Variety's Mark David reports that Tom Cruise has listed his mansion on Mulholland Drive for just under $13 million with the real estate Multiple Listing Service.

The European-style villa in Beverly Hills has two parcels with a total of 2.5 acres of land, according to the listing. The home is gated with three bedrooms and a fully detached guest house with an additional four bedrooms and bathrooms.

According to Variety, the home was rumored to have been bought as a retreat for high-level Scientologists — it was purchased by two corporate entities back in 2005 — and Tom Cruise’s sister was recently living on the property.

The movie star seems to be undergoing a real estate overhaul. In November of last year he listed his Colorado estate for $59 million and back in 2013 he listed his New York townhouse for $28 million as well as an East Village condo for $3 million. Variety reports he currently lives in a Beverly Hills mansion he bought for $30.5 million in 2007.

The home is on sale for $12.995 million, according to real estate listing website Redfin.

Welcome to Tom Cruise's Beverly Hills mansion that he's currently selling for $13 million. The home is right off of the famous Mulholland Drive.

According to Variety, the estate is rumored to have been a not-so-secret Scientology retreat.

The property has both a main residence as well as a separate guest house.

The Federal Reserve is scheduled to announce its most recent monetary policy decision at 2:00 PM ET.

While everyone will be looking to see whether or not the FOMC will remain "patient" in considering whether or not to raise interest rates in future meetings, we'll also get an update on what individual members of the committee think will happen over the next few years.

The Dot Plot, part of the FOMC's Summary of Economic Projections released along with the policy decision statement, shows where each participant in the meeting thinks the federal funds rate should be at the end of the year for the next few years and in the longer run.

While the Dot Plot is not an official policy tool, it provides some insight into how the committee members feel about economic and monetary conditions going forward.

Recent dot plots have shown a lot of disagreement about what should happen over the next two or three years, with target rates for the end of 2016 ranging anywhere between 0.25% and 4%. There's been a bit more consensus about the longer run, with projections hovering between 3.25 and 4.25%.

We'll update this post when the new version of the plot is out. Here's the most recent plot, from the December 17, 2014 meeting:

SEE ALSO: RANKED: The 50 US state economies from worst to best

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Animated map of what Earth would look like if all the ice melted

When Amazon bought Twitch, a popular video-game streaming platform last August, the website had a healthy 45 million monthly visitors. Fast-forward less than a year and the site has more than twice that, averaging 100 million viewers as of the end of December.

What's more astounding is that Twitch's average user watches 106 minutes of video on the site per day even though none of the players are exactly household names.

This dedicated community of viewers fuels Twitch's success, according to Twitch star Sean Plott.

“Twitch is fundamentally a community site [for the gaming community] and a technology platform," Plott told Business Insider. "It’s not successful because it has a huge show or 10 huge personalities.” 

On the surface, Twitch may look simply like a video-streaming site. At its core, though, Twitch serves as a social network for gamers, according to Plott.

While watching and playing the games is a central function of Twitch, the action on the screen is not limited to the games. As Twitch's PR director told Business Insider, users joke around with each other, talk about their lives, and form friendships. Twitch helps users socialize.

Twitch enables fans of a particular game to form a community on their own without the interference of a third party, Plott points out, citing that ability as the site's main strength.

"There are streamers that only have 40 or 50 followers, but those followers always watch when that person streams," Plott said. "It’s so easy for someone to hit a button, be live, and create a community."

Since its launch, Twitch has focused on video games and the gaming community. It's easy to see however, how the site could transfer that "social video" approach to other communities and interests like traditional sports or even politics. 

Indeed, the site has begun to push into a new sector: music. In 2014, the site added a "Music" category for musicians and has started to livestream concerts on the site. Twitch has created partnerships with record labels like Monstercat, Fool's Gold, Skrillex-founded OWSLA, and Steve Aoki's Dim Mak, which have made their music available for free on the platform and host their own Twitch channels. 

It's easy to imagine music aficionados using Twitch as a space to talk about their favorite bands, watch exclusive performances live, or even talk to the performers themselves during a livestream.

The challenge in bringing "social video" to other areas like music and news may lie in managing other communities. Twitch is deeply involved in the video game community and understands what it wants. Whether Twitch could bring that knowledge to other areas remains to be seen.

Twitch works best when streamers have small, but dedicated followings, which allows for productive chats. The larger the followings, the more difficult it is for streamers to connect with viewers, which is one of its core strengths. When it comes to other sectors, it might not be so easy to create those followings.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 14 things you didn't know your iPhone headphones could do

Have you ever wondered why you make bad financial decisions, or why you have certain money habits you wish you didn't?

According to Ellen Rogin and Lisa Kueng, authors of "Picture Your Prosperity: Smart Money Moves to Turn Your Vision into Reality," it's all because of your "bird suit."

This is the metaphor Rogin and Kueng use to describe the two factors behind the money choices you make:

1. Your external actions and money habits (the actual suit or costume itself)
2. The inner money beliefs you hold (the person inside the costume)

The authors say that when it comes to financial success, your inner money beliefs — what's inside your costume — are what really matter.

They write:

Most people think that to reach their financial goals they need more of these three things: money, knowledge, and discipline. Don't get us wrong — these things certainly help. But there's something even more important to making your goals happen that's not nearly as obvious — and that's a supportive mindset. This is the all-important driver we all have inside our exterior 'costume.' Without this, it may be very difficult for you to find true prosperity.

According to Rogin and Kueng, we find it easy to focus on the costume — our external money habits and actions — because it's what we see. But the person inside the costume is what's actually making the costume come to life.

Rogin and Kueng say that often our past is what shapes our current inner money beliefs.

