallow Sidecar Company with a man named William Walmsley. Within a few years, Lyons had built his first car, called the SS1.

In 1934, Lyons bought the company out from Walmsley, renamed it SS Cars Limited.

And in 1935, the first Jaguar was born, a model named the SS Jaguar.

Lyons renamed the company Jaguar Cars Limited in 1945 in an effort to build a brand around the luxury sports cars it was making at the time.

Mid-century success

The 1930s through 1950s were marked by a number of innovations for the company, which it touts on in corporate history.

Jaguar introduced its first four-door model in 1937 with the SS Jaguar 2½ Liter Sedan, and by 1948, it had created the world's fastest production car — the Lyons-designed XK120, which could reach speeds up to 133 miles per hour.

In 1951, Jaguar introduced its aerodynamic C-type model, which was 25% lighter than the XK120 and won first place when it debuted at the Le Mans 24-hour race.

Then, in 1954, Jaguar rolled out one of the first cars with a unibody structure, the D-type racecar. Like the C-type before it, the D-type also made history at Le Mans, scoring first place three consecutive years, including in 1957, when the car secured five of the top six places.

All this built up to 1961 when Jaguar unveiled one of the most iconic cars of all time — the E-type.

Italian racing driver and founder of Ferrari, Enzo Ferrari, is frequently cited as declaring the E-type "the most beautiful car in the world," according to classic car auction house RM Sotheby's.

Some of the E-type's most famous owners included Frank Sinatra, Brigitte Bardot, and Steve McQueen, according to lifestyle magazine Gentleman's Journal.

The Museum of Modern Art in New York City acquired and first exhibited an E-type in 1996, becoming just the third car in the museum's design collection.

"Rarely has a car inspired the kind of passion in both car enthusiasts and the general public that the Jaguar E-type has. Even today, the E-type is considered an icon of the postwar British sports car," Christopher Mount, a MoMa curator who organized the Jaguar exhibition, said in a press release at the time.

Jaguars in popular culture

Jaguars have long been a favorite of the British royal family, along with Land Rovers and Range Rovers, which are part of the Jaguar Land Rover brand, owned by India-based Tata Motors.

The family's love for the brand dates back at least to 1955, when the Queen Mother Queen Elizabeth acquired the Jaguar Mark VII M Saloon 464 HYV, which was specially made in the royal color, claret, according to historic preservation charity Jaguar Heritage Trust.

Other members of the royal family, including Princess Diana and Queen Elizabeth II, also owned and drove Jaguars over the years.

And a number of Jaguar vehicles have been driven by villains in James Bond movies, like the Jaguar XKR driven by henchman Tang Lin Zao in 2002's "Die Another Day," the Jaguar XF featured during a car chase in 2021's "No Time to Die," and the Jaguar C-X75 driven by assassin Mr. Hinx in 2015's "Spectre."

Jaguar's next chapter

Jaguar first announced in 2021 that it would be ditching internal combustion engines to go all-in on EVs.

In November, Jaguar stopped selling new models of its cars in the UK as it prepares for its electric vehicle launch, expected to hit the market sometime in 2026.

As part of this next phase, Jaguar has debuted a new brand identity focused on the creative philosophy of "exuberant modernism," which the company defines as "imaginative, bold, and artistic at every touchpoint."

Jaguar Chief Creative Officer Gerry McGovern said in a statement that the company's new vision was inspired by Lyons' belief that "a Jaguar should be a copy of nothing."

The company's new marketing campaign included a promotional video that featured models clad in colorful high fashion, with no cars in sight.

Some conservative social media users criticized the company as being too "woke" — partly over the look of the models it chose, while others have questioned why the ad didn't show any cars.

Meanwhile, high-profile critics of the rebranding video — which has been viewed more than 160 million times on X — included Tesla CEO Elon Musk, the influencer brothers Andrew and Tristan Tate, and the conservative personality Ian Miles Cheong.

In response to the video posted on X by Jaguar, Musk wrote: "Do you sell cars?" And Nick Freitas, a Republican member of the Virginia House of Delegates, replied to Jaguar on X: "Well … we know where the advertising team for Bud Light went," referring to the backlash to a Bud Light ad in 2023 that featured a transgender influencer.

Jaguar's managing director, Rawdon Glover, defended the British luxury car maker's rebranding campaign to the Financial Times — calling out some of its online critics and characterizing their reaction as "vile hatred" and "intolerance."

Jaguar said it would announce more details about its new branding strategy in December, though it's not clear whether that will include specifics about any of its forthcoming electric vehicles.

As part of the brand's positioning, the newly announced Jags are expected to be significantly more upmarket than the ones that are being phased out, Car and Driver previously reported, citing a Range Rover from the brand's corporate cousin that costs about $400,000 as where the brand wants to be. (Most 2024 Jaguar models have list prices of about $50,000 to $80,000.)

Without commenting specifically on the recent backlash to the new branding campaign, Jaguar previously said in a statement to Business Insider: "The brand reveal is only the first step in this exciting new era, and we look forward to sharing more on Jaguar's transformation in the coming days and weeks."

• Brennan Schlagbaum and his wife became millionaires in 2022 after paying off debt and investing.
• They set up 529, brokerage, and Roth IRA accounts for each daughter, which they contribute to monthly.
• Their goal is to leave each daughter with over $1 million by the time they are 30.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Brennan Schlagbaum, a 32-year-old CPA and founder of Budgetdog, who lives in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The following has been edited for length and clarity.

My wife and I reached our goal of becoming millionaires in 2022, after five years of paying off over $330,000 in debt — including our house, cars, engagement rings, and student loans — and investing our money, largely in index funds.

We have two daughters — Logan is 3 years old, and Ellie is 1 — and when each of them was born, we set up three accounts which we put money into each month. Assuming 8% interest, their accounts should leave them each with $1,000,000 by the time they're 30. Compound interest is honestly the eighth wonder of the world; time is money.

Our goal with our investments for our daughters is to position them for success and give them opportunities that we may not have had growing up.

