For seven years in the 2000s, photographer Andrew Moisey captured what life was like in an unnamed fraternity at an undergraduate university in the US.

A decade later, these shots comprise the bulk of Moisey's new photobook, "The American Fraternity: An Illustrated Ritual Manual," published by Daylight Books.

Shot in black and white, the images show candid moments shared between members of the anonymous Greek letter organization. Men drink, vomit, and wrestle; brothers carry pledges in a coffin during an initiation ceremony; women are pictured topless and inebriated, lying down on couches and beds with their eyes closed.

We recently talked to Moisey, a professor of art history at Cornell University, to learn more about his provocative series. Below, take a closer look at 12 shots from "The American Fraternity."

Editor's note: Some of the images below show partial nudity and suggest an act of animal cruelty that may make readers uncomfortable.

Between 2000 and 2008, Andrew Moisey photographed members of a Greek letter organization at the University of California, Berkeley.

Moisey, who attended the same college, began to visit the fraternity house after his younger brother became a member. At the time, the professor told us, he had just taken an introductory photography class and always had his camera with him.

Sensing a rare opportunity to observe a fraternity from the inside, he slowly began to take pictures of the organization's members until "people got used to having [him] around."

At first, Moisey mainly captured photos of brothers partying and spending time together.

But after a while, he realized that his project had to "transcend" what people "already knew about fraternity life." 

"It took a long time to get pictures that were more than brothers hanging out, playing video games, and every once in a while, drinking too much," the photographer told INSIDER. 

Moisey believes this common depiction of fraternity life is one reason why people do not "take it seriously" as a culture. "They don't see how influential [fraternities] can actually be," he said.

"So I stayed around to see what I would find," he added.

Over time, the photographer was able to get a more intimate look inside the fraternity.

Moisey said the members invited him to take increasingly candid photos after seeing his initial work.

"They enjoyed seeing themselves in my pictures," the professor told us, "even when they were doing things other people might look at as scandalous." 

Four years after he started photographing the brothers, Moisey compiled his work for a show in 2004. "It seemed like a success," he said. "But I didn't think I was finished, so I continued shooting."

• Someone launched a website selling merchandise to raise money for Tesla CEO Elon Musk after he was sued by the SEC.
• The Shopify store sells tote bags, bathing suits, T-shirts and coffee mugs all with the goal to "Save Elon from the SEC."
• The SEC filed charges against Musk on Thursday alleging that he made "false and misleading statements" about Tesla in August.

A site selling "Save Elon" merchandise has been launched to raise awareness for Tesla CEO Elon Musk's lawsuit with the Security Exchange Commission. 

The Shopify store sells tote bags, bathing suits, T-shirts and coffee mugs all with the goal to "Save Elon from the SEC."

A bathing suit on the site sells for $69, while a tote bag can be bought for $25, and a T-shirt for $26. Baby onesies sell for $32.

It remains unknown who started the shop, or if funds made from selling the products will help cover billionaire Musk's defense fund. 

The founder's description for the site says they want to "help Elon Musk with this preposterous SEC filing against him."

"By purchasing these products, we vow to spread the word, to rise up and shout for what is right! As citizens of planet earth, we must show our support for innovation, for attempting to create a positive future, and for our fearless change agent of the world, Elon Musk," the shop description says.

The SEC filed charges against Musk on Thursday, claiming the Tesla CEO made "false and misleading statements" about Tesla in August, when he told his followers his plan to take his electric-car company private at $420 a share.

Tesla shares fell as much as 11% in after-hours trading following the tweets.

Now, the SEC wants to bar Musk from being an officer or director of a public company.

Musk said in a company statement to Business Insider that he was "deeply saddened and disappointed" by the lawsuit, which he called "unjustified."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: An environmental group is testing giant floating pipes to clean up oceans

• Amazon reportedly made a second visit to HQ2 contender Chicago in August, as it prepares to announce its decision on where to place its second headquarters by the end of the year. 
• According to The Chicago Tribune, Amazon representatives visited The 78, a development slated for the city's South Loop neighborhood.
• Amazon did not visit this particular site on its previous HQ2-related visit to Chicago.
• If Amazon did indeed visit Chicago for HQ2 purposes recently, it could mean the contest is far from over, and it may be more wide-open than had previously been speculated.