The authors cite the example of Joan, a female corporate executive who has worked for multiple Fortune 500 Companies and managed to save close to $9.5 million. Yet she still feels that she doesn't have much and can't afford to retire for a long time, mainly because she was one of eight children. Her mother now lives on social security benefits and a small pension, and Joan is fearful that she'll end up in a similar situation.

Rogin and Kueng point out that making more money is not the answer for Joan — it's examining and changing what's inside her bird suit.

If you aren't sure what's inside your own costume, take a look at these common stupid money beliefs even the smartest people hold.

SEE ALSO: 7 Stupid Beliefs Even The Smartest People Have About Money

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 6 Crazy Things Revealed In HBO's Explosive New Scientology Documentary 'Going Clear'

A report released by the Conference Board shows that CEOs are sticking around longer than they should. 

The average tenure of a departing S&P 500 company CEO is 9.7 years. It hasn't been that long since 2002, and a recent study by Temple University suggests that this number could be problematic for companies.

The study measured the performance of CEOs over time and found that the "optimal life span" of a CEO is just 4.8 years. 

It concluded that after about five years, chief executives will rely more on their internal network rather than information that comes from outside markets. This tendency to focus inward causes them to become less attune to market conditions and customers, which ultimately hurts the company.

Why do so many CEOs overstay their welcome when it could be jeopardizing their firm?

Charles Wardell, CEO of Witt/Kieffer, explains the difficulty of the transition process: "The biggest issue is the uncertainty it creates — the uncertainty of what the new CEO will do."

Change is a sensitive subject for everyone, especially when it comes to such an essential role within a company.

According to Wardell, there are three main reasons a CEO would step down or be asked to leave. 

1. Burn out or loss of enthusiasm for the job. 

"When CEOs begin to realize that their skills aren’t matching up, or their enthusiasm is waning, or they’re tired of the constant responsibility," explains Wardell,"they are going to the board and saying, 'I’m running out of juice here. Lets think about replacing me over the next year or so.'"

In this scenario, strategic succession planning can make for a smooth transition.

2. External changes in the market.

"Oftentimes the market dictates, causing the business proposition to change so radically that the skills of the CEO don’t mesh up with the needs of the firm," says Wardell.

A company could have a strategic plan in place, but this is ultimately an external factor out of the hands of the CEO and the company, which can force a more abrupt transition. 

3. The board decides enough is enough.  

Pushing a CEO out for whatever reason — age, competency, or vulnerability — can cause turbulence and tension within a company, making for a less than ideal transition. 

A smooth transition at the top can never be guaranteed. This makes the change in leadership that much more scary, causing CEOs to stay put longer than they should.

So what can companies do?

"We're not saying, 'Fire your CEOs after 4.8 years,'" explained co-lead researcher of the Temple University study, Michelle Andrews. "But if company boards restructure CEO packages to cater to consumers more, you may find yourself with better results. After all, you're only a firm if you have customers. Without customers, no firm can prosper."

SEE ALSO: The Shortest-Tenured CEOs In History

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 14 things you didn't know your iPhone headphones could do

An essential drug that has been on the market for decades still has a sticker price out of range for some patients who need it.

Insulin, a life-saving treatment for diabetes, was first patented in 1923. Unlike many common, even newer medicines, a generic option does not exist. Because there isn’t a generic option available, a month’s supply of insulin can cost a patient more than $100 per month — a cost patients must often bear for their whole lives. 

While the number of uninsured people in the US is going down, a 2005 study estimated that nearly a million Americans with diabetes didn't have any form of insurance.

Today, twenty-one million Americans are diagnosed diabetics, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Of those, 6 million take insulin to manage the chronic disease. (The rest take pills only or no medication at all.)

The reasons these 6 million Americans don’t have a cheaper option by now are biological and regulatory as well as historical and economic, according to a paper published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine. Authors Jeremy Greene and Kevin Riggs of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine use insulin as a case study of the healthcare system not quite working as we'd hope.

Biology and regulation

Insulin is a hormone made by the pancreas that makes it possible for the body to absorb and process sugar from food. It’s what doctors call a biologic product, a substance produced by the human body, and it's more complicated and difficult to manufacture than the medicines most often produced generically.

A "generic" version of insulin would be considered a biosimilar, a product equivalent in function to a drug already on the market but not exactly the same, like generics of simple pharmaceuticals like ibuprofen. In the latter case, a chemical formula can be copied; with biologics, the process is much trickier.

Getting a biosimilar insulin approved is more difficult than getting a generic of a simpler drug approved, study coauthor Kevin Riggs explained to Business Insider.

“Scientifically it's harder to point to generic copy of insulin and say this is the same,” Riggs said in an interview.

Regulations have only recently changed to make the path to approving biosimilars smoother. Earlier this month the first biosimilar drug (a white-blood-cell booster) was approved. But regulatory barriers are not the whole story of why there's no generic insulin. 

A history of insulin

Insulin has been used to manage diabetes for a long time, nearly 100 years. Generally, it's assumed a drug that has been available as long as insulin has will have a low-cost generic option. 

“So many of my colleagues have been surprised to learn that insulin (which most doctors think of as an old drug) is unavailable in generic form,” lead study author Jeremy Greene, a medical historian at Johns Hopkins, explained in an email to Business Insider.

Typically, new prescription drugs are available only from the company that developed and patented them for the first few years after gaining FDA approval. The brand name drug is allowed to monopolize the field so drug companies have incentive to invest heavily in research and come up with new medicines.  

After a few years, however, other companies are allowed to move in and make generic versions of the drug. Generics are cheaper, “off-brand” options that are otherwise exactly the same as the original, brand name drug. Because there’s no longer a monopoly and generic manufacturers are only trying to turn a profit — not recoup high research and development costs — generics can be much less expensive and thus more accessible treatment options for the general public. 