I don't want my kids to have a scarcity mindset

My wife and I both grew up middle class. In 2008, my family lost our house and cars, and I saw my parents change mentally. We still had food on the table and access to education, but I could tell things were tight and I felt a sense of scarcity that has stuck with me.

I don't want my kids to feel that way about money. I grew up being told that if I did a chore, I'd make X dollars. Then, I'd have to put, say, $2 toward saving, $1 toward charity, and could have $2 for spending. It was a good lesson, but it also fed into my scarcity mindset.

I want my daughters to realize that value creation is more important than trading time for money — I learned this when I moved from my 9-to-5 at Deloitte to being an entrepreneur — so I try to get away from the hourly or shift work structure with them and think about how I can help them have an abundance mindset rather than a scarcity mindset.

I want my kids to be trust fund babies who see money as a tool

I'm not of the belief that you should just hand your kids money. I think that creates what most people view as a "trust fund baby" who wastes their family's money, and that's not what I want.

But I do want a trust fund baby in a different way — in the sense that they understand the principles and responsibility that come with money and what they can do with it, treating it as a tool rather than as a god. How someone chooses to use money shows who they are as a person, so we feel that grounding our daughters' characters is essential. We think charity is really important, for example, and we want that to all be included in our daughters' understanding of money.

I think it's a really good idea for my kids to understand how much I make and how much we spend. They're young right now, so they don't understand the technical elements, but I think it's worth explaining things to them so they can adopt our culture around money.

If Logan came to me and said, "Hey, my friends are going to the park. Can I have 10 bucks?", I'd have a conversation with her about what she needs the money for and teach her not to spend it recklessly. I'd ask her to think about whether she values what she's spending it on.

Here are the three accounts we have for our daughters

We typically put a total of around $500 a month into each child's accounts and plan to increase our monthly contributions to $1,333 a month for each child when they turn 7 as we pay them more for helping with my business.

529 plan

The 529 plan is for their education. My wife and I want to contribute 60% of the cost of a four-year public in-state college and to have them take accountability and cover the other 40%, whether it be through scholarships, working, or other methods. Using Vanguard's college cost calculator, we decided to put $250 a month into each of the girls' 529 accounts.

But we also don't want them to get a college degree just because we saved up money for them. I went to college totally clueless because my parents told me to, and I don't want my children to repeat that same cycle. We want them to ask themselves, What do I want to get out of life?

Also, our older daughter was diagnosed with Dravet syndrome when she was five months old, so we don't know whether college will be on the table for her. Because of that, we decided to switch to putting all $500 a month into her brokerage account until we better understand what her future will look like.

Taxable brokerage account

The second type of account we have for both of our daughters is a taxable brokerage account. They're both in my wife's and my names, but we'll be able to give the money to our kids when the opportunities arise.

According to the IRS's gift tax law for 2025, we're allowed to gift up to $19,000 per spouse per kid without paying taxes, so we could technically give them each $38,000 a year from this investment account. Currently, we put $250 a month for Ellie and $500 for Logan. If they receive money from grandparents or family for holidays, I typically deposit that amount as a lump sum into their brokerage accounts as well.

We want to let the money that's being invested for them grow for quite some time, so they probably won't touch the brokerage account money until they're 22 and fully in the adult world.

Roth IRA

The Roth IRA is for retirement purposes and requires earned income. Our daughters are young and don't have much income, but I pay them for the photoshoots they do for my business. It's nothing crazy — maybe $200 to $400 a year. Logan has $1,200 in her Roth IRA at the age of three and Ellie has $200.

Many parents think, "Well, my kids are too young to work, and they don't have earned income, so we can't set up a Roth IRA for them." The only requirement is to have earned income, and there are a number of ways they can do so.

I'd rather give my kids now than wait until I die

I think it's silly to wait to give our kids money. If someone gets a big lump sum when their mom or dad passes away, they often look at it as this big gift, almost like winning the lottery. They often don't treat it as a tool and instead live on a yacht and party and do nothing.

Instead, I think it's better to give it to our kids now, so that we can teach them how to treat money and how saving and investing has given them opportunities.

If you'd like to share the steps you're taking to prepare for your children's financial futures, email Jane Zhang at [email protected].

• Israel's potent air defenses are increasingly threatened by low-flying drones.
• Two retired Israeli generals say it needs new defenses against this "low sky" layer.
• Israel pioneered targeting air defenses with drones in a stunning victory four decades ago.

Israel's air and missile defense system is arguably the best in the world, having proven this year it can down Iranian ballistic missiles and Hamas-fired rockets. Its Iron Dome is the epitome of this success and is only one of many systems. But while these can protect Israeli cities, they have an increasingly glaring problem — they can't protect themselves from low-flying drones, two retired Israeli brigadier generals warn.

"We have to defend our air defense," wrote Eran Ortal and Ran Kochav in a blog for the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Defense at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv, Israel.

Ortal and Kochav fear that enemy drones could knock out air defense systems such as the vaunted Iron Dome, enabling ballistic missiles, manned aircraft and artillery rockets to strike Israel without being intercepted. "The Israeli Air Force does continue to rule the skies, but under the noses of the advanced fighter jets, a new air layer has been created."

The authors call this the "low sky" layer. "The enemy has found a loophole here. The Air Force (and, within it, the air defense corps) is required to defend against the combined and coordinated threats of missiles, unmanned aircraft systems and rockets."

Over the past year, Israel's air and missile system has achieved remarkable success against a range of projectiles launched by Iran, Hamas and other Iranian proxies, including ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, artillery rockets and mortar shells. For example, Israel — with the assistance of the US, Britain and other nations — reportedly intercepted 99% of some 300 ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and large attack drones launched by Iran in April 2024.

However, Israel has struggled against small exploding drones launched by Hezbollah, the Iran-backed militia in Lebanon. More than a hundred Israeli soldiers and civilians have been killed or wounded by these UAVs, including 67 who were wounded when a drone hit a building in northern Israel in October. Still, the situation is a far cry from the Ukraine war, where hordes of small drones have rendered battlefield maneuver almost impossible.