Apparently, Amazon hasn't gotten enough of the Windy City. 

Representatives for the company made a visit to the city in connection with its second headquarters search in August, according to a report from The Chicago Tribune. 

Amazon declined to comment on the report to Business Insider. 

The visit is notable, as it's reportedly the only repeat, HQ2-related visit from Amazon representatives to a city or location on Amazon's short list.

According to the Tribune report, the visit was planned so that representatives could see the site for a new, 62-acre development called The 78. Located in the South Loop, it's one of the last sizable pieces of undeveloped land close to the city's core.

That could make it attractive to Amazon, which stipulated in its request for proposals that it desired an urban campus for its second headquarters, much like its original campus in Seattle.

Amazon visited four other potential HQ2 sites in its earlier trip to Chicago this year, but not this one.

A second visit at such a crucial time in the HQ2 process could throw open the doors of speculation on HQ2. Though most analysts and experts have been betting on Northern Virginia as the winner, Chicago remaining in the running as late as August is significant. 

Amazon has said it will make its decision by the end of the year. 

SEE ALSO: Amazon's new store is its latest huge bet in defiance of the retail apocalypse

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside the Trump 'MAGA' hat factory

• A group of amputee-athletes are attempting to climb Cotopaxi, one of South America's toughest peaks.
• They're traveling with the Range of Motion Project, a nonprofit that helps amputees climb mountains around the world.
• The nonprofit is hoping to raise $100,000 to provide 100 prosthetic limbs to those need.

On Saturday, a group of amputee-athletes are hoping to summit Cotopaxi, a 19,347-foot tall, heavily glaciated stratovolcano that's also Ecuador's second highest mountain.

It's one of the most famous — and challenging — peaks in the South American climbing circuit. 

The expedition is part of the Range of Motion Project (ROMP), a nonprofit organization that aims to improve the lives of amputees by outfitting those in need with the highest quality prosthetic limbs — and help them climb some of the world's toughest peaks.

The Cotopaxi expedition is seeking to raise $100,000, which will provide 100 prosthetics to those who lack access to quality healthcare.  

The team is comprised of expert climbers, like Jukes and David Krupa — ROMP's executive director and an amputee mountaineer — as well as non-amputee experts and a host of local guides.

"Cotopaxi is big enough, bad enough, and intimidating enough to be a serious goal to train for," Krupa said. "But it's also reachable enough to be attainable, provided the team puts in the work."

The expedition includes amputee climbers from Ecuador, many of whom have never put on crampons or scaled big peaks before.

"This team has been a year in the making," Krupa told Business Insider. "It's by far the most physically and mentally strong team we've had."

'I was going to climb come hell or high water after the amputation'

In 2006, Chad Jukes suffered a life-changing accident. 

At the time, he was deployed in Northern Iraq. The truck he was driving ran over a buried mine, and the explosion destroyed his foot.

When he returned home, doctors told him he had a decision. Jukes could either have reconstructive surgery to repair his foot or get it amputated.

"They said if I opted for the surgery I'd be on pain medications for the rest of my life and could probably never run again," Jukes told Business Insider in an interview from Ecuador's Cotopaxi National Park, where he is serving as one of the expedition's leaders. 

To Jukes — who hails from Colorado and was an avid climber — that wasn't an option. He went for the amputation.

"I was going to climb come hell or high water after the amputation," Jukes said. "I was really excited to overcome those obstacles."

The amputation didn't slow him down. Since the accident, Jukes has summitted some of the most challenging peaks around the globe, including Mt. Everest. He recently led a group of veterans up Nepal's Lobuche peak.

"Climbing big peaks is all about adapting to a hostile environment," Jukes said. "For me, I just have to take that adaption one step further."

'People aren't disabled by a missing limb, but by a missing prosthetic'

Jukes said he'd rather have a team member who has a positive attitude and is ready to push a little bit harder than someone who is stronger.

"Tenacity is crucial," Jukes said. "Everyone in this group has had to overcome significant obstacles. Where people are usually complaining when things are hard, this group is smiling and laughing and pushing through that pain. That's beyond important in the mountains."