Insulin didn’t follow the usual trajectory of a new drug. Its path was much less straightforward, partly because of being a biologic product, but also because scientists kept tinkering with it.

The New England Journal of Medicine paper details years of “incremental innovation” of insulin — substantial tweaks to the product by various companies that truly improved it, but kept the latest and greatest version under patent protection until 2014. This happens with a lot of drugs — it's called "evergreening"— and is a subject of much debate.

The first insulin available to patients was derived from animals. Next, human insulin was produced using recombinant DNA technology that made bacteria into mini insulin factories, so people could take human insulin instead of animal forms. The most recent innovations are insulin analogues, slight variations on human insulin to make the injected treatment act more like the insulin naturally produced and regulated by the body.

With each subsequent innovation, older but still effective forms of insulin that could have been produced and sold more cheaply fell out of use.

“One downside to the broad shift of insulin prescriptions to these newer, patent-protected forms was that instead of becoming cheaper, older forms of insulin gradually disappeared from the US market,” Greene said in an email to Business Insider.

Meanwhile, the number of Americans with diabetes has tripled since 1980.

Economic implications

That’s not to say newer forms of insulin don’t have benefits to offset their heftier price tag.

A review published in 2008 in the American Journal of Managed Care showed insulin analogues were more cost-effective than other treatment options in the long run. They worked a bit better than unmodified human insulin, and were less unpleasant for patients to use. Though prescriptions for insulin analogues were more expensive than unmodified human insulin, the review concluded they reduced later costs of patients being hospitalized with complications from diabetes that wasn’t well managed.

But individual patients and the their particular situations can get lost in large studies that look at population-wide cost-effectiveness.

“If an individual simply cannot afford to purchase their insulin, how can it be cost-effective?” Greene said in his email.

For patients without health insurance, insulin is prohibitively expensive. Earlier iterations of insulin would be good choices for a lot of individuals if they were available more cheaply, argued Greene and Riggs.

“What would have been better is if as newer versions came on market the older version became generic and gave people more choice,” Riggs said in an interview with Business Insider.

But that's not what's happened. As the case of insulin illustrates, medicines don’t “become” generic automatically. It takes the participation of at least one company to manufacture a lower cost alternative to the original brand. In their paper, Greene and Riggs speculate that no company has done so because none has deemed it a worthwhile investment. 

What's next?

Now that patents on the latest insulin products are expiring and a regulatory approval pathway exists, biosimilar options for insulin are moving forward. Last year a biosimilar version of insulin was given tentative approval by the FDA. The FDA concluded that the biosimilar met all its regulatory requirements, but it will not receive final approval until after a lawsuit over patent infringement is resolved, by a deadline of mid-2016. 

Just because biosimilars are on the way doesn’t mean diabetics will soon have access to cheap, affordable insulin, however. In their paper, Greene and Riggs cited a prediction that biosimilar insulin will cost only 20-40% less than insulin does currently. In contrast, generic drugs can cost as much as 80% less than the brand name version. That's typical for biosimilars, which are far harder to produce than traditional generics.

SEE ALSO: The first drug of its kind was just approved, and it could signal a massive change for pharmaceuticals

SEE ALSO: 90% of Americans with pre-diabetes has no idea they have it

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Paul Krugman: One Of The Biggest 'Facts' About The US Healthcare Debate Looks Like It Might Be Wrong

The path to success isn't always straight. There are often bumps and turns and forks in the road. But a little bit of guidance can help you find your way.

In fact, many of the most successful leaders are where they are today because they took advice from people they trusted.

Here we've compiled some of the best tips that executives have shared throughout the years.

Aimee Groth and Kim Bhasin contributed to an earlier version of this article.

Warren Buffett, chairman and CEO, Berkshire Hathaway

Berkshire Hathaway board of directors member Thomas Murphy told him:

"Never forget Warren, you can tell a guy to go to hell tomorrow — you don't give up the right. So just keep your mouth shut today, and see if you feel the same way tomorrow."

From a 2010 interview with Yahoo!

Marissa Mayer, president and CEO, Yahoo!

"My friend Andre said to me, 'You know, Marissa, you're putting a lot of pressure on yourself to pick the right choice, and I've gotta be honest: That's not what I see here. I see a bunch of good choices, and there's the one that you pick and make great.' I think that's one of the best pieces of advice I've ever gotten."

From a 2011 interview with the Social Times

Richard Branson, founder and chairman, Virgin Group

"My mother always taught me never to look back in regret but to move on to the next thing. The amount of time people waste dwelling on failures rather than putting that energy into another project, always amazes me. I have fun running ALL the Virgin businesses — so a setback is never a bad experience, just a learning curve."

From an interview with The Good Entrepreneur

The “Freemium” model dominates mobile games. From Candy Crush Saga to Clash of Clans, “freemium” games and their in-app purchases account for about 70-80% of the $10 billion or more in iOS revenue each year.

But they aren’t limited to mobile. Today, many of the most popular computer games are freemium games as well.

Such games have generated plenty of criticism for seemingly favoring money over skill, since players need to pay for in-game currency and special features. But game designer and former pro StarCraft player Sean Plott thinks it is actually the best business model for popular multiplayer games like League of Legends, Defense of the Ancients 2, and Hearthstone.

To Plott, it's about an alignment of goals.

The freemium model offers users the core product — the game — for free and then optionally charges them for premium content such as in-game currency, extra content, or customizations.

In multiplayer games, the goal is to create a game that brings players back for hundreds of hours of gameplay, says Plott. If developers don't have a strong monetary incentive, it's difficult for them to constantly improve the game experience. With freemium games, players are continuously spending money on the game, as opposed to paying once and forgetting about it. Developers are then incentivized to put that stream of revenue directly back into the game to improve it.