Nonetheless, Ortal and Kochav worry that Israeli air defenses were designed in the pre-drone era, when the threat to Israel came from aircraft and ballistic missiles, a critique that also applies to Western- and Russian-made systems. "This array was built over the years under the premise of Israeli air superiority. The air defense itself was not supposed to be hunted."

"The enemy is able to penetrate deep into Israel and engage the air defense system in one lane while other aircraft take advantage of the diversion and penetrate in another, more covert lane. It can identify targets and strike immediately using armed or suicide UAS. Above all, it strives to locate, endanger, and destroy key elements of the air defense system itself."

Israel relies on a multilayer defense system, with long-range Arrow interceptors targeting ballistic missiles above the Earth's atmosphere, the medium-range David's Sling handling ballistic and cruise missiles about 10 miles high, and the short-range Iron Dome stopping cruise missiles, short-range rockets and artillery and mortar shells at low altitude. All depend on the production and reloading of missiles adequate to the threat.

The problem is that these three systems can't protect each other. "The degree of mutual assistance and protection between the layers is relatively limited," Ortal and Kochav wrote. To optimize the allocation of a limited supply of interceptor missiles, "each tier was designed to deal with a specific type of missile or rocket. Iron Dome can't really assist Arrow batteries or support their missions. This limitation is equally true among the other layers."

Nor are Israel's air defenses built for survivability, such as creating decoy missile batteries and radars to protect the real ones or frequently relocating systems. "The degree of mobility, protection and hiding ability of the Israeli air defense system is inadequate. Unlike similar systems in the world, our air defense system was not built with synchronization as a critical goal."

Their solution? The creation of a fourth layer focused on point protection of the radar, missile launchers and troops that operate them against rockets and drones that have penetrated the first three layers. Air defenses must be camouflaged and should be mobile enough to change location before the enemy can target them.

Ironically, Israel itself was one of the pioneers of using drones to suppress air defenses. Stung by heavy losses from Soviet-made surface-to-air missiles in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel used drones in during the 1982 Lebanon War. By using unmanned aerial vehicles that mimicked manned aircraft, Israel lured Syrian air defense radars into coming online so they could be destroyed by anti-radiation missiles. The Israeli Air Force destroyed 29 out of 30 anti-aircraft missile batteries in the Bekaa Valley without loss and downed more than 60 Syrian aircraft.

Israel's Air Force became so dominant that the ground forces discarded their tactical anti-aircraft weapons (though the IDF recently reactivated the M61 Vulcan gatling cannon for counter-UAV defense on the northern border). Meanwhile, the IDF's air defense corps switched its focus from anti-aircraft to missile defense.

"The working assumption was, and remains to this day, that Israel's Air Force rules the skies," wrote Ortal and Kochav. "The job of air defense, therefore, is to focus on missiles and rockets. This assumption is no longer valid."

Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.

• The Houthis have spent the past year menacing key shipping lanes with missiles and drones.
• The US-led military response has been unable to effectively stop the rebels from attacking ships.
• A more aggressive approach is unlikely — putting the conflict at an impasse.

On a blue sky day last November, a helicopter carrying Houthi gunmen descended on a commercial shipping vessel in the Red Sea. The rebels jumped out, seized control of the ship, and took the crew hostage. They're still in captivity in Yemen.

The dramatic hijacking of the Galaxy Leader, which was captured on video, catapulted the Houthis into the global limelight. In the year since, the rebels have menaced key Middle East shipping routes with missiles and drones, disrupting maritime trade.

The American military has led a Western naval coalition into battle against the Houthis to curb their relentless attacks, but a year of intense combat has brought the US no closer to ending the threat posed by the rebels — and, for now, a more aggressive approach doesn't appear to be the desired course.

"We're not looking for a military solution in Yemen at this particular time," US Special Envoy for Yemen Tim Lenderking told Business Insider in a recent interview. He said that chasing such an outcome could bring more devastation to a country shattered by years of war.

"To pursue that would subject Yemen to more years of death and destruction and military conflict," he explained, arguing that "it is essential to consider the impact on Yemeni civilians, on the impact on Yemen's economy and infrastructure, the ability to move supplies in, the ability for commercial goods to get into Yemen."

That restrained approach to the ongoing Houthi crisis leaves the US military engaged in combat operations without a clear path to victory.

'The threat still persists'

The Houthis have launched more than 130 attacks targeting military and civilian vessels in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden in a campaign that the Iran-backed rebels claim is connected to the Israel-Hamas war. They have struck a number of commercial ships, sinking two of them and hijacking one (the Galaxy Leader), and killed four sailors.

Merchant shipping through the Red Sea normally accounts for as much as 15% of global maritime trade, the US Defense Intelligence Agency said in a report earlier this year. However, the ongoing Houthi attacks have caused a notable decline in activity along that critical route, forcing ships to make longer and more expensive trips around Africa.

US warships and aircraft operating in the region have routinely been tasked with intercepting Houthi missiles and drones in defense of key shipping lanes. The military has also carried out airstrikes against the rebels in Yemen, targeting their weapons, launchers, and other facilities.

The Pentagon has said that these efforts are intended to degrade the Houthis' capabilities, but the rebels still retain the ability to target ships. This month alone, for instance, they have launched attacks on a commercial vessel and several American destroyers, though they have yet to score a hit on a warship.

Analysts at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank said last month that even though Houthi strikes against commercial ships have declined, the response — which includes American, British, and Israeli strikes — over the past year has been insufficient.

"The threat still persists, and there doesn't seem to be much abating that," retired Gen. Joseph Votel, who oversaw military operations in the Middle East in the 2010s as the commander of US Central Command, told BI.

He said that US military operations "have been clearly focused on trying to defend ourselves and going after launch sites, production sites, storage sites, maybe some command and control sites — but none of that seems to be deterring the Houthis at all."

Limited options

Some analysts have said the US should consider a more aggressive response to the Houthis, including greater efforts to cut the flow of weapons and capabilities from Iran.

Brian Carter, the Middle East portfolio manager at the American Enterprise Institute's Critical Threats Project, wrote in an analysis earlier this month that "allowing the Houthis to protract their gradual escalation campaign is a much more dangerous policy choice for the US in the long run than a more decisive military effort would have been."

