This is a preview of the Influencer Marketing (2018) research report from Business Insider Intelligence. To learn more about the top platforms, as well as strategies for social media influencer marketing, click here. Current subscribers can read the report here.

The concept of a brand hiring a popular personality to promote a product or service isn't new, and brands know that celebrity endorsements can sell products. In the age of social media, however, brands are finding new ways to leverage popular figures as brand ambassadors, and these people aren't necessarily famous actors, singers, or athletes.

How brands are leveraging social media influencer marketing

While brands certainly continue to tap celebrities for endorsement deals, they’re also starting to enlist social media personalities, broadly known as “influencers,” for advertising campaigns. Social influencers generally focus on specific content areas — like fashion, beauty, parenting, or gaming — and cater their content to a specific vertical.

A new report from BI Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service, identifies the ways brands can find and manage relationships with social media influencers. It notes the most engaging industry verticals, the pitfalls to avoid, and the opportunities to cash-in on. Finally, it explores how major social platforms are increasingly building out tools that enable their most popular users to build their personal brands.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

• Influencer marketing ad spend is poised to reach between $5 billion and $10 billion in 2022. Taking the midpoint of $7.5 billion as a base case, this represents a five-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 38%.
• Brands need to fine-balance providing influencers with enough creative freedom, while also ensuring the messaging positively reflects the brand. Nearly 40% of influencers believe that overly restrictive content guidelines are one of the biggest mistakes brands and agencies make when working with them. 
• Influencers tend to have higher user engagement than content generated by brands. The average influencer engagement rate across industry verticals is 5.7%. As a comparison, the average engagement rate for brands on Instagram has fluctuated between 2-3% in the past year. 
• Authenticity is key for influencer marketing messaging. Brands should give influencers sufficient creative freedom to keep posts authentic, as it makes posts less likely to be dismissed by users. Other best practices include repurposing influencer content for multiple platforms, evaluating the audience and following of an influencer, and leveraging data to optimize future campaigns. 

 In full, the report:

• Outlines recent steps the top social platforms are taking for influencer posts.
• Details the best practices brands should adopt when starting out with influencer marketing. 
• Discusses the top verticals that are poised to benefit the most from influencer marketing, and which ones are growing. 
• Highlights the factors that will be critical for compliance with social platforms and the FTC.

Join the conversation about this story »

• Russia test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile in its far east on Wednesday, according to the Russian defense ministry.
• The RS-24 Yars, a solid-fuel missile carrying multiple warheads and equipped with countermeasures, is designed to be launched quickly and to evade missile-defense systems.
• The test comes amid rising tensions between Washington and Moscow and as a brewing arms race between the two great powers kicks into high gear.

Russia test-fired its advanced RS-24 Yars intercontinental ballistic missile Wednesday, the Russian defense ministry said, amid rising tensions between Washington and Moscow.

The road-mobile, solid-fuel ICBM, which was "armed with multiple warheads," was launched from the Plesetsk state testing spaceport, according to Russian state-run media outlet TASS. "The launch aimed to confirm the advanced missile system’s capabilities and flight characteristics," the ministry said.

The Yars missile went into service in 2010. It can be either mobile or silo-based and is a multiple independent reentry vehicle, or MIRV, replacement for the older Topol-M missiles. With a range of nearly 7,000 miles, the Yars was designed to beat enemy missile defenses.

The Yars has the ability to alter its trajectory during flight, and this maneuverability makes it more difficult to intercept. It can also deploy active and passive decoys — countermeasures that make it more formidable.

And then there are, of course, its multiple warheads.

"This coupled with the fact that the Yars only takes 7 minutes to launch poses serious threats to the missile defense system used by the US to protect its homeland and its allies,"according to the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance. "The RS-24 is a vital part of Moscow's effort to increase the survivability its nuclear forces and to counter missile defense systems being deployed by the United States."

The latest test comes just a few weeks after the release of the Trump administration's Missile Defense Review, a document highly criticized by Moscow, and just days after the collapse of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty — the last line of defense preventing a major nuclear arms race — from which the US withdrew over alleged Russian violations of the Cold War-era nuclear-arms agreement.

As he ripped up the INF Treaty, President Donald Trump warned the US will "move forward with developing our own military response" to Russian moves. Russian President Vladimir Putin then stressed that Russia "will respond quid pro quo."

The Russian defense ministry has called for the development of a new land-based cruise missile, a variant of the sea-launched Kalibr missiles, and hypersonic missiles. There are also reports that Russia is again testing its much-hyped Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile, although Moscow apparently has yet to achieve success with this new system.

SEE ALSO: Putin's much-hyped nuclear-powered cruise missile still isn't working right as Russia restarts testing

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: These are the secret bunkers government officials will go to in the event of an attack

• UPS hasn't moved into one of the fastest-growing sectors of e-commerce — at-home furniture deliveries. 
• UPS CEO David Abney told Business Insider that part of the reason is because UPS' small package unit is not equipped to process large packages.
• "They want something that fits on a conveyer belt," an analyst told Business Insider of UPS' strategy.  

Online orders of furniture was estimated to grow by 18.2% in 2018. That industry — powered by folks who are now comfortable ordering their couches, mattresses, and other furnishings through the internet — is now worth an estimated $50.32 billion.

The sector is obviously a boon for online retailers in the space."Big and bulky" packages also provide a new market for the trucking and logistics companies who can take those goods to your home and build them — UPS, FedEx, XPO Logistics, J.B. Hunt, and the like.

XPO Logistics, the fourth-largest trucking company in the US, has been a player in last-mile big and bulky deliveries for several years. Beyond just dropping a massive box off at the customer's house, XPO offers "white glove services" in which XPO employees carry the good into the home and install it. 

"We also made a conscious decision not to treat last-mile deliveries like freight, but rather a personalized service we offer that includes in-home installations," Mario Harik, chief information officer for XPO Logistics, told Business Insider. "If an online shopper expects the delivery of a new oven to be just as seamless as the delivery of a pair of sneakers, we have to help our customers meet those consumer expectations."

Such involvement is naturally more labor-intensive and costly for logistics companies that might be more accustomed to leaving smaller packages in a customer's mailbox or stoop. To provide white glove services, you need two employees in the delivery van, not just one, which jacks up the cost of labor, Zipline Logistics senior business development representative Jesse Juett told Business Insider.

There's also the factor of dealing with massive packages in your supply chain rather than smaller parcels. At a recent retail conference, UPS vice president of advanced technology Bala Ganesh said big and bulky packages, while part of a quickly growing furniture e-commerce sector, "disrupt the flow of packages." 

Read more: Buying furniture from the internet has become normal — and trucking companies are investing millions in the e-commerce boom

Nevertheless, the past few years have seen FedEx, JB Hunt, Werner, Schneider, and others yet crowd into the last-mile heavy goods delivery sector. "Last mile is likely to grow as more customers gravitate toward buying heavy goods online," XPO's Harik said.

There's one significant name missing from the list — UPS

UPS has notably not made a major push into home furniture deliveries. UPS CEO David Abney told Business Insider that the logistics giant is "still analyzing (the last-mile big and bulky sector) for the right opportunity."