"If people are playing your game and there is something they are frustrated with, the developers can fix it and make the players happy, and the players will continue to stay on the product. If they don't, players leave," says Plott.

For example Plott offers up League of Legends. While League of Legends is 100% free to play, it generated more than $1 billion last year in revenue. It did so through its micropayments to buy champions (new characters) and skins (new color schemes or appearances of a champion). Any person can play League of Legends — and play it well — endlessly without spending a dime.

Here's what the League of Legends store looks like. The prices of items are marked in RP (Riot points):

And here's how much RP equates to real dollars:

Spending money just adds customization to the experience. It’s a benefit that many players are more than willing to do. However, some players — as evidenced by this League of Legends subreddit — complain of spending more than $2,000 on the game over the course of several years.

A considerable portion of the profits from League of Legends micropayments go right back into the game. Riot is constantly updating the mechanics of the game to make them more balanced and fluid, redesigning the artwork and character designs so they look sharp, and adding content so the game stays fresh. All of that is given to players free. As Plott notes, that would be an impossible proposition for any gaming company that releases standalone games.

Plott is so convinced of the model that he thinks we could see traditional console games splitting their products between single-player games, which would cost a flat fee, and multiplayer games, which are free-to-play.

Freemium games have generated most of their criticism over the mobile gaming experience. Last year, South Park famously skewered the concept as a money grab that preys on addicts and leads to boring games. The singer of the Sex Pistols, John Lyndon, claimed last year that he spent over $15,000 on iPad apps.

In 2013, Apple settled a class-action lawsuit for parents who alleged that Apple didn’t make it clear that free apps could charge money.

The “freemium” model has proven itself to be incredibly profitable. The question now is how game developers use it to grow without alienating a large share of the gaming community.

SEE ALSO: The ‘freemium’ model is brilliant, but it’s ruining my life

DON'T MISS: Ex-pro video gamer explains why e-sports are becoming the number one hobby in the world

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Animated map of what Earth would look like if all the ice melted

Maiduguri (Nigeria) (AFP) - Dozens of Nigerian women who were forced to marry Boko Haram fighters were reportedly slaughtered by their "husbands" before a battle with troops in the northeast town of Bama, multiple witnesses said Thursday. 

Five witnesses who recounted the massacres to AFP said the Islamist militants feared they would be killed by advancing soldiers or separated from their wives when they fled the town.  

They killed the women to prevent them from subsequently marrying soldiers or other so-called non-believers, they added. 

"The terrorists said they will not allow their wives to be married to infidels," said Sharifatu Bakura, 39, a mother of three. 

Nigeria's military along with forces from neighbouring Cameroon, Chad and Niger have claimed huge victories over the insurgents in recent weeks but defenceless civilians still face serious threats. 

- 'Dozens' of corpses -

According to Bakura's account, which was supported by others, Boko Haram fighters received word of a military assault on Bama, formerly an Islamist stronghold in Borno state. 

The insurgents had decided to flee to the nearby town of Gwoza before the troops' arrival but first decided "to kill their wives so that nobody will remarry them", she said.

Bukara's husband was killed by the insurgents four months ago but she was spared from a forced marriage because she was visibly pregnant. 

Boko Haram forcibly married scores of women in Bama after seizing it in September. Nigeria's military announced the recapture of the town on Monday. 

Witnesses who were taken under military protection this week to Borno's capital Maiduguri, 73 kilometres (45 miles) away, said the killing of women began 10 days before Bama was liberated. 

The Islamists said "if they kill their wives, they would remain pious until both of them meet again in heaven, where they would re-unite", said Salma Mahmud, another witness.  

A vigilante who fought alongside the military in the battle to retake Bama, Abba Kassim, said he saw "dozens of women corpses" in the town. 

- Commander's instructions -

While other witnesses reportedly a similarly high casualty figure the numbers were impossible to verify.

Fanna Aisami, 52, also in Maiduguri after escaping Bama this week, said the executions followed a warning from Boko Haram's top commander in the town.

"He informed them of the situation and ‎the consequence of the takeover of the town by the advancing troops.

"He warned them that when soldiers killed them they would take their wives back to the society where they would be forced to marry and live with infidels," the mother of seven said, speaking by phone to AFP in Kano.

The commander "said it would be better for them to kill their wives and send them to heaven," Aisami added.

A number of women were shot dead in front of the commander's house, she further said.

Yagana Mairambe, 58, reported similar details but told AFP that "some Boko Haram men refused" and fled with their wives towards neighbouring Yobe state.

Nigeria's national security spokesman Mike Omeri told AFP he would try to verify the reports while the military could not immediately be reached for comment. 

With Boko Haram gunmen facing heavy military pressure across northeast Nigeria, attacks, including suicide bombings, have persisted, even as the government in Abuja tries to assure voters that March 28 elections will be secure. 

The Islamist uprising has claimed more than 13,000 lives since 2009 and President Goodluck Jonathan has faced fierce criticism over failure to contain the violence. 

The latest reported atrocities in Bama recall similar massacres at high schools and colleges across northeast Nigeria, where Boko Haram has executed scores of students learning a so-called infidel curriculum. 

Join the conversation about this story »

This chart says it all: "Excluding the mega rallies, the latest [US dollar] rally has been bigger than average."

The thesis this chart is advancing is that the current US dollar rally has gotten too extended and is due for a pullback. The reason it's due for a pullback is because the rally has been bigger than average. And this is just an average rally.

The chart's title advances a somewhat specious argument. HSBC note makes a stronger argument. 

Here is HSBC rejecting the notion that this time is different:

The current USD bull run has already exceeded this historic average. Since June 2014, the rise has been over 25%. Arguably, one could take the starting point as the low in April 2011, in which case the gain is just shy of 40%. In either case, we have seen a USD rally which is greater than the average seen since the early 1970s. This is already a "big" USD rally.