The Navy admiral overseeing naval operations in the Middle East has said that military action alone won't be enough to stop the rebels. "The solution is not going to come at the end of a weapon system," Vice Adm. George Wikoff, who leads US Naval Forces Central Command, stressed at a think tank event in August.

A diplomatic solution, however, remains unclear. The Houthis have tied their actions to the Gaza war, but it remains to be seen if a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas pushes them to stop their attacks. The rebels did not adhere to a pause in fighting last fall.

With no apparent end in sight, the conflict has raised real concerns about sustainability. Over the past year, the Navy has fired off hundreds of munitions in its Middle East operations, costing over $1.8 billion and draining the Pentagon of key missiles that are expensive to procure.

Votel, now a distinguished senior fellow on national security at the Middle East Institute think tank, said that the US can continue to send warships into the fight, but the conflict is impacting other priorities within the Pentagon's national security strategy, such as China's growing military capabilities.

There are no indications that US naval activity is set to wind down. Officials stress that Washington will continue to act against the Houthis to stop their attacks. Even as some warships left the Middle East earlier this month, other vessels have already moved in to take their place.

"We are committed to ensuring the freedom of navigation, ensure that ships are able to pass through in the Red Sea," said Lenderking, the US envoy.

"Of course, much of international commerce that flows through the Red Sea has adjusted toward alternatives," he added. "But we think the fact that a non-state actor is aggressing the international community in this manner is not something that we or the international community should abide by."

But, for now, it's unclear what will make it stop.

• Rapid advances have turned drones into aerial spies and flying bombs.
• They pose increasing risks to governments, companies, and public utilities.
• Defense companies like MARSS and Dedrone sell systems designed to defeat drones.

Attack drones are evolving so rapidly in the cauldrons of combat in the Middle East and Ukraine that militaries and even law enforcement agencies see a pressing need for defenses.

Companies are rushing to meet these needs even as unmanned aerial vehicles continue to change rapidly to exploit vulnerabilities.

"That's essentially been what we've been trying to do over the last decade — play catch up — and the UAV threats have always been able to stay one step ahead of the counter-[unmanned aerial systems] systems as we're developing them," said Jamey D. Jacob, a mechanical engineer who is director of Oklahoma State University's Unmanned Systems Research Institute.

This demand for defenses is a booming area where start-ups and newer companies compete with the largest defense contractors to build the sensors and weapons to defeat drones and the AI-assisted networks that integrate them into a clear picture for a human operator.

The typical ways to counter drones can be broken into four steps: detect, track, identify, and mitigate threats. Sensors like radars and cameras are essential to the first three tasks. The final step to stop the threat can be accomplished via frequency jamming and electronic warfare (soft-kill) or by physically damaging it (hard-kill).

One company specializing in creating the battlefield awareness systems to spot and defeat drones is MARSS, a global defense technology company.

MARSS' technology is designed to detect, analyze, and annotate the heaps of data collected by its integrated systems and present it in a way "that the drone operator could understand it extremely easily," said Josh Harman, Vice President of Business Development at MARSS Group.

"What was happening when the drone threat started to continually evolve and get more complicated, you had to turn drone sensor solutions into a layered defense solution," he added.

The defense tech company focuses on developing counter-drone platforms that detect threats for civilian, government, and military clientele.

Earlier this year, MARSS showcased its AI-driven NiDAR counter-drone system at the Red Sands military drills in Saudi Arabia, jointly run by Saudi armed forces and the US Army Combat Capabilities Development Command.

"Over the course of the Red Sands exercise, MARSS demonstrated multi-sensor integration on a single UI that was mature and devastatingly effective against the various air threats — reducing the decision cycle of 'detect to defeat' to a matter of seconds," Harman told UASWeekly at the time.

'Golden age of aviation'

Drone defenses are difficult and iterative simply because they are counters to technology that's leaping ahead.

The flexibility and cost-effectiveness of UAVs has ushered in a "new golden age of aviation where you can come up with really neat ideas that you weren't able to develop a decade ago," said Jacob, the UAV expert at OSU.

"What we see in the drone industry is really flipping this conventional aircraft design cycle on its head, which is really what allows new companies to compete because they could be much more nimble and don't have to have the big development budgets that are necessary for the development of full-scale manned aircraft," Jacob told Business Insider in an interview.

The drone makers and pilots are devising ways to dominate the battlefield while drone defenders try to figure out how to neutralize them in a game of spy-vs-spy that has implications far beyond the battlefield. Drone defenses range from radiofrequency detectors to jammers and guns. MARSS sees an opportunity to network them together into an integrated, operator-controlled network.

"Most companies in the market were building specific sensors, whether it be radars, radio frequency, directed energy, kinetic energy, kinetic guns, missiles, or whatever it may be," said MARSS's Harman. "Essentially, you had a lot of different systems out there working independently, not in sync, and you had a low success rate across not only all the US services but also the international services as well."

Another defense company has developed its drone shields from combat use in Ukraine.

Virginia-based drone company Dedrone by Axon has integrated artificial intelligence and machine learning solutions into its open-architecture counter-drone platforms.

"When you think about our use across the world — both on the public safety side, but especially on the national security side — by virtue of being in situ, not only does our AI-ML machine get smarter every day, but we are also able to benefit and improve our system at that same pace that the drones are evolving in the conflict zones," said Mary-Lou Smulders, CMO and head of government affairs at Dedrone.

Dedrone allows a buyer, such as an airport authority or electrical power plant, to set up a network of sensors and jammers and have AI guide the user to quickly identify and respond to threats it detects.

MARSS also says its counter-drone networks are enhanced by supervised machine learning and AI skillset to alert the user sooner.

"It's a big, big deal when you can extend the range on detection, you give the operator a lot more time to act accordingly and to lower any mistakes," Harman said. "When you can eliminate a large portion of all the false positives, you allow the operators to focus on what they need to focus on."