Through UPS Freight, the company delivers large goods from business to business but not private residences, the company told Business Insider. 

UPS Freight comprises the company's less-than-truckload sector, where multiple shippers share a truck's space to ship packages. It differs from the company's better-known small-package business, in which drivers deliver one or several packages directly to consumers and businesses. 

Read more: UPS CEO David Abney has finally admitted that he sees Amazon as a competitor

"The big thing for us is to make sure we have heavy freight going into the right network," Abney said in an interview. "When online furniture just started building up, we started getting things in small package that should have gone into freight.

"We're focused on UPS Freight handling those large oversized shipments," he added.

It may seem like unneeded detail that UPS would need to separate packages from its small package network versus its freight network, but it's crucial for keeping UPS operations running smoothly. 

During Q4 2018, UPS delivered an average of 21 million packages per day globally. That's significantly more than the 15 million parcels delivered daily by FedEx, the second-largest shipping company in the US.

And before those 21 million packages got to your doorstep, they had to be received, labeled, sorted, and shipped at UPS' 1,800-plus operating facilities. Much of that processing is done via automated technology — nearly 80% will be sorted with UPS' vast array of autonomous scanners and sorters.

Read more: UPS said automated facilities will help sort almost 80% of its packages this year

With that amount of volume and automation, it's important that UPS sorting facilities, which consists mostly of small packages, don't get bogged down by, say, an errant refrigerator or couch.  

"They want something that fits on a conveyer belt," Kevin Sterling, managing director of Seaport Global Securities, told Business Insider. 

UPS specializes in delivering smaller packages, not your washing machine

Helane Becker, Cowen managing director and senior research analyst, said the choice from UPS to not be involved in last-mile heavy deliveries speaks to the company's difference in strategy from, say, FedEx.

"It's not what they do," Becker told Business Insider. "It's not their core business. UPS has always been a package delivery company and that's always been what they do." 

SEE ALSO: There's an 80-month waitlist to receive new semitrucks as manufacturers work through a massive backlog of 300,000 orders

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what it's like to drive trains on London's Tube — one of the most complicated subway systems in the world

• The flagship store as we know it is changing. 
• Experts say that large flagship stores that do not offer exciting and engaging experiences are no longer effective marketing tools for brands.
• Here's how the flagship store will likely change in the future. 

In today's shopping environment, no store is safe, not even a flagship. 

These stores, which are typically large-format and located in expensive areas of cities, have in some cases become costly burdens for retailers who have failed to innovate. 

In a recent earnings call, Gap Inc. CEO Art Peck said that the company would be closing hundreds of its stores this year, including flagship locations. It kicked off this effort at the end of 2018, closing its former New York flagship on Fifth Avenue.

Read more:Old Navy is one of the most successful stores in retail right now — but Gap's struggles are raining on its parade

"Many brands no longer find that having hundreds of thousands of square feet, in high-rent districts, is the best impression they can give customers of their brand," Maya Mikhailov, chief marketing officer and cofounder of GPShopper, told Business Insider. "Today online and mobile shopping is so much more accessible, consumers easily have the majority of brand products available at the tap of a screen."

Because of this, we are seeing major changes in how some retailers are approaching their flagships. Legacy brands such as Nike, Lululemon, and Nordstrom are taking note of their digital competitors who are entering the brick-and-mortar space to create more innovative and engaging flagship stores.

Here’s how we can expect to see flagship stores changing in the future:

SEE ALSO: Retailers from Gap to Lord & Taylor are giving up on their flagship stores — and experts say others will have to make big changes to keep the store model from dying

Smaller formats

Large square footage is no longer a prerequisite for a flagship and because of this, we are seeing a push toward smaller spaces that can be just as impactful, Mikhailov said.

Digitally native brands such as Allbirds, Glossier, and Casper are leading the way here and opening smaller locations that "exude their brand's essence every time a consumer steps through the door,"she said. 

Read more:Glossier, the wildly popular startup that's raised $86 million in its mission to revolutionize makeup and skin-care, just opened its first flagship store. Here's what it's like to shop there.

Less inventory

A flagship store that is simply a larger version of its standard store — but with more inventory — doesn't cut it anymore. Customers are increasingly favoring a more curated shopping experience. 

Brands such as Bonobos and Everlane have created demand for this "less is more" shopping experience with their so-called guideshop stores that stock a limited amount of inventory.

Legacy brands are taking notice of this. In a recent interview with Business Insider, H&M's US president Martino Pessina said the company is well aware of the downsides of overdoing it on inventory. 

"If you treat it just like a normal store but bigger, it becomes really overwhelming," he said. "We need to find ways to fill the stores creatively and not just with garments."

Read more:H&M's US president reveals the retailer's plan for the future — and it includes a lot less discounting

Places to immerse yourself in the brand's personality

The purpose of a flagship store has traditionally been to promote the brand image and tell a story, and this hasn't changed. 

"Flagship stores bring a brand's true personality to life," Jaime Bettencourt, SVP of business development at Mood Media, told Business Insider. "They not only reach and connect with their customers at the moment they are shopping, but they also have a halo effect on the entire brand."

Brands such as Glossier and Lively are finding innovative ways to tell their brand's story and educate the customers about the product. Lively, for example, offers customers the chance to attend events and talks in the store.

"It's bringing marketing and retailing together,"CEO Michelle Cordeiro Grant told Business Insider during a recent interview. The company wants shoppers to come in, experience the product, and spread the word on social media.

Read more: A company that's taking on Victoria's Secret with $35 bras just opened its first store. Here's what it's like to shop there.

• Wall Street has been concerned about GM's Cruise division struggling to launch commercially in 2019.
• GM CEO Mary Barra tried to ease those worries on the carmaker's Q4 earnings call.
• When asked about Cruise losing less than expected in 2018, Barra said that the division is benefitting from good management — and GM's CFO said that the company will spend a billion on Cruise in 2019.

GM reported fourth-quarter and full-year 2018 earnings on Wednesday, beating analysts' estimates and sending shares up about 4% before they dropped back in afternoon trading.

In its earnings statement, GM broke out results for its Cruise self-driving division. The carmaker had said in 2018 that it would spend $1 billion on Cruise, but for the year, the tally was just $700 million. 

On a call with analysts after earnings were announced, CEO Mary Barra reinforced GM's plans to Cruise, stressing that although the division has been pushing for a 2019 commercial launch, the company continues to be guided by a safety-first mission.

Read more:GM President Dan Ammann is taking over as CEO of the Cruise self-driving division as the company pushes toward a commercial launch in 2019

Goldman Sach's David Tamberrino, in a follow-up question, called Barra's comments "squishy" and noted the $300-million difference between what Cruise was expected to spend and what it did (the entire $700 million, by the way, was recorded as a loss).

Barra quickly countered that impression.

"We're not squishy at all," she said.

The explanation for Cruise losing less than anticipated? The management skills of Kyle Vogt, Cruise's co-founder and, until last year its CEO (he shifted to being the division's president and chief technology officer when former GM president Dan Ammann assumed the chief executive's role). 

"Kyle spends every dollar as if it’s his own," Barra said.