But some may argue that this should be an outsized rally as USD strength is largely the mirror to unconventional and unprecedented monetary easing elsewhere, and so history cannot be used as a gauge. We disagree. After all, the US has been through the QE process. Chart 2 again shows the DXY index but this time the shaded areas are the three periods of QE in the US. It shows the USD fell roughly 20% during QE1, and another 20% in anticipation of and during QE2. It was largely flat during QE3. So the shifts in the JPY (-35%) and the EUR (-25%) driven by their QE strategies are already greater than witnessed in the US.

The firm additionally argues that the divergence of monetary policy around the globe — tighter in the US, looser just about everywhere else — is already priced in to the dollar and the currency markets more broadly. 

HSBC adds: "If monetary policy divergence is so well known by the markets and therefore largely priced in, the hunt should be on for other factors that could determine the next stage in the USD story. We believe a number of these argue against additional USD strength."

In response, the firm lays out five quick bullets on why the rally is done:

• The cycle is surprisingly EUR-USD bullish
• US tolerance for USD strength has its limits
• Valuations show the USD is 'rich'
• USD bullishness ahs become all-pervasive
• The USD weakens in the early months of a Fed-hike cycle

On Wednesday following the Fed's latest policy announcement, the dollar got crushed. On Thursday, the dollar had recovered almost all of its losses. 

(via @TheStalwart)

SEE ALSO: Emoticons are the hot new thing in Wall Street research

Join the conversation about this story »

While working as a currency broker on Wall Street in 1990, New Jersey resident John Bovery, now 58, started a fantasy-football pool in his office. Fifty-seven players joined for $50 each, making the total payout $2,850.

Over the next two decades, his pools mushroomed in size to $837,000 and included more than 8,000 people from around the globe, according to NJ.com.

The explosive growth, however, came to an abrupt halt in 2010, when police investigating a Jersey mobster with ties to sports betting found out about Bovery's lucrative hobby. At the time, New Jersey had banned sports betting, even fantasy pools, which have become an ubiquitous element of office culture around the country.

Since then, Bovery had his banks accounts seized and spent time in jail, and he now stands in the throes of a years-long legal battle, all while $150,000 in debt.

"I'm a rules guy," he told NJ.com. "You want to enforce the letter of the law? Fine. But I'm the only pool manager you'll able to find in the state? The first one you ever found? .... Why am I the only one?"

Realistically, Bovery isn't. Some put profit estimates for the fantasy realm as high as $70 billion— and that's just football.

Read the full story at NJ.com »

Though New Jersey's vague gambling laws make no mention of fantasy pools, statute 2C:37-2 states:

A person is guilty of promoting gambling when he knowingly ... "accepts or receives money or other property, pursuant to an agreement or understanding with any person whereby he participates or will participate in the proceeds of gambling activity; or ... engages in conduct, which materially aids any form of gambling activity."

According to Bovery, his pools included sports broadcasters, New Jersey state troopers, dozens of lawyers, and even agents for Tiger Woods and other PGA tour golfers.

He says he never asked participants for any money to join his pools though. His website, jrwinkle.com, only suggested that pleased players "gift" 10% of their winnings. Bovery's pools, however, did leave him with about six figures worth of profit, enough so that he could quit his finance job and become a math teacher.

Then, in September 2010, two investigators from the Monmouth County Prosecutor's Office knocked on the door of Bovery's three-bedroom condo. They asked if he knew Joseph LaScala, an alleged member of the Genovese crime family, known as the "Godfather of New Jersey."

Bovery didn't — but he had sent LaScala $90,000 as winnings from one of his pools.

"Where is the cash," one officer demanded, according to NJ.com. "Where are the betting slips?"

Right then and there, Bovery says, he explained his entire operation and asked if he was doing anything illegal. The police allegedly didn't answer. So he kept his pools going.

Four months later, 11 cops stormed Bovery's home again — "like I was Al Capone," he told NJ.com — and arrested him. Bovery spent 25 days in jail and now faces a felony conviction, which caused him to lose his teaching job and has prevented him from finding another.

"They targeted John because of the money that was involved, and instead of telling him to stop, they shut him down the Thursday that the season started," Ralph Ferrara, Bovery's civil attorney, told NJ.com. "And then they said it was 'coincidental.'"

While awaiting his criminal trial scheduled to begin summer 2015, Bovery has filed a civil case against the forfeiture of his assets. Police confiscated three of his bank accounts, totalling $846,000. Bovery says $722,000 of that belonged to participants in an NFL pool, while $124,000 was his life's savings.

While Monmouth County prosecutor Christopher Gramiccioni didn't provide any details on the case, "there's more than one side to the story," he told Fox News. "Our evidence will show that, and we look forward to our day in court in June to present our case."

In 2014, New Jersey repealed a provision that made sports gambling illegal in the state. That move, however, could violate federal laws, which take precedent over state's rights. The fight just returned to court Tuesday.

“I’m just a guy who manages the spreadsheets and names and holds the money until someone is the victor," Bovery told Fox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 6 Crazy Things Revealed In HBO's Explosive New Scientology Documentary 'Going Clear'

Billionaire Virgin founder Richard Branson hinted to Bloomberg that the company could take on Tesla in the electric car businesses.    

Branson spent part of the week in Florida where the Virgin Racing team competed in a Formula 1 spin-off race for battery-powered cars capable of going from zero to 60 mph in three seconds. 

"Where is Virgin going with this?" reporter Tom Randall asked Branson.

"We have teams of people working on electric cars," Branson replied. "So you never know — you may find Virgin competing with the Tesla in the car business as we do in the space business. We will see what happens."