• Airlines are using more narrow-body planes across the Atlantic, opening new routes for flyers.
• New single-aisle planes offer cost efficiency, smaller capacity, and flexible cabins.
• The Boeing 757 used to be the main transatlantic workhorse but is losing market share to Airbus.

New narrow-body planes designed for long-haul flights are changing how people fly.

This evolution has been largely propelled by the Airbus A321neo family, smaller planes that can flyer further than previous single-aisle aircraft. Its longest-ranged variant, the newly launched A321XLR, can fly up to 11 hours nonstop and carry up to 240 people.

These planes are popular with airlines because they can connect profitable cities that previously required a high-capacity wide-body plane like the Boeing 767 or Airbus A330. Flexible cabins mean airlines can offer different cabin configurations, like all-economy or a mix of business and coach.

Airlines can also earn extended-range allowances that govern how passenger jets can safely fly over the open ocean.

In 2024, 39,000 flights between North America and Europe are scheduled on single-aisle planes made by Boeing and Airbus, according to data from Cirium, an aviation analytics company. That's a 14% increase from the previous year and 40% more than in 2019.

Airbus is pioneering this narrow-body shift

Such a focus on single-aisle planes that can tackle long flights has been a boon for Airbus.

JetBlue, for example, started flying between New York and Europe in 2021 with about 400 total flights on its A321neoLRs. In 2024, that figure is set to hit 7,200 in 2024.

The launch of Iberia's A321XLR has added at least another 1,400 flights for 2025, per Cirium, with more to come as the jet is delivered to more airlines.

Such growth has come at the expense of Boeing's 757. The jet has been a transatlantic workhorse since the 1980s but now only represents 23% of flights to and from Europe, down from 82% in 2019.

With no replacement available, airlines are turning to the A321XLR — paving the way for Airbus to continue dominating the growing market.

Long-haul narrowbodies are cheaper to fly

Before long-haul single-aisle operations became popular, airlines struggled to fly lower-demand city pairs with widebodies because the bigger planes weren't always full — meaning they weren't making money.

This effectively eliminated direct routes to smaller leisure markets, forcing flyers to make one or more stops to reach smaller cities.

New narrowbodies solve this problem thanks to their powerful engines, fuel efficiency, and lighter weight.

United Airlines, for example, uses single-aisle jets between unique city pairs that other carriers don't fly, such as those from Newark Liberty to Malaga, Spain, and Chicago to Shannon, Ireland.

United's SVP of global network planning and alliances, Patrick Quayle, told BI in August that a Boeing 787 or Boeing 767 widebody wouldn't economic make sense in these smaller markets. The carrier plans to expand its long-haul operations with the cost-effective A321XLR.

Meanwhile, Icelandic low-cost carrier Play learned from its predecessor, WOW Air, that using widebody planes in a budget transatlantic business model is difficult because the big jet requires constant high demand — prompting Play to use Airbus narrowbodies between the US and Europe.

Single-aisle jets offer versatile route options

One reason mainline carriers like United and Iberia are moving in the single-aisle direction is because it allows them to right-size their routes depending on demand.

Cirium data shows Iberia plans to fly two A321XLRs daily between Madrid and Boston in the summer of 2025, with each carrying up to 182 people.

This allows Iberia to capture the demand without oversizing the route with two 288-passenger A330s or losing out on potential business with just one widebody.

Flying two single-aisle planes across the Atlantic instead of one widebody, for example, could up daily frequencies from one to two and give travelers more flexible options.

Airlines like Tap Air Portugal and Ireland's Aer Lingus switch between A321neo and A330 planes throughout the year, flying the bigger jet during the summer and holiday months, per Cirium.

Single-aisle planes don't always fly long haul. Their versatility, especially the previous generation A321neos and the Boeing 757, allows airlines to efficiently deploy them on short or medium-haul routes.

Delta Air Lines has decreased its 757 transatlantic flying over the years in favor of more domestic routes, per Cirium.

Widebodies don't have the same flexibility, except on a few very high-demand cross-country treks like New York to Los Angeles.

Narrow-body planes can accommodate more flexible cabins

One of the draws of these small but powerful aircraft is their versatility because they can fit into both mainline and low-cost fleets with varying cabin layouts.

Some airlines, like JetBlue and Aer Lingus, equip their A321LRs with business and economy classes. Meanwhile, Hungarian low-cost airline Wizz Air plans to fly a no-frills, all-economy A321XLR cabin where even water costs extra, and France's La Compagnie has all-business-class A321LRs.

Some flyers may be hesitant to fly on a narrow-body long-haul, but flying on these planes across the Atlantic is not much different from riding in a one cross-country.

Boston to Madrid lasts about seven hours, while New York to Los Angeles is about six and a half hours — though most flyers will get more perks on flights to Europe, like hot meals and linens.

Plus, single-aisle flying allows for quicker boarding and deplaning, which may be welcome time-savings for some customers — especially during tight layovers.

• Microsoft's Bing search engine has Copilot AI features built into it.
• Copilot, integrated into Bing, can perform tasks like writing poems and making reservations.
• Here's how to use the AI service in Bing.

Microsoft first unveiled a revamped, AI-powered version of its search engine, Bing, last year.

The new Bing, which promised to be "more powerful than ChatGPT," runs on Microsoft's own next-generation language model called "Prometheus." The proprietary technology was developed using elements of OpenAI's most advanced GPT models as part of Microsoft's partnership with the company.

Built into the revamped search engine is Microsoft's AI chatbot, Copilot, which can perform a number of tasks the old Bing never dreamed of, like suggesting recipes, writing poems, conducting image-based search queries, and making restaurant reservations. Copilot was formerly called Bing Chat.

Microsoft's Bing was launched in 2009, more than a decade after Google's launch — and though it's come a long way since then, Bing still holds a fraction of the market share compared to Google.

And though Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella once raved that Copilot would "fundamentally transform our relationship with technology," the AI assistant has struggled to live up to the hype, both inside and outside the company.

Here's a step-by-step walkthrough of how to access and use the new Bing with Copilot.

How to use the new Bing

1. Go to Bing.com/new in your internet browser.

   Note: You don't need to download Microsoft's web browser, Edge, but if you do, Copilot is integrated directly into the browser, with an icon in the top-right corner that lets you chat with the AI companion.