She added that if Cruise required more resources, GM is ready to provide them.

GM intends to fund Cruise at the same level it has previously, however. When asked what the budget is for 2019, CFO Dhivya Suryadevara was decisively succinct.

"Our guidance for GM Cruise for 2019 is approximately $1 billion," she said.

FOLLOW US: On Facebook for more car and transportation content!

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Chevy has built a $37.5K all-electric car capable of a 238-mile range

• Instacart is reversing a controversial payment policy that workers say drastically cut their wages.
• In a blog post published on Wednesday, Instacart's CEO Apoorva Mehta said that the company had "fallen short" in delivering its promises to shoppers. The company will be increasing its minimum payment fee to between $7 and $10 and keeping customer tips separate from its own contribution.
• Some workers are still dubious as to whether Instacart will deliver on its promises. 

Instacart shoppers are rejoicing after a protest against the company's new payment structure resulted in it being overturned. 

In a blog post published on Wednesday, Instacart's CEO Apoorva Mehta admitted that the company had "fallen short" on delivering its promises for shoppers under the new payment structure, which was rolled out nationwide last year. 

Instacart had promised that the new payment structure would make the process more transparent for its shoppers by allowing them to see a preview of the job — and how much they would be paid — before accepting it.

But the fees also changed. The former flat delivery fee was removed and replaced with a "Batch Incentive" fee, which was set at a $10 minimum and determined by the makeup of the order, trip length, and location. 

However, shoppers said that under the new system, customer tips were also factored into this fee, which meant that Instacart was often paying them as little as $1 to $2 for a job. 

Read more:Instacart workers are threatening to boycott the company over a payment policy change that they say has cut their wages

Mehta addressed this issue in his blog post: "While our intention was to increase the guaranteed payment for small orders, we understand that the inclusion of tips as a part of this guarantee was misguided. We apologize for taking this approach."

The company is increasing its batch payment fee to between $7 and $10 and keeping customer tips separate from its own contribution.

Moreover, it will retroactively compensate shoppers who were negatively impacted by the changes in the past few months by reimbursing them for the times when Instacart's payment fell below the $10 threshold.

Matthew Telles, who has worked as an Instacart shopper since 2015 and has been leading a boycott effort against the new payment structure, told Business Insider on Wednesday that while he is "all smiles and celebrations," the work is not over.

"We are cautiously optimistic about this victory. Their history shows that what's said is never really what's actually done. We will continue to have Instacart and their policies under a microscope as we move forward," he said.

Debi L., who has been an Instacart shopper since July 2017, echoed Telles' thoughts: "In a few words, I am wary."

She continued: "I am cautiously optimistic that we will finally, finally start making the money that we deserve and that our tips can now be an added bonus for us for our hard work. This has been a maddening, frustrating and, at times, incredibly disheartening experience. I am really hoping that Instacart will actually bring a group of us Shoppers into the corporate office to listen to our experiences and our ideas on how they have the ability to make this platform great for both their contractors and their customers."

SEE ALSO: Instacart workers are fighting back against a policy change they say drastically cut their wages

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch the 7 best Super Bowl commercials so far

• Chipotle beat on revenue, comparable sales, and profits.
• Shares of the burrito chain had fallen as much as 65% since October 2015, when an E. coli outbreak that was linked to Chipotle expanded to multi-states.
• Shares have rebounded more than 100% since new CEO Brian Niccol was appointed in February 2018.
• Watch Chipotle trade live.

Chipotle on Wednesday reported fourth-quarter earnings that crushed Wall Street estimates, sending shares up 5.75% to $556.95 apiece.

Here are the key numbers, compared to what Wall Street analysts were expecting, according to Bloomberg data:

• Adjusted earnings per share:$1.72 versus $1.37 expected 
• Revenue: $1.20 billion versus $1.19 billion expected
• Comparable sales: +6.1% versus +4.5% expected

Comparable restaurant sales improved primarily as a result of an increase in the average check size, which included a 3.3% benefit from menu price increases, according to the company. 

"I'm very pleased to report strong fourth quarter results with 6.1% comparable restaurant sales growth that included 2% transaction growth," said CEO Brian Niccol in a press release. "For the full year, Chipotle's average unit volumes exceeded $2 million with digital sales surpassing half a billion dollars." 

He added: "The growth acceleration this quarter gives us confidence that our strategy is working. When we connect with guests through great operations, relevant marketing focused on Chipotle's great taste and real ingredients, and provide more convenient access, they respond enthusiastically."

Shares of the burrito chain had fallen as much as 65% since October 2015, when an E. coli outbreak that was linked to Chipotle expanded to multi-states. However, they've more than doubled since Niccol's appointment in February of 2018.

Under the management of Niccol, the former head of rival Yum Brand's Taco Bell, Chipotle has heavily invested in digital ordering and delivery, and increased its share buyback program. 

Entering 2019, Chipotle's biggest challenge was skyrocketing wages, just like many other restaurants, Niccol warned last month at the ICR Conference — an event with many restaurant executives and investors attending. At the time, he told Business Insider that Chipotle was considering raising prices to help combat the wage increases, but that investors shouldn't panic. 

"Every cost in the business is a challenge," Niccol said. "The good news is we have a model that we can invest in our labor. And, we will use sales growth coupled with some pricing to handle it." 

Chipotle was up 19% this year through Wednesday.

Now read:

• From Denny's to Chipotle, chains' CEOs say the biggest challenge in 2019 is workers' skyrocketing pay
• Chipotle is considering raising prices as minimum wages rise, but the CEO says not to panic — they 'don't want to be like Whole Foods'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Bud Light's 'Dilly Dilly' just made a comeback at the Super Bowl with a weird crossover ad with Game of Thrones — here's what the phrase means

• When special counsel Robert Mueller finishes his investigation, he'll write a report to be sent to the attorney general.
• But neither President Donald Trump nor his attorney general nominee, William Barr, have committed to making the full report public.
• Even if the Trump administration tries to bury Mueller's report, there's a possible path for Democrats to make it public: win the presidency in 2020.

It has been reported that special counsel Robert Mueller may be close to finishing his investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election. But after he files his report, President Donald Trump's administration might only make part of it available to Congress and the public, if they choose to release any of it at all.

However, even in the event Trump, his attorney general nominee William Barr, or Republicans in Congress try to bury Mueller's report, that doesn't mean it'll disappear into a black hole forever.

There's a way to make it public — and it all depends on who wins the 2020 presidential election.

The current rules leave it up to the Trump administration

The rules governing the special counsel's office offer a few ways to make Mueller's report public. Basically, Mueller will send "a confidential report" to the attorney general explaining his decisions to prosecute — or decline to prosecute — specific people.

The attorney general will then send his own report to the chairman and ranking minority member of the judiciary committees in the Senate and House of Representatives, describing the special counsel's actions and his views on them. The attorney general could also choose to make Mueller's report public, with retractions if needed. And Trump, as president, could declassify whatever he wants.

But Trump frequently says he views Mueller's investigation as illegitimate and has refused to commit to making the results public.