No need for Tesla CEO Elon Musk to start quaking in his boots, but it's interesting that Virgin has multiple teams focused on electric cars. 

The business of making smart, electric automobiles is gaining speed. Besides Tesla and possibly Virgin, Google continues to work on its self-driving cars, Uber may have similar ambitions, and Apple is reportedly working on its own vehicle. 

Earlier today, Musk announced that upcoming versions of Tesla software will make the company's cars better than ever, with autosteering features and the ability to optimize long-distance trips for drivers. 

"Most cars don’t improve over time," he said. "But the Model S does get faster, smarter, and better as time passes. The car gets better as you sleep, when you wake up, it's like driving a new car."

Even if Branson is plotting for Virgin to take on Tesla, he still seems to have respect for what Musk's built: "Tesla is as sexy as any other car on the road today," he told Randall. 

SEE ALSO: Elon Musk says that updated Tesla cars will make it 'impossible to run out of range'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How to supercharge your iPhone in only 5 minutes

The wealthy gulf states of the Middle East are driving an explosion in military spending, much of which is being funnelled into the fight against Islamic State (ISIS or ISIL).

In fact, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), military exports to the states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), several of which are engaged in fighting Islamic State, have surged 71% in the last four years.

Here's some of the heavy weaponry being bought up by Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain for the fight.

The government of Qatar recently bought 24 AH-64E Apache attack helicopters from Boeing, one of the biggest US military orders in the last year.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have also ordered billions of dollars worth of 'hit to kill' air defence Patriot Pac-3 missiles.

France is in the final stages of discussions with Qatar to sell 36 Rafale fighter jets, some of the world's most advanced.

Even huge coffee chains are feeling the pressure of New York retail rents.

Starbucks is looking to close some of its pricy, large locations, according to the Commercial Observer.

The brand has nine stores for every square mile in Manhattan according to the Wall Street Journal.

Last year marked 20 years since Starbucks came to New York, which means the leases on some its original city locations are up for renewal.

And, increasingly, the chain is seeing these coveted corner locations it had as just not worth the extra expense.

Commercial Observer reports that a Starbucks at the corner of Fifth Avenue and West 33rd Street was shuttered after they declined to release the space for $1 million a year.

Another shop near Lincoln Center is also on the market, and other locations are rumored to close, like the one at Union Square North (Broadway and 17th Street), after its rent doubled from $325 a square foot they currently pay to the $650 a square foot the landlord is asking now.

This comes as no surprise, as retail rents have been on the rise for a while now. In Manhattan alone rents rose 20%, Commercial Observer reported in 2014.

Of course, Eater notes that, if Starbucks wanted to, they could pay the exorbitantly expensive leases. Revenues grew more than 10 percent in the fourth quarter of 2014 to a record $4.2 billion, according to Commercial Observer.

But they just aren't worth it as the brand is strong enough to to lure customers into Manhattan's less-busy side streets to get their Carmel Frappuccinos and Venti Chai Lattes.

“In today’s world of rising rents, especially on the high-profile corridors, likely Starbucks knows they can still be successful in smaller space and/or just off the main avenues,” retail specialist Robin Abrams of Lansco told Commercial Observer.

SEE ALSO: 5 ways Starbucks entices you to spend more money

DON'T FORGET: Follow Business Insider's The Life on Facebook!

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 6 Crazy Things Revealed In HBO's Explosive New Scientology Documentary 'Going Clear'

We all know by now that Instagram is a prime place to put filtered photos of your brunch, your hot dog legs, and your selfies.

But no matter how good you look in your latest upload, these tiny stars of the photo platform have us all beat. 

They're the smallest, and most fashionable, celebrities of Instagram.

We have 5-year-olds rocking better outfits than some 25-year-olds could put together, little girls who look like they've stepped off the runway or off of your coveted Pinterest board, and babies in couture.

Thanks to their social media savvy parents, these kids are becoming household names before they even learn how to spell their own. 

Meet the youngest celebrities of Instagram.

This is London Scout. We're pretty envious of her wardrobe.

Her mom, Sai, started an Instagram account for her 3-year-old to document her life living in Manhattan.

London has gotten lots of press, and even attended Kids Fashion Week as an ambassador.

The Guardian's director of commercial operations, Juliet Scott-Crowford, revealed on Thursday for the first time ever the number of people that have joined the "Membership" scheme it launched in September last year.

It has has already managed to sign up 35,000 people, Scott-Crowford said at the newspaper's Changing Media Summit conference in London, although it is not clear how many of those members have opted for free versus paid access.

Guardian Membership comes in three tiers: Friends, where readers can sign up for free; Partners who pay £15 per month (or £135 a year); and Patrons, who pay £60 a month (or £540 a year.)

The different levels of Guardian Membership open up access to or discounts on tickets for live events, festivals, debates, classes, and some free gifts. The Guardian says some 20,000 people have attended the 70 events it has held since launching the scheme in September.

Speaking to Business Insider in January, Guardian deputy CEO David Pemsel said the Membership scheme's value isn't just in adding a new revenue stream, but that it now has the digital infrastructure to take payments and gather more data: Both of which can be difficult when a site does not operate behind a paywall.

Nevertheless, The Guardian has basically invented a new revenue stream that did not even exist before. Even if just half of those 35,000 took up the yearly "Partner" option and the rest free, that would still mean around £2.4 million in brand new revenue. Not massive, but every little helps in a market suffering from terminal print revenue declines.

The Guardian's parent company, Guardian Media Group, reported a 3% lift in group revenues to £215 million in the year to March 29 2015, according to an unaudited trading update published earlier this month. The company told Campaign Magazine it expects its pre-tax losses will remain broadly flat at around £30 million.