   

2. There are a few ways to use AI in your search experience from the Bing homepage.

3. One option is to click "Try now" underneath the heading "Bing generative search," located directly below the general search bar on the Bing homepage.

   

   • The "Try now" button takes you to a search results page that auto-populates for the query "How can I get started with learning to play the guitar."
   • The page displays several helpful resources related to that query, including a Table of Contents with sections that guide you through the process of learning to play guitar, alongside videos and step-by-step instructions.

   

   • You can also type in your own query, like "How to paint a bathroom," and, depending on the query you search, the results will offer helpful sections including relevant videos, instructions, and, in this case, a section on the side for the best paint to use on bathroom cabinets.

     

4. Another option is to click "Copilot" in the bar at the very top of the Bing homepage.

   

   • This takes you to the Copilot homepage where you can message the chatbot.

   • In the "Message Copilot" text field at the bottom of the page, you can type something you need help with, like, for example, "Write me a poem," or "plants that survive with minimal light." The chatbot will quickly give you a detailed response — for example, it offered 10 options for plants that don't need much light.

     

• Adam Knorr left a lucrative finance career to pursue writing in Hawaii in 2022.
• Despite a growing salary and the opportunity for a big promotion, Knorr felt unfulfilled in finance.
• Knorr now freelances as a copywriter and ghostwriter and has no regrets about leaving finance.

I walked away from life-changing money in finance to chase my dream of becoming a writer. I had no experience, clients, or idea where to start.

I moved from Nashville to Hawaii to figure it out.

I graduated with a journalism degree, but my brother worked in finance in Nashville. He told me he could get me an interview at his company. I interviewed, got the job, ditched my dreams, and chased a paycheck for six years.

I never liked working in finance, but the money made it hard to leave

I started working in 2016 and made about $50,000 as a 22-year-old. I felt rich, and the number kept climbing.

By 2021, I was making nearly $150,000 a year. Halfway through my last year, I was on pace to make $205,000. I was also interviewing for new roles in the $250,000 range.

Every day I worked in finance, I knew it wasn't right for me. I wanted to quit and be a writer, but the money was too good.

Finally, in May 2022, when I was up for a promotion, the dam burst. I remember going home one night after a final interview, and I could feel it in my gut. I knew I didn't want to get the job; it would trap me, and I'd regret pursuing it.

I printed off my two-week notice that night and quit the next day. My boss and coworkers were in disbelief when they found out, but for the most part, I had tremendous support from the people in my life.

After quitting my job, I moved to Hawaii in June 2022

I heard about a work-stay program at a coffee farm on the Big Island of Hawaii through my brother and sister-in-law, who had visited Hawaii. You can live on the farm in exchange for 28 hours of work a week. That sounded like a pretty good deal since my income dropped from six figures to $0 overnight.

I put my stuff in storage, packed a carry-on and a backpack, and flew to Hawaii, trading in my Nashville high-rise apartment and rooftop pool parties for a one-floor communal living house with six college kids.

I worked as a tour guide on the farm a few days a week. The rest of the time, I tried to figure out how to make a living as a writer.

I had never been to Hawaii before I moved

Visiting and living in a place are different experiences. Hawaii is a rock in the middle of the ocean — sometimes, it feels like it, but for any of the cons, there are more pros.

It was nice to get a break from city life and a good reminder that the world outside your immediate circle is full of people who live life at a different pace.

I had to get creative to land my first client

I wanted to become a freelance copywriter, but the industry is saturated. Many people are attracted to the opportunity to work for themselves, travel the world, and make money by pressing a few keys on a keyboard.

I spent day after day locked in my bedroom in Hawaii — just me and the geckos — sending cold emails and LinkedIn messages. I got a few nibbles but no bites.

I decided I wanted a car to explore the island. I contacted a local car rental service and noticed the owner's website needed serious copywriting work, so we struck a deal. I'd write his entire website for $500 and an extra month of my rented Dodge Challenger. I had my first client.

I started freelancing with an agency thanks to a cold email I sent. Then, I started posting on LinkedIn and picked a couple of clients up that way. Today, I'm a full-time freelance copywriter and ghostwriter.

I started writing a book in Hawaii before moving to Michigan

While in the work-stay program, I wrote some email copy for the farm. The emails did well, and one day, I sat down with the farm's CEO.

He envisioned writing a book about the history of a local church and using it to raise money to restore some of the murals that had deteriorated over the last 125 years. He asked me if I'd be up for writing the book. I agreed and started splitting my time between leading farm tours and researching for the book.

All roads lead home. I moved to Michigan in March 2023 to be closer to my family.

Quitting finance was worth it, but it's more nuanced than that

In my first full year of freelancing, I made $85,500. Through November 2024, I've made $110,000. I'm grateful to be doing as well as I am, but I can't pretend like I don't think about the money I would've made by staying in finance.

Gratitude and perspective are more important than the number on your tax returns, but it's also ignorant to pretend like money doesn't matter. I wonder sometimes if I was dumb for leaving that money behind — it's impossible not to.

But was it worth it? Am I happier? Would I do it again? Yes, 10 times out of 10.

I had to know if there was something more out there for me

When deciding whether to quit my job to pursue this dream, I heard Tim Ferriss on a podcast recommending playing out the worst-case scenario of a decision in your head. How catastrophic is it? How permanent is the impact? How bad would it really be?

Worst-case scenario 1: If I stay in finance, I'll always regret not discovering what I could've made of myself.

Worst-case scenario 2: I try to write, fail, and get another finance job.

For me, the fear of regret was greater than failure.

Now, I never have to wonder, "What if?" or think about what I could've done with my life. I know the answer.

• Israel is expected to soon deploy its top missile-defense system, Arrow 3, to Germany.
• Arrow's chief engineer told BI that the system had already proved its worth in combat.
• The transfer, planned for next year, comes amid growing concerns in Europe over Russian missiles.

Germany is expected to receive a top Israeli missile-defense system that helped protect the Middle Eastern country from two massive Iranian attacks earlier this year.