During Barr's Senate confirmation hearings, the attorney general nominee pledged to "provide as much transparency as I can," but stopped short of making a commitment to releasing the report in its entirety. Months earlier, Barr had called parts of Mueller's probe "legally insupportable."

Read more:Trump's attorney general pick once sent an unsolicited memo to the Justice Department calling Mueller's obstruction probe 'legally insupportable'

Congress has a few options

Even if Barr doesn't send Congress a copy of Mueller's report, he'd need to tell lawmakers whether he overrules the special counsel on any particular matter, and he'd have to explain why. Mueller could theoretically force Barr's hand by, for example, by making him explain why it would be wrong to indict Trump.

And now that Democrats control the House of Representatives, they could subpoena the Department of Justice for a copy of Mueller's report. It could take a long time for that legal battle to come to a conclusion. The House could also subpoena Mueller and ask him to testify about his findings.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said he would subpoena the Department of Justice if he didn't receive the full report, and that he would invite Mueller to testify. Republicans on the committee also support making the report public.

"Congress is likely to subpoena the report if the attorney general refuses to give it to Congress, and there could be an extensive political and legal fight over that subpoena," Jens David Ohlin, a vice dean at Cornell Law School, told INSIDER.

Mueller has support in the other chamber of Congress as well.

Sens. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, and Charles Grassley, a Republican and the former chair of the Senate judiciary committee, introduced a bill that would guarantee every special counsel report would be released directly to Congress and the public. The bill effectively circumvents Barr's role in making the document public.

"A report would be required whenever a Special Counsel finishes the investigation, is fired, or resigns, assuring that the results cannot be sealed or selectively censored," Blumenthal said in a statement. "The public has a right and need to know the facts of such betrayals of public trust."

If a Democrat wins the presidency in 2020, they could make the report public themselves

If Trump's administration refuses to make Mueller's findings public, that doesn't mean his report disappears forever. It'll still be on file in the Justice Department.

And, as with any other Justice Department file, the president could simply choose to declassify it, or the attorney general can choose to make it public. If a Democrat wins the White House in 2020, the next president can make the report public as soon as they take office in January 2021.

"An attorney general in a future Democratic administration could release the report," Ohlin told INSIDER. "Also, if there are issues pertaining to classified information, a future Democratic president could declassify it."

The possibility of seeing the report may only remain because Democrats won the House in the 2018 midterm election. If Republicans still maintained full control over the government, they could have buried Mueller's report forever.

"If Republicans still had control of both houses on Congress, they could take the drastic step, along with a Republican attorney general, of ordering all versions of the report destroyed," Ohlin told INSIDER. "But it's unlikely the same thing will happen to the Mueller report given that the Democrats are in control of the House now."

• Read more:
• The House intelligence committee is expected to send more than 50 interviews of Trump's closest allies to Robert Mueller
• Sen. Chuck Grassley says he expects the Mueller report to be released 'within a month' amid growing speculation that the probe is wrapping up
• Trump said 'you have to get rid of' the Russia probe and parroted a Kremlin talking point in a wide-ranging interview
• Mueller dropped a huge bombshell in Roger Stone's indictment, and it's bad news for Trump

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Donald Trump's connection with Vince McMahon and WWE spans decades

• Apple surpassed Microsoft in market value at the close of trading Wednesday.
• It means that Apple is currently the most valuable publicly traded company. 
• Watch Apple trade in real-time here.

Apple has retaken the crown.

Apple surpassed Microsoft as the world's most valuable publicly traded company at the close of trading on Wednesday after a hot streak stemming from better-than-expected earnings last week. 

Apple was flat on Wednesday, giving it a market capitalization of $821 billion, ahead of Microsoft's market value of $813 billion after a 1.1% slide. Both were ahead of Amazon, which had a market value of $805 billion at the close of the markets on Wednesday. 

It's the first time Apple has closed as the most valuable company since December 3, according to Bloomberg data. Before that, the last time that Microsoft was more valuable than Apple was in 2010. 

Although Apple had been whacked on fears of slowing Chinese demand, potential tariffs, a revenue warning, and slow iPhone demand, it's been up 12% since its most recent earnings, where the company said that every other product line aside from the iPhone showed strong growth. 

Here's what Apple has done over the past month: 

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How to use this time-saving feature Apple added to the iPhone

• People recently reported on the resurgence of chicken pox parties— gatherings where healthy children are put in the same room as a child who has the disease so they can catch it and "get it over with."
• Although this makes sense in theory, pediatrician Dr. Natasha Burgert told INSIDER that pox parties are an unsafe practice with potentially life-threatening health implications.
• Rather than host or attend chicken pox parties, parents should vaccinate their children to prevent the chicken pox and other viruses, Burgert said. 

Before the chicken pox vaccine became available in 1995, parents often hosted "chicken pox parties." During these gatherings, healthy children would be put in in the same room as a child who had chicken pox in hopes that the healthy children would contract the disease and "get it over with." Though this has been out of practice for some time, People recently reported on a resurgence of chicken pox parties.

Although pox parties operate on the fact that most people who contract chicken pox once never get it again, that doesn't make them safe.

"There is no way to tell in advance how severe your child’s symptoms will be," the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) noted on its site. "So it is not worth taking the chance of exposing your child to someone with the disease."

Even healthy children can potentially die if they contract chicken pox

Unfortunately, when a person contracts chicken pox, it is impossible to predict the outcome. Even if a child is generally healthy, pediatrician Dr. Natasha Burgert told INSIDER that it's a "gamble," as there is no way to determine how sick they might get if they contract chicken pox.

"It's impossible to predict," she said. "Some kids will just get a few [chicken pox], some will die. You just don't know, so we vaccinate everyone [we can]."

Read more:Anti-vaxxing, diabetes, and air pollution are among the biggest global health threats of 2019

According to the CDC, a person with a minor case of chicken pox might have headaches, a fever, loss of appetite, and extreme tiredness in addition to the trademark itchy red rash and blistering. In extreme cases, however, a person could develop a bacterial infection, pneumonia, brain inflammation, and sepsis and potentially die.

Exposure to a disease like chicken pox doesn't boost a person's immunity

People who don't get vaccinated may also believe that exposure to a disease will better protect them down the line, but Burgert said that isn't true.

"[It is] incorrect that getting the natural disease is going to make your immunity stronger so you don't need a vaccine, which is a much safer option," Burgert told INSIDER. "People don't realize that the reason we made vaccines is because they can't kill kids."

According to the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), vaccines contain dead or weakened disease germs and have been proven to boost a person's immune system safely without exposing them to the airborne form of a disease.

Instead of the exposure approach, parents should vaccinate any child who isn't medically exempt. Doing so can help create herd immunity, a concept in which as many people as possible get vaccines in order to protect themselves and other community members who are unable to get vaccines for health reasons, like HIV or cancer, according to the HHS. In many cases, herd immunity has stopped the spread of once-rampant diseases like diphtheria and whooping cough, according to the CDC.

Visit INSIDER's homepage for more.