Climbing Cotopaxi is no small feat. It's an active volcano that's far taller than any peak in the continental US.

The team will have full mountaineering gear, and they'll have to do an "alpine start" to attain the summit — that is, waking up around 11 p.m., climbing through the night, summiting at dawn, and returning to high camp in the afternoon.

Prepping for an expedition like Cotopaxi takes a lot of careful planning, and climbing with a group of amputee-athletes only adds to that challenge.

Krupa said part of his role will be repairing and adjusting team member's prosthetic limbs as the climb progresses. He'll have to carry a full pack of tools with him on the mountain to do so, and help coach team members modify their gait to cover steep terrain and negotiate tricky glacial features like crevasses. 

"Many of the amputee climbers have told me their injury pushed them to explore new limits of their capacity," Krupa said. "When we're prohibited from something, we want to do it more." 

The team is hoping to summit the peak on Saturday, after training on a number of smaller peaks in the region , including summiting the 15,489-foot Rumiñahui Volcano. 

Along the way, they're hoping to show that amputees — given the right prosthetic — are capable of anything.

"People aren't disabled by a missing limb," Jukes said, "but by a missing prosthetic."

SEE ALSO: A 30-year-old mountaineer became the first person to successfully ski down K2, the second highest peak in the world — here's the footage

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The 5 most extreme newborns in the animal kingdom

Shake Shack is a popular fast food chain that started in New York City that's known for their burgers. It's often described as the In-N-Out of the East Coast. We had our millennial coworkers try Shake Shack's ShackBurger, 'Shroom Burger, and french fries for the first time. Following is a transcript of the video.

Jenna Frain: I think I like McDonald’s better than Shake Shack.

Owen Burke: It kind of looks emaciated. And I don't trust the tomato.

Millennials try Shake Shack for the first time

Alex Frank: I know Shake Shack is kind of like the “In-N-Out” of the East Coast.

Shayanne Gal: I've heard pretty rave reviews leading up to this exact moment, so I'm hoping that it tastes good.

SHACKBURGER

Carly Fokos: I mean, it looks a little smushy.

Alex Frank: It looks really good from this side, then from this side, it’s a little less cute. It definitely doesn't look as good as In-N-Out.

Alex Frank: It’s really good! I can’t — I don’t know if it’s better than In-N-Out, I don't know if I can say that. I really like the bun. It lets the burger sing. It doesn't take over the taste, which is great.

Carly Fokos: It’s actually really good. It’s better than what I was expecting it to be, based off of how it looks. This is definitely better than some of the fast food burgers I've had in the past.

Shayanne Gal: This is really good! [This is] way juicier than I was expecting. It looks almost stale-looking from the outside? I think this tastes way better than a McDonald’s or Burger King burger for sure.

Jenna Frain: I feel like people are going to hate me for saying this, but I like McDonald’s better, I think, because it’s just a thinner patty.

'SHROOM BURGER

Monica Humphries: With burger places, they can kind of serve whatever they want to the vegetarians and then we have to eat it so I'm hoping it tastes really good but I'm not sure.

Monica Humphries: It's really good! It’s definitely crunchy. I think the mushroom is filled with cheese, which [is] obviously always a good surprise.

Nicole Martinez: I feel like it could be more mushroom-y though. I feel like the mushroom flavor isn't that strong. It feels a bit like, breaded cheese? A breaded cheese patty. Which is fine, but I would like some mushroom and bigger tomatoes.

Monica Humphries: It’s better than a lot of the other burger joints where a veggie burger is just the burger without the meat part.

FRENCH FRIES

Alex Frank: These remind me of the cafeteria fries I had in high school and middle school, which weren't bad, I genuinely looked forward to eating them every day, so...

Shayanne Gal: These are way better than any fast food fries that I've had.

Carly Fokos: The fries are really good. It’s not too potato-y but it still, you know, tastes like real food which is good.

FINAL THOUGHTS

Alex Frank: So I still think In-N-Out burger is a little bit better than Shake Shack’s, but I definitely think their fries are a winner. 

Nicole Martinez: I would eat Shake Shack as a third-to-last resort.