Israel is set to deploy the Arrow 3, a highly advanced system designed to intercept ballistic missiles outside the Earth's atmosphere, on German soil in 2025 as part of a $3.5 billion deal announced last fall in what officials said was the country's largest-ever defense export.

The transfer comes as Europe and NATO allies like Germany face a rising Russian missile threat to its eastern flank. Just last week, Moscow used a new intermediate-range ballistic missile to strike Ukraine.

Arrow 3 made its combat debut just a year ago in the early days of Israel's ongoing war with Hamas. But the system's chief engineer told Business Insider that it had proved its worth against two massive Iranian missile barrages in April and October of this year.

"Arrow 3 is the right answer for Germany, and, also, it'll be a part of an even greater system to German allies in Europe," Boaz Levy, the CEO of the state-run Israel Aerospace Industries, said in a recent interview.

The Arrow systems are a product of IAI and the US manufacturer Boeing. They were developed because Israel needed a way to defend itself from longer-range ballistic missiles. Together, they make up the upper echelon of the country's air-defense network.

Arrow 2, which was first deployed in 2000, can intercept targets in the upper atmosphere. It was followed in 2017 by Arrow 3, which can eliminate targets in space and up to 1,500 miles away — well beyond the ranges of the US's Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense systems. Both systems use a two-stage solid-fueled interceptor to engage incoming ballistic missiles.

Israel confirmed the first operational use of Arrow 3 in November of last year after it was used to take down a missile fired by Houthi rebels in Yemen. But the system saw its most serious tests against two massive Iranian attacks this year.

In mid-April, Iran fired more than 300 missiles and drones — including some 120 ballistic missiles — at Israel, which, along with partner forces like the US and the UK, shot down nearly all the munitions.

Six months later, in early October, Iran fired a much larger salvo of ballistic missiles — about 200 — at Israel. Most of the projectiles were intercepted, including by American warships.

Earlier this month, the Israeli defense ministry said Arrow "proved effective" in both Iranian attacks. Levy declined to provide specific figures on its performance. But he said the system performed as intended, adding that "the results that we received over those attacks are really phenomenal."

"We believe that the system proved its capability during these two attacks," he said.

Arrow's demonstrated capability in the Middle East conflicts will make it a valuable asset to Germany as Europe grows increasingly concerned with the Russian missile threat. Moscow's war against Ukraine and its widespread employment of ballistic missiles has prompted NATO countries to seek ways to bolster their air defenses.

Unease over Russian missile capabilities was underscored last week after Moscow launched an experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile at Ukraine. A Pentagon spokesperson described the weapon as a "new type of lethal capability" deployed on the battlefield and called it a "concern" to the US.

When Arrow 3 eventually arrives in Germany, it will complement NATO's existing network of systems capable of ballistic-missile defense, including the American-made MIM-104 Patriot battery that has been a workhorse in Ukraine.

In a statement earlier this month, Israel's defense ministry said it has started coordinating joint preparations with Berlin for the initial deployment of Arrow 3 next year. It did not provide a specific date.

Levy said the deployment to Germany was just a starting point, but it comes at a crucial time as missile attacks become more common in conflicts.

"We should expect to have missile attacks in future wars, and that's why a country that wants to defend its assets needs to have such a sophisticated system," Levy said. "Arrow was designed for that."

"I believe that more customers will come," he added.

• Netflix emerged as the winner of the streaming wars this year.
• It's forecasting billions of dollars in profit, and its stock is rocketing.
• From vast ad ambitions to zeitgeisty true crime fare, here are five of its biggest achievements.

The year 2024 has been one to remember for Netflix.

Crowned the winner of the streaming wars, the streamer solidified its already huge lead in subscribers — with more than 280 million paying users around the world as of the third quarter, generating billions of dollars in profit annually and sending its stock price soaring.

Meanwhile, Netflix continued to flex its first-mover advantage over cash-hungry rivals, who retrenched and returned to licensing their shows back to Netflix, which will likely fuel its continued dominance.

Netflix continues to put out hits that keep people watching and subscribing. Lately, it's been leaning into popular fare like true crime and live events that have big advertiser — and water-cooler — appeal.

It's continued to capitalize on its password-sharing crackdown and is ramping up ad tech and measurement deals to entice more advertisers to buy on the platform.

Netflix faces questions about how much more it can grow its audience without sacrificing profits, whether it can compete for ad dollars with the likes of Amazon's Prime Video, and how it can capture younger viewers who grew up on YouTube.

But for now, here's a look back at the biggest swings Netflix took this past year:

A massive push into live sports

Netflix swung big into live programming in 2024, a format that's key to its burgeoning ad business.

The streamer hosted its most-watched live event to date in November, a glitch-ridden boxing bout between Jake Paul and Mike Tyson that drew 60 million households as live viewers. And it'll close the year with another spectacle: its first Christmas Day NFL game, which will include Beyoncé performing at half-time.

Stellar advertising growth amid an executive shake-up

Netflix has undergone leadership changes across multiple teams this year. In advertising, where the company harbors vast ambitions, Ampersand's Nicolle Pangis replaced Peter Naylor as VP of advertising.

The move came as Netflix reported stellar growth for ad-supported subscribers in 2024 — to the tune of 70 million, up from 40 million in May.

Next up for ads? Netflix is building its own ad technology to further open the spigot, which it said will roll out next year.

A leadership and strategy overhaul in film

At the beginning of the year, Netflix parted ways with longtime movie chief Scott Stuber.

The New York Times reported in April that Stuber clashed with higher-ups over what kind of movies to make. Chief Content Officer Bela Bajaria told staff in a meeting that quality needed to improve as the company shifted strategy.

Incoming film boss Dan Lin entered with a streamlined vision.

Rather than big-budget action films and big-name stars, he sought to diversify the company's offering, prioritizing in-house producers and skipping theatrical releases. Lin also ended the massive upfront checks the company had been writing to movie stars.

True crime hits with real-world consequences

Netflix continued to focus on true crime this year. But while its series were enormously popular, some plunged the streamer into controversy.