• Read more:
• There has been a disturbing rise in the maternal death rate in the US, and experts say it's the most dangerous developed country to give birth in
• 5 mistakes I made when I had my second child, and how to avoid them
• From autism risks to mercury poisoning, here are 10 lies anti-vaxxers are spreading about the measles vaccine in the Pacific Northwest

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We compared Apple's $159 AirPods to Xiaomi's $30 AirDots and the winner was clear

• SoftBank provided an update on its Vision Fund investments in new regulatory filings.
• The $97 billion fund has invested $45.5 billion to date.
• As of December 31, the fund had stakes in 49 companies.

SoftBank, the Japanese tech company buying stakes in Silicon Valley unicorns at eye-popping valuations, has spent half of its $100 billion investment fund in just two years, according to company filings.

Out of $97 billion in capital committed by the company and third-party investors, just $49 billion remains, the documents show. The fund launched in early 2017 and doesn't officially close until November 20, 2022.

At its current rate of spending of around $7 billion per quarter, the remaining fund will last just a year and a half, as The Wall Street Journal pointed out.

And it's no wonder. SoftBank has put billions of dollars behind expensive startups.

As of January, the company invested around $10 billion into WeWork. Its most recent WeWork investment gave the startup $2 billion of capital at a $47 billion valuation, though that add-on investment did not include any money from the VisionFund, according to Reuters.

SoftBank also paid an estimated $9.25 billion for a 15% stake in Uber, which made SoftBank the largest individual shareholder at Uber.

Read more:SoftBank spent $900 million on investment-banking fees in 2018. The only entity it lagged? The People's Republic of China.

Billions made on FlipKart, lost on Nvidia

The third quarter financial results, released Wednesday, shine a light on what has come to be one of the most disruptive and impactful investment arms in Silicon Valley.

As of December 31, the Vision Fund held 49 investments, including venture capital darlings like DoorDash, Uber, WeWork, and Slack.

Those 49 investments cost the fund a total of $45.5 billion, according to the filing. SoftBank estimates that those investments are now worth a total of $55.3 billion. Those figures exclude investments that SoftBank has already exited from.

The company's first major exit took place in May, when Walmart paid $16 billion for a 77% stake in the Indian e-commerce company Flipkart. Softbank, which paid roughly $2.5 billion for a 20% stake in Flipkart, said in the filing that it sold its stake for around $4 billion.

With stakes in IPO-ready companies like Uber and Slack, SoftBank could see more mega exits in 2019 as well.

Overall, the fund reported gains of ¥838 billion — approximately $7.6 billion — the majority of which is unrealized gains from valuation bumps on private companies such as WeWork. That figure also accounts for substantial losses on its investment in the publicly traded Nvidia. SoftBank documented its losses at ¥299.5 billion, or roughly $2.7 billion.

Consequently, SoftBank revealed,  it sold of its entire stake in Nvidia — worth around $3.6 billion — in January.

SEE ALSO: $1 billion video conferencing startup Zoom has picked banks but is sitting in SEC purgatory ahead of a planned IPO

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I quit texting for a week and it was harder than I expected

This is a preview of a research report from Business Insider Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service. To learn more about Business Insider Intelligence, click here.

Neobanks, digital-only banks that aren’t saddled by traditional banking technology and costly networks of physical branches, have been working to redefine retail banking in major markets around the world.

Driven by innovation-friendly regulatory reforms, these companies have especially gained traction in Europe over the last three years. While the US is home to some of the oldest neobanks — including Simple, which set up shop in 2009, and Moven, which was founded in 2011 — the country's neobank ecosystem has lagged behind its European counterpart.

That’s largely because of an onerous regulatory regime, which has made it very difficult to obtain a banking license, and the entrenched position incumbents hold in the financial lives of US consumers. Navigating the tedious and costly scheme for obtaining a banking charter and appropriate approvals has been a major stumbling block for the country’s digital banking upstarts. However, developments over the past year suggest these startups are finally poised for the spotlight in the US. 

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence maps out the factors contributing to this shifting tide, examines how key players are positioning themselves to take advantage, and explores how incumbents can embark on their own digital transformations to stave off disruption.

The companies mentioned in this report are: Aspiration, Chime, Goldman Sachs' Marcus, JPMorgan Chase's Finn, N26, and Revolut. 

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

• Despite lagging behind Europe, recent developments suggest that neobanks are finally ready for the spotlight in the US.
• Three distinct influences are responsible for creating the fertile ground for this evolution: regulation, shifting consumer attitudes, and the activity of incumbent banks.
• Among those driving this evolution in the US are foreign neobanks including Germany’s N26 and UK-based Revolut.
• Meanwhile, two notable incumbent-owned outfits have deployed amid great fanfare: Marcus by Goldman Sachs and Finn by Chase. 
• In this increasingly competitive landscape, incumbent banks have a range of strategic options at their disposal, including overhauling their entire business for the digital era.

 In full, the report:

• Details the factors contributing to a shift in the US' neobank market.
• Explains the different operating models neobanks in the US are deploying to roll out their services and meet consumer demands.
• Highlights how incumbent banks are tapping into the advantages offered by stand-alone digital outfits. 
• Discusses the key strategies established players need to deploy to remain relevant in the US' increasingly digital banking landscape.

Interested in getting the full report? Here are two ways to access it:

1. Purchase & download the full report from our research store. >>Purchase & Download Now
2. Subscribe to a Premium pass to Business Insider Intelligence and gain immediate access to this report and over 100 other expertly researched reports. As an added bonus, you'll also gain access to all future reports and daily newsletters to ensure you stay ahead of the curve and benefit personally and professionally. >>Learn More Now

The choice is yours. But however you decide to acquire this report, you've given yourself a powerful advantage in your understanding of the fast-moving world of Fintech.

SEE ALSO: Latest fintech industry trends, technologies and research from our ecosystem report

Join the conversation about this story »

The Insider Picks team writes about stuff we think you'll like. Business Insider has affiliate partnerships, so we get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

• SeaVees, which bills itself as the brand behind the "original casual sneaker," has been making footwear for over 50 years.
• Despite how long it's been around, the first shoe that finally caught my attention was a sneaker that doubles as a rain boot: the SeaVees Mariners.
• Where most brands fail at making sneaker-boot hybrids, SeaVees' minimal approach to style makes this design a winner. And at $158-$178, the SeaVees Mariners a much better value than buying sneakers and boots separately.

As someone who loves shoes, I'm very open to trying new styles (hence my more-than-100-pair collection), but there are certain types of shoes that I just won't wear — and rain boots are at the top of my list.

I get it; rain boots have a distinct purpose of keeping feet dry. It'd be hard to argue that they're not useful for everyone at one point or another, but I just can't see myself trucking through the rain in calf-high rubber galoshes. Maybe if I had a slick yellow rain jacket to match, but that's a whole lot of look.

On rainy days, I typically find myself struggling to choose the lesser of two evils: sacrificing my sneakers that are alright at keeping my feet dry but probably too nice to get soaking wet, or wearing winter boots that are fully waterproof, but definitely overkill for rain and puddles. I needed shoes that were casual and comfortable like my sneakers, but still fully functional in the rain — and I found them at a brand called SeaVees. 