SEE ALSO: The Guardian, Financial Times, Reuters, CNN, and The Economist have formed an ad alliance to take on Google and Facebook

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Animated map of what Earth would look like if all the ice melted

There's another reason I quit cable three years ago besides the fact that I don't watch most of the programming that came with my subscription.

Modern cable systems are awful: You have to use a beat up old DVR box that's been used by who-knows-how-many people before you. (And then when it inevitably fizzles out, you have to schedule an appointment to get it swapped.) You have to slog through confusing, unresponsive menus. You have to use a remote with more buttons and options than the cockpit of a 747. 

And you pay $50 or $60 or $70 per month for that experience, plus the equipment rental fees.

Yes, it's great to get a gazillion channels pumped into your home, but good luck finding what you want to watch.

If Apple's new TV streaming service, which is set to launch later this year according to reports form the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, can make that user experience even moderately better, I can see people switching over just for that — even if it does have fewer programming options. (Apple's service reportedly may not include NBCUniversal channels because of a dispute between Apple and NBCUniversal parent company Comcast.)

Right now there's no good way to juggle your cable channels and the variety of streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Instant. Samsung has tried with its smart TVs. So has Roku. And just about every other TV manufacturer. But no one has nailed it yet. If you stream a lot of your video content online, you're stuck with the messy process of switching multiple inputs with multiple remotes to get to what you want to watch.

Apple has the opportunity to loop all of that together with the Apple TV as your hub. You won't have to worry about switching inputs because you'll have one box and one remote that controls everything. And if you decide you want to watch something on the go, you could stream it to your iPhone, iPad, or Mac instead.

There's no guarantee Apple solved the TV problem, of course, but the company has been casually teasing that it has over the years. In Walter Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs, Jobs was quoted as saying he finally "cracked" TV, leading to wild speculation that Apple's next big thing would be a reinventing the television experience. (But that was almost four years ago.)

In interviews since then, Apple CEO Tim Cook has teased Apple's "interest" in television. Last fall, he said TV was stuck in the 70s, a line he's repeated at least one other time.

Now it sounds like most of the pieces are in place on the content side of things for Apple to make that vision a reality. According to the WSJ and NYT reports, Apple has deals with Viacom, Discovery, ABC, CBS, and most important of all, ESPN. All for between $20 and $40 per month.

If Apple truly has "cracked" how to get all those channels and streaming services to you without a confusing, clunky interface, that'll solve the biggest problem cable subscribers have to deal with today. 

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A lawyer in Florida has come up with an ingenious way for drivers to evade drunken-driving checkpoints

The terms of a possible nuclear deal with Iran are now out, as the AP has gotten its hands on a draft version of a framework agreement.

Tehran and the US-led group of countries (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, a group known as the P5+1) are negotiating an end to the international standoff over the Iranian nuclear program.

The AP's reporting suggests that the sides aren't exactly close to reaching even such a preliminary deal, which has a March 31 deadline and would prefigure a final agreement to be signed by the end of the June.

It's still unclear how long an agreement would even last, with France pushing for a 25-year lifespan, according to AP. The sides are also split on how and when various international sanctions on Iran would be lifted, and on the extent of nuclear research and development Iran would be permitted to continue over the life of a deal.

But AP reporting confirms two fairly substantial P5+1 concessions to Iran.

Firstly, it says that the P5+1 has agreed to let Iran operate 6,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges. Both Israeli and US sources have previously reported that the P5+1 was considering letting Iran run between 4,000 and 6,500 centrifuges under a final agreement. But the AP report is the best confirmation so far that the P5+1 has substantially shifted its negotiating posture, eroding its demands on Iran's centrifuge capacity.

The 6,000 number is a huge increase on the 1,500 machines the P5+1 was demanding a year ago, according to the AP.

The number is also about 185,000 centrifuges fewer than the number Iran would need to feed its Bushehr nuclear reactor without having to import enriched uranium from a foreign seller. But as Ollli Heinonen, a senior fellow at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and a former deputy director general for safeguards at the International Atomic Energy Agency told Business Insider last month, it's also 5,000 centrifuges more than Iran needs to run a "demonstration cascade" that would allow the country to maintain its nuclear scientists' expertise and keep up its mastery of the fuel cycle.

Six-thousand centrifuges can produce about 6,000 separative work units' worth of uranium enrichment a year, which has a market cost of only $852,000. Iran has no specific civilian need to operate 6,000 machines, and buying enriched uranium on the international market would be far cheaper than running the centrifuges anyway.

But it does allow Tehran to remain between six months and a year of nuclear breakout, and that's assuming its stockpile of low-enriched uranium remains constant and there are no additional secret nuclear facilities. Iran has cheated on both counts in recent years, so the 6,000 centrifuge number takes a huge gamble with Tehran's future compliance — in addition to giving it a capability that isn't strictly necessary to its civilian nuclear needs.

Secondly, the AP reported that elements of the arms embargo on Iran would be rolled back early on in the life of the deal.

"If a deal is reached, officials say various layers of UN sanctions on Iran will be eased," the AP reports. "That will include parts of the UN arms embargo, with Russia and China, in particular, more forward-leaning on that front and talking about acting within weeks of a full accord."

This would be a double concession. International sanctions have forced Iran to develop one of the world's most comprehensive domestic arms industries. But while Iran is one of the only countries on earth capable of building submarines, warships, and ballistic missiles, their materiel isn't up to Russian or Chinese standards.

Russia and China are both members of the P5+1. And they both have a history of backing Tehran on various issues — Russia and Iran are the Assad regime's only two remaining state allies in the Syrian civil war, after all. And they're both energetic arms exporters, with China's exports increasing 143% in the past five years, according to the Financial Times.