The stalker saga "Baby Reindeer" and the scammer series "Inventing Anna" drew defamation suits, which Netflix said it would defend. And Netflix's two projects about the Menendez brothers — a Ryan Murphy-produced drama and an accompanying documentary — were also ensconced in controversy.

The brothers' families criticized the show, though Murphy has said the brothers should be grateful given the attention the project received. In October, Los Angeles's top prosecutor recommended the brothers be resentenced with the option of parole.

A password crackdown continued to fuel growth

Subscribers initially balked at Netflix's bid to ban password sharing, but in the end, the streamer prevailed.

The move helped to fuel impressive earnings reports this year, with subscriber growth that repeatedly surpassed expectations — and caused its stock to soar.

While Netflix has emerged as the clear victor of the streaming wars, that wasn't always a foregone conclusion given the loads of debt it previously accrued to fund its production war chest. Today, the streamer is forecasting billions of dollars in profit while competitors struggle to break even.

That said, analysts expect the effects of Netflix's password crackdown to diminish in the future.

Correction: December 3, 2024 — The Paul-Tyson fight drew 60 million households, not people, as live viewers, Netflix said. An earlier version of this story misstated that figure.

• The US blocked Turkey from acquiring F-35 stealth fighters.
• Turkey wants the F-35s and may be willing to move the Russian air defenses that triggered the ban.
• President-elect Trump may favor a deal, but he'll likely face resistance inside his administration.

Until five years ago, Turkey had planned to buy 100 of Lockheed Martin's F-35 stealth jets to modernize its air force. But its acquisition of a top-of-the-line Russian air defense missile system dashed that plan, with the US barring Turkey from acquiring any F-35s out of concern the sophisticated Russian system could compromise its tiny radar return.

Five years later, Ankara hopes the incoming Trump administration will reverse its ban.

Turkish sources are signaling the discussion may go beyond an appeal from Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with whom Donald Trump built a rapport. According to Bloomberg, Turkey may agree to restrict its Russian S-400s air defenses in return for the US lifting sanctions. Over the summer, Greek media reported that Washington suggested Ankara transfer the Russian missile launchers to the American section of Turkey's Incirlik airbase, effectively putting them under American supervision.

"If Turkey agrees to a soft decommissioning of the S-400s by storing them at Incirlik under US supervision, it could significantly accelerate Ankara's reintegration into the F-35 program," Suleyman Ozeren, a lecturer at the American University and senior fellow at the Orion Policy Institute, told Business Insider.

"However, this move would likely require Moscow's consent, which presents a complex challenge."

That's not the only hurdle. While analysts see signs that Trump and Turkey may try to clear the impasse, any agreement could still face resistance in his cabinet and in Congress, which passed the 2017 legislation under which Turkey would later be sanctioned for its acquisition of the S-400 system.

Ali Bakir, a Turkey expert at Qatar University's Ibn Khaldon Center and nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative, sees "cautious optimism" in Ankara.

He attributes this to the belief that "personal understanding and communication" between Trump and Erdogan will resolve outstanding issues in the Turkish-US relationship, paving the way for a "fresh start."

"However, it is important to acknowledge that Congress also plays a significant role in this dynamic," Bakir told BI. "Congress has often been the most problematic element in US-Turkish relations, rather than the US president."

"Early indications suggest that Congress may not be particularly favorable towards Ankara," Bakir said.

Ozeren also anticipates Ankara could find "greater room to maneuver" during Trump's second term, especially as Republicans will control the House and Senate.

"In theory, this could increase the chances of obtaining US approval for Turkey's return to the F-35 program," Ozeren said. "Nonetheless, given the deeply strained relations over the past decade, any progress would likely be fraught with difficulties and setbacks."

Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at the risk intelligence company RANE, believes Trump is personally "keen" on selling F-35s to Turkey.

However, Trump's nominee for secretary of state, Marco Rubio, is a Russia and China hawk and may prove "less flexible" on the requirements of the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act that became law in 2017. Bohl sees "little sign" that the law will be overturned.

"So, it will remain to be seen if Trump can overcome these institutional hurdles to a sale to Turkey," Bohl told BI.

Before Turkey received any S-400s, Washington had repeatedly warned Ankara it would not tolerate F-35s flying in a military that also operates S-400s, fearing that could compromise the low observable radar signature critical to the aircraft's survivability. Placing Turkish S-400s under US supervision in Incirlik could resolve such concerns.

"The damage will never be too severe in terms of relations; what matters is whether or not the administration, and Congress, decides Turkey has done enough to limit the potential exposure of the F-35 to Russian intelligence and/or information gathering," Bohl said.

"That will likely be a split between Trump, who tends not to emphasize such risks, and the Pentagon and intelligence services, who do," Bohl added. "Even with a pliable defense secretary compared to Mark Esper in his first term, this consideration may still be in play."

Turkey has repeatedly asserted over the years that it no longer needs F-35s since it is developing its indigenous stealth jet, the TF Kaan. Despite these assertions, Ankara would most likely welcome another chance to acquire the fifth-generation produced by Lockheed Martin, in partnership with Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems; its powerful single-engine is built by Pratt & Whitney, a subsidiary of RTX Corporation. The F-35 is flown by 17 American allies.

"I believe that if the ban on F-35s is lifted, Ankara would definitely want to acquire them, despite other parallel deals, as Turkey cannot afford to be overly dependent on a single player in critical times," Bakir said.

At the same time, Turkey is developing domestic air defenses and has never put the S-400 into service in the five years since receiving them. The intervening Ukraine war, where Russian S-400s suffered losses, could reduce the value Turkey sees in them.

"Certainly, the S-400's combat performance against Ukraine has been mixed; Turkey may conclude that more advanced F-35s are in its national interest, particularly given Israel's recent deployment of F-35s against Iran," Bohl said.

"At the same time, F-35s will be reliant on US supply chains, and those could be interrupted over politics or because of other priorities that make resupply difficult."

Paul Iddon is a freelance journalist and columnist who writes about Middle East developments, military affairs, politics, and history. His articles have appeared in a variety of publications focused on the region.