SeaVees has been around since 1964, and while I had heard of the brand, I always overlooked its footwear. The company calls itself the maker of "the original casual sneaker," but I finally came to appreciate the brand for a shoe that's actually more of a rain boot: the SeaVees Mariners.

At first (and even second) glance, they look like sneakers, and that's actually what makes them a huge winner for me.

On paper, the idea of sneaker-boot is genius, but I almost always hate them as soon as they come to life. When sportswear or boot companies haphazardly slap performance materials that clearly come from a sneaker onto a bulkier silhouette, the resulting hybrid is confusing aesthetically and sometimes harder to wear than a normal sneaker or a normal boot. The SeaVees Mariners, on the other hand, is a very rare exception because of the brand's minimal and casual approach to design. 

The shoe features a waterproofed suede upper, sealed seams, gusseted tongues, and extra rubber foxing around the perimeter to ensure leak-free wear. With all the necessary attributes of a boot that matter for staying dry, the rest of the shoe design is closer to a sneaker. The high-top silhouette has a simple toe box, a traditional lacing system with metal eyelets, a heel pull-tab, and a natural rubber sole.

The end result is a shoe that's just as stylish and wearable as most casual sneakers, built with the utility of a rain boot. I've been wearing my pair of SeaVees Mariners for a few weeks now and even tested them in an unexpected downpour in New York City and they're everything you can ask for in a rain-ready shoe. 

When it came to keeping my feet dry, the SeaVees Mariners were very capable. In addition to handling the rain with ease, they were also suitable for everything else in my day. The Mariners were just fine as my only pair of shoes, which meant I didn't have to lug around an extra pair on my commute.

Read more: Everlane's $75 rain boots for women handled slush and puddles after heavy rain in New York City

For days when the weather isn't a concern, the SeaVees Mariners are still a nice shoe to wear. I'd even go as far as saying you could wear them as boat shoes. Although the overall look isn't the most trendsetting or unique, it's at least, and very simply, totally timeless. I'd like to think of them as being in the same vein of everlasting style as a Converse Chuck Taylors or a Vans Authentics. I went with my normal shoe size, but if I were to buy another pair, I'd go a half-size up.

At $158, the SeaVees Mariners are priced very fairly. I've paid more for sneakers that are only good for looks and I've paid a lot more for heavy-duty boots — and none of which provided me with the best of both worlds like the Mariners. 

Whether you live in a city where style is equally important as function, or a simply don't want to buy two different pairs of shoes, the SeaVees Mariner is a great footwear choice. Call them what you want — boots, sneakers, or a mixture of both — they're good looking, extremely durable, and fully waterproof.

SeaVees Mariners Boot, available for men and women on Zappos, $158-$178

Shop all SeaVees shoes on Zappos here

Join the conversation about this story »

• Three recent studies have shown initial public offerings have an impact on the prices of housing surrounding a company's headquarters, according to a report from San Francisco Chronicle. 
• A handful of Bay Area tech companies with valuations in the billions are expected to go public in 2019, which will ultimately send CEOs with cash into the real estate market. 
• San Francisco-based companies like Uber, Lyft, Slack, Airbnb, and Pinterest have either filed or expressed interest in going public in 2019. 

San Francisco housing prices have hit record peaks, but get ready for them to skyrocket. 

Tech execs flooded with cash and fresh off initial public offerings will likely flex their wallets in the real estate market, driving up prices and suckering out other buyers, according to three recent studies and a report by San Francisco Chronicle.

A wave of Bay Area-based tech companies are expected to file for initial public offerings in 2019, a handful of companies with multi-billion-dollar valuations already doing so in recent weeks. Slack confidentially filed to go public on Monday, while Lyft and Uber submitted early filings in the same week this past December. Airbnb is also hinting at a run to Wall Street, as well as Pinterest.

A study titled "Cash to Spend: IPO Wealth and House Prices" looked at the impact of IPOs on local housing prices in California from 1993 through 2017. What the authors found was that home prices within a 10-mile radius of a company's headquarters rose by 1%, compared to that of the rest of the country. The bigger the valuation, the study found, the bigger the impact on surrounding neighborhoods. The study examined housing price indexes three months prior to IPO, filing, and when employees were free to sell stocks (known as the lockup period). 

Younger startups going public had a bigger impact on home prices than older companies of the same size, the study said, because younger execs tend to live closer to work. 

In another study titled "Local Economic Spillover Effects of Stock Market Listings," researchers found that IPOs have spillover effects on local labor markets, business environments, consumer spending, real estate, and migration. Houses deemed "expensive" rose 1% in the areas surrounding the IPO headquarters. Co-author Larry Fauver told The Chronicle that IPOs did not affect the prices of less expensive homes.

The most recent study, released by Zillow on Tuesday, examined the home lots near Facebook's Menlo Park headquarters after the social network went public in 2012. It found that home values grew faster in areas home to lots of Facebook employees — more than 20% from March 2012 to March 2013. Many of the employees were first-time home buyers, converting their stock into a roof over their head. 

However, the fact remains that San Francisco is currently the most expensive city to live in America. The city's median home price is $1.61 million, and the average apartment rents for upwards of $4,000. Raising housing prices just 1% percent would make the city even more unattainable for non-tech workers, and may effectively create a city for only the elite. 

SEE ALSO: Calm, the 7-year-old meditation app, says it's now valued at $1 billion

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The science behind why your phone shuts down when it's cold outside

• Earth's magnetic north pole keeps shifting— each year, it moves north by an average of about 30 miles.
• Magnetic north shifted so much in the last few years that NOAA issued an early update to its World Magnetic Model, which tracks Earth's magnetic field. 
• The World Magnetic Model informs everything from Google Maps to the US Department of Defense's navigation systems.

The Earth's magnetic north pole has led scientists on something of a chase over the last century.

This point, which is not the same as geographic north, is critical for compasses as well as plane, submarine, and ship navigation. Yet over the last few decades, magnetic north has moved erratically over Nunavut, Canada, flitting north towards Siberia. 

"It's moving at about 50 km (30 miles) a year," Ciaran Beggan, a scientist from the British Geological Survey in Edinburgh, told Reuters. "It didn't move much between 1900 and 1980, but it's really accelerated in the past 40 years."

Keeping tabs on magnetic north is imperative for European and American militaries, since their navigational systems rely the World Magnetic Model (WMM), which tracks Earth's magnetic field. Commercial airlines, Google Maps, and smartphone GPS apps also rely on the model to help pilots and users pinpoint their locations on the globe and navigate accordingly.

Every five years, the British Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) release a WMM update to ensure that GPS systems and compasses continue to use the correct points of reference.

The next major update was scheduled for 2020, but the magnetic north pole had other plans. In 2018, it crossed the International Date Line and started moving faster. Scientists aren't sure what's driving this seemingly accelerated gambol, but the shift was significant enough for the US military to request an unprecedented early review, Beggan said.

So the WMM was updated early, on February 4.

A magnetic field day

Earth's magnetic north pole and the northernmost point of our planet's axis aren't in the same place. While "true" geographic north is fixed, the magnetic North Pole shifts every year. In 1904, magnetic north was located in northeastern Canada, but it has been moving toward Siberia since then.