The end of the embargo opens up a new arms market for both countries. Iran is one of the region's rising powers, according to no less an authority than President Barack Obama. China and Russia realize they both have something to gain from that.

There are still plenty of nuclear-related issues that haven't quite been resolved in the negotiations, or at least where there hasn't been a publicly reported fix. The status of the Arak plutonium reactor, Iranian disclosures of the military dimensions of their nuclear program, limits on centrifuge testing and construction, and the exact process and timetable for lifting international sanctions are still up in the air.

The question now is whether these will be dealt with through further P5+1 concessions — or whether Iran is willing to give the ground needed to reach a final resolution to the nuclear standoff.

SEE ALSO: An Iran nuclear deal is coming into focus, but there's one glaring problem

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This 26-year-old from Baltimore took a 35,000-mile road trip and ended up fighting in the Libyan revolution

The head of a leading security-software firm is friends with high-level Russian spies, according to a report from Bloomberg.

The company's connections to the Kremlin have long been known and reported on, but Bloomberg reports that several executives have been replaced with people closely aligned with Russia's military and intelligence operations.

Kaspersky Lab's founder and CEO, Eugene Kaspersky, used to work for the KGB and reportedly maintains relationships with former and current Russian intelligence officials.

"Unless Kaspersky is traveling, he rarely misses a weekly banya (sauna) night with a group of about 5 to 10 that usually includes Russian intelligence officials," Bloomberg writes. "Kaspersky says in an interview that the group saunas are purely social: 'When I go to banya, they’re friends.'"

Kaspersky Lab has reportedly aided some of the Russian government's criminal investigations by handing over data from customers who used the company's software, which is favored by the likes of Best Buy and Amazon, according to Bloomberg.

Kaspersky insists that Russian intelligence officials can't associate that data with individual customers, but sources who spoke to Bloomberg said the data can be altered to gather identifying information from users.

In any case, it's unsettling that a major cybersecurity company serving millions of people (including Americans) is working so closely with a country that harbors some of world's top hackers.

The most significant implication of Bloomberg's report is that while Kaspersky often goes after foreign hackers, the company looks the other way when it comes to malicious figures on its own turf.

And Kaspersky Lab's services go beyond antivirus software — as Wired wrote in a 2012, the company is a "leader in uncovering cyber-espionage." Except, perhaps, when it comes from Russia itself.

"While Kaspersky Lab has published a series of reports that examined alleged electronic espionage by the U.S., Israel, and the U.K., the company hasn’t pursued alleged Russian operations with the same vigor," Bloomberg reports, noting that Kaspersky released a detailed report about presumed NSA spying on countries including Iran, Russia, and Pakistan but has not detailed any of Russia's many cyber-espionage campaigns.

It's important to note that similar companies in the US have aided intelligence agencies there.

But what also concerns critics about Kaspersky, on top of his personal connections, are statements he's made about his visions for the future of cybersecurity. Wired reports that Kaspersky supports government regulation of social networks, claiming that there's "too much freedom" on these channels.

"Freedom is good," Wired quotes him as saying, referring to sites like Facebook. "But the bad guys — they can abuse this freedom to manipulate public opinion."

Kaspersy's position and opinions, as explained by Noah Schactman in Wired, encapsulates "the paradox of Eugene Kaspersky: a close associate of the autocratic Putin regime who is charged with safeguarding the data of millions of Americans; a supposedly-retired intelligence officer who is busy today revealing the covert activities of other nations; a vital presence in the open and free Internet who doesn’t want us to be too free."

Back in 2012, Kaspersky responded to Wired's report, writing on his website: "Kaspersky Lab is a private international company that registered its holding in Great Britain in 2006. This means that our financial reporting is transparent and freely available to anyone. I think we can all agree that her majesty's laws are strong and respected worldwide. Our affairs there have nothing to do with the Kremlin."

Bloomberg reports that Kaspersky Lab has been having a hard time getting US federal contracts, but Kaspersky himself doesn't seem too concerned about the skepticism surrounding his company's ties to the Kremlin.

"I'm not the right person to talk about Russian realities, because I live in cyberspace," he told Bloomberg.

That is, presumably, when he isn't at the sauna.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Putin: We Have The Best Army In The World

A metal fragment from the crash site of the downed Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 matches a Russian surface-to-air BUK rocket, reports Dutch broadcaster RTLNieuws on Thursday. 

Despite a mountain of evidence that pro-Russian separatists shot down the commercial flight, Russia blames the West and continues to deny any involvement.

The fragment was recovered by a Dutch journalist near the area where the plane flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur crashed on July 17th, killing all 298 passengers and crew.

Dutch broadcaster RTLNieuws said it had had the shrapnel tested by international forensic experts, including defense analysts IHS Jane's in London, who said it matched the explosive charge of a Buk a Russian-made anti-aircraft missile system.

Buk missiles are launched from trucks to engage planes and helicopters within 13 miles off the ground.

The damage from a Buk rocket is similar to the damage to the MH17 plane:

The downing of the plane was a turning point in the conflict in Ukraine, which pits the separatists against Kiev's forces.

Kiev and its Western supporters blamed the rebels for the incident and it stiffened the resolve of Western governments to impose sanctions against both leading separatists and Moscow.

The Dutch Safety Board, which is investigating the cause of the crash, said in a reaction that its investigation was in "full progress and focuses on many more sources than only the shrapnel."

In preliminary conclusions published last year, the board said the plane had been hit by high velocity projectiles but did not specify the source.

"Additional investigation material is welcome, but it is imperative that it can be indisputably shown that there is a relationship between the material and the downed aircraft," it said in a statement on Thursday.

(Reporting By Anthony Deutsch; Editing by Gareth Jones)

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A lawyer in Florida has come up with an ingenious way for drivers to evade drunken-driving checkpoints