Earth's magnetic field exists thanks to swirling liquid nickel and iron in the planet's liquid outer core some 1,800 miles beneath the surface. The field protects the planet from solar radiation and deadly solar winds; without it, those winds could strip Earth of its oceans and atmosphere. 

But periodic and sometimes random changes in the distribution of that turbulent liquid metal cause idiosyncrasies in the Earth's magnetic field.

Imagine the magnetic field as a series of rubber bands that thread through the magnetic poles. Changes in the liquid core can tug on different rubber bands in various places. Those jerks influence the magnetic north pole's migration.

Recently, scientists presented two guesses as to why this accelerated migration might be happening. One option is that a powerful geomagnetic pulse— when the magnetic field experiences a sudden, severe jerk — under South America in 2016 may have thrown the field into whack. A second possibility is that a stream of high-speed liquid iron flowing in the inner core under Canada could be linked to the pole's changes, as Nature News reported.

Why an accurate World Magnetic Model is so important

The WMM isn't a static snapshot of what the Earth's magnetic field looks like every five years. Rather, it's a list of numbers that allows devices and navigators to calculate what the magnetic field will look like anywhere on Earth at any time during the five years after the model was published.

The problem is that the more the magnetic north pole moves, the more it magnifies errors in the model. So the WMM had been getting more and more more inaccurate since 2016. That means our GPS and military navigation systems were, too.

Those rapidly compounding errors led scientists to initiate the recent emergency update, which was welcome news for navigational models, even though it got delayed two weeks because of the US government shutdown. 

Fortunately, as Beggan told Reuters, the errors only affected navigation in the Arctic and northern Canada. People using smartphones in New York, Beijing, or London, for example, would not have noticed the magnetic north pole's recent shifts.

But ship captains, airline pilots, and military navigators can breathe easier now that an accurate magnetic north is on the books — at least for the time being.

SEE ALSO: The US government shutdown is preventing scientists from improving forecasts for severe weather and navigational models

WATCH NEXT: Earth's north magnetic pole is on the move — here's what will happen when our poles flip

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: NASA has a $3.5 billion idea to save Earth from a supervolcano apocalypse

• A leaked sales deck for 2017's Fyre Festival contains the pitch CEO Billy McFarland gave investors ahead of the failed event.
• The sales deck contains misleading information about Fyre Festival and has been described as "beyond parody."
• McFarland got investors to pump $26 million into the doomed festival, money he was ordered to forfeit after he was sentenced to six years in prison for fraud.

A leaked sales presentation from Fyre Media reveals the pitch CEO Billy McFarland gave investors in the lead-up to 2017's failed Fyre Festival.

Fyre Festival was advertised an upscale music festival in the Bahamas, complete with luxury beach villas, gourmet food, private jets, and supermodels and influencers galore.

The experience customers received was the polar opposite, as anyone who watched the disaster unfold online or saw either of the two recent documentaries about the event knows. 

McFarland was sentenced to six years in prison in 2018 after pleading guilty to wire-fraud charges. He was ordered to forfeit more than $26 million that investors had pumped into Fyre.

A 43-slide sales deck containing Fyre's investor pitch contains many of the exaggerated claims and outright lies that would eventually doom the festival. The pitch deck was first reported on in 2017 by Vanity Fair's Nick Bilton — who uploaded the full deck online — and recently recirculated on LinkedIn.

Read on to see some of the most shocking, outlandish, and surreal slides from the Fyre Festival pitch deck.

SEE ALSO: Here's everything we know about Billy McFarland, the 27-year-old who created the disastrous Fyre Festival and who's now serving a 6-year prison sentence

DON'T MISS: We watched Netflix's and Hulu's docs about the doomed Fyre Festival, and one gives you a better look inside the fiasco

In 2016 and 2017, Fyre CEO Billy McFarland secured $26.4 million for his company from more than 100 investors.

Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

McFarland's investor pitch deck begins with a primer on Fyre's app, which would enable users to directly book artists and celebrities for events. (Fyre Festival was conceived with the intent of promoting the app.)

Source: Business Insider

A few slides in, the deck shifts to the festival itself.

• The first prisoner released under the criminal-justice reforms President Donald Trump signed in December has proposed a unique idea to ensure other prisoners can get second chances, too.
• Matthew Charles, whom Trump honored at the State of the Union on Tuesday, suggested in a Washington Post op-ed that federal prisoners be given the opportunity to be re-sentenced after serving 15 years.
• "People would not be guaranteed release, but they would be given an opportunity to be resentenced by a judge," Charles wrote. "Anyone who wants and deserves a second chance would be able to demonstrate that within 15 years."
• Data show that the vast majority of federal prisoners are incarcerated due to drug, property, and public order crimes, rather than violent crimes.

President Donald Trump sparked a rare moment of bipartisan celebration during his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, praising a former prisoner who became the first person released under the criminal justice reforms he signed into law in December.

Matthew Charles was released from prison for the second time on January 3, after serving more than 21 years of a 35-year sentence for selling crack cocaine.

Now, Charles said he wants to ensure he's not the only prisoner given a second chance. In a Washington Post op-ed, Charles said he spent last week in Washington, D.C., urging lawmakers to consider stronger prison reforms.

He proposed a radical law that he said would "encourage prisoners to improve themselves"— by allowing all federal prisoners to earn a second chance at freedom after serving a certain length of their sentence, perhaps after 15 years.

"People would not be guaranteed release, but they would be given an opportunity to be resentenced by a judge," he wrote. "The judge could determine whether they had used their time in prison to atone for their crimes and make changes for the better. If not, they would continue to serve their original sentence."

Read more: Most Americans approve of the bipartisan, Trump-backed criminal-justice reforms

Charles said he knew some would criticize the idea as being "too lenient," but he wrote that 15 years is more than enough time for someone to prove they deserve redemption.

"From what I saw during my years behind bars, anyone who wants and deserves a second chance would be able to demonstrate that within 15 years," he wrote.

'Our justice system shouldn't depend on luck'

Charles garnered national attention after a whirlwind of court decisions resulted in his release from prison — then forced him to return less than two years later.

A judge orignally released him in 2016 after the Obama administration changed its sentencing guidelines, but a federal appeals court reversed the judge's ruling and ordered him to return to prison to complete his sentence.

Charles' story went viral in 2017 when Nashville Public Radio profiled him, detailing his efforts to rebuild his life after prison and how he volunteered each morning at a local food pantry even after he finished his mandatory community service hours.

In his address on Tuesday, Trump praised Charles for his self-improvement efforts both in and out of prison, noting the more than 30 Bible correspondence courses he took, as well as his work teaching GED classes and mentoring other inmates.

"America is a nation that believes in redemption," Trump said. "Thank you Matthew. Welcome home."

Charles' idea to grant opportunities for resentencing after 15 years would apply only to the federal prison system, which represents a tiny fraction of the estimated 2.3 million incarcerated people across the country.

Data from the Prison Policy Initiative, which tracks mass incarceration trends, show that federal jails and prisons held roughly 225,000 inmates in 2018 — a far cry from the millions of others in state prisons, local jails, juvenile facilities, and immigration detention centers.

But of those 225,000 federal inmates, data show that the vast majority are incarcerated due to drug, property, and public order crimes, and just 13,000 have been convicted of violent crimes.

"I got lucky. Our justice system shouldn't depend on luck," Charles wrote. "The First Step Act is in place — now it should be used to make real change and help families. And let's not lose any time in making a Next Step Act, because everyone deserves a second chance."

Read Charles' full op-ed from the Post »

• Read more from INSIDER:
• Critics are warning that the criminal-justice-reform bill being hailed as a bipartisan victory doesn't go nearly far enough
• Attorney general nominee William Barr helped write the handbook on mass incarceration in the 1990s — but he said he realizes times have changed
• The most powerful moment at the State of the Union was a win for Democrats that Trump had no control over
• The 'future' of the Democratic Party, Stacey Abrams, made her national debut in the party's response to Trump's State of the Union

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How Apple went from a $1 trillion company to losing over 20% of its share price

• Wall Street thinks Harley-Davidson is in trouble and needs to take radical steps to fix its business.
• But the last time Harley-Davidson faced a crisis, during the Great Recession, it went back to basics and prospered.
• Harley's biggest challenge is a tariff-supportive administration in Washington.

There's a strong sense that Harley-Davidson, the 116-year-old American icon, is in trouble. The Milwaukee-based motorcycle manufacturer's stock is down 45% over the past five years, CEO Matt Levatich is facing a tough turnaround job, and the company has wrangled with President Trump over tariffs.

Harley is sort of in trouble. The motorcycle market is in decline in the US, perhaps terminal decline, and Harley's customer base is aging — eventually, they'll be cruising to that great biker bar in the sky, and it's unclear whether younger generations will take their place in the saddle.

But since 2006, the company has endured exactly one quarter in which it brought in less than $1 billion, and that was during the financial crisis. So Harley's struggles could be more of the to-come variety, rather than the here-and-now.

Over-the-horizon worry has led to some sketchy ideas about how to fix Harley. The first is electrification. Harley intends to bring the $30,000 LiveWire to the US market later this year, and it should be the coolest, baddest electric bike on the road. 

Read more:Harley-Davidson is in an impossible position in the motorcycle business

But electric bikes aren't exactly moving like hotcakes out of dealerships — they account for around 1% of total sales. Harley's LiveWire alone could double that, but we'd still be at only 2%. And it's uncertain whether even a $30,000 e-motorcycle will be profitable.

What about the developing world, where motorcycles are the primary source of mobility, rather than weekend fun? Harley has already been following a trend in the gas-powered bike world, offering smaller mounts that still have hog style. But a new notion is to attack up-and-coming markets with really small electric rides.

Numerous bad ideas to rescue Harley

These are both dicey propositions, but before I get into why, let us first consider Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas' suggestion that Harley should get involved with a pickup truck. 

"[W]e are only exploring the possibility of the brand being valuable to an established or emerging auto manufacturer and do not anticipate HOG to allocate investment capital to its own in-house manufacturing of 4-wheel vehicles," Jonas wrote in a research note.

What Jonas hopes for is a bit unclear, but he appears to think that Harley could extend its brand to established pickup-truck makers, perhaps going beyond putting the Harley logo on Ford F-150s.

Brand extensions, futuristic electric concepts — this is all great story material that could get investors excited. But it's worth taking a look at how Harley dealt with its last crisis, a decade ago during the great recession.

Harley was, back then, in a money-losing bind. It was also at the end of a period of diversifying its offerings and brands, away from its core business of big, expensive, profitable motorcycles.

Then-CEO Keith Wandell got rid of distracting brands such as Buell sport bikes and MV Agusta and doubled down on the Harley's that were proper hogs. It worked and the company prospered again.

Back to the future for Harley

It's fairly obvious that Harley might have to run the same script, with electric bikes functioning as the new Buell and un-hog-like products for the developing world playing Agusta. Levatich might actually know this, but he's sitting on a stock price that has been sawed in half and is unlikely to sell a back-to-the-future strategy to Wall Street. 

But back-to-the-future could be Harley's best bet. Jonas points out that this strategy would signal surrender and turn Harley into a slow-growth dividend stock. Jonas thinks this would be risky, but it probably wouldn't be. And if Harley can grow its core business outside the US, it could counteract the US sales declines and demographic headwinds, generating fresh growth.

But to do that, Harley, more than any other US manufacturer, needs a cooperative administration in Washington, to enable the company to move production to markets it wants to open up and to export US-made bikes to those markets. The brand is mighty and could succeed without any hail mary passes. But it can't make big money off big bikes if it can't sell them in the place and time of its choosing.

FOLLOW US: On Facebook for more car and transportation content!

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch BMW's self-driving motorcycle accelerate, turn, and brake to a stop

• It might be time for you and your partner to take a romantic vacation.
• To help you out with your decision of where to go, TripAdvisor compiled a list of the most romantic destinations all around the world.
• Whether you want to walk down cobblestone streets, swim in the Caribbean ocean, or go on an adventure — there is somewhere for everyone.

Valentine's Day is just around the corner and with love in the air, it may be time to take off a few vacation days and spend some much-needed quality time together on a romantic getaway with your significant other.

Whether you want to travel locally or go overseas, there are options for low-key couples, adventurous couples, and everyone in between.

TripAdvisor compiled a list of the most romantic destinations to travel in 2019.

Eureka Springs, Arkansas, USA feels like Europe.

Surrounded by the Ozark Mountains, Eureka Springs, Arkansas is an unexpected but incredible destination for romance. The city is known for its historic Victorian buildings, natural springs, and stunning church, creating a European atmosphere in the Midwest US.

Cabo San Lucas, Mexico is a classic romantic destination.

A celebrity favorite, the beaches of Cabo San Lucas in Baja California offers couples incredible views of the California Peninsula as well as luxurious living in five-star hotels and resorts.

Jimbaran, Bali, Indonesia has white-sand beaches.

One of three spots in Bali to make the list, Jimbaran is a quieter alternative to nearby Kuta and Legian. Once a small fishing village, the area is known for its tranquil white-sand beaches and luxury resorts.

• A recent report shows that the US is looking into its draft program, weighing options from mandating service for women to getting rid of the draft altogether.
• While a reinvigorated draft may alarm US citizens, nearly 60 countries around the world still have some form of conscription.
• Some, like Israel, need the draft to ensure it can maintain its armed forces. Others, like China, often have enough recruits that a draft is unnecessary.
• Some countries, like Norway and Israel, have allowed transgender people to serve for decades.
• This is a look at 10 countries that still require every man, or every woman and man, to serve.

1. Russia

One year of military service is required for Russian men between the ages of 18 and 27. 

The country allows for some exceptions — sons or brothers of men killed during their military service are released from conscription, for example. 

Even with these exceptions, Russians have been evading the draft at alarming rates, and the government has considered forcing men to report even if they have not been selected.

2. Switzerland

Military service is mandatory for Swiss men.

As recently as 2017, Switzerland was considering adding women to its draft roles.

3. Israel

Israeli men must serve in the defense force for three years.

Women are conscripted for two years.

Transgender Israelis have been allowed to serve since 1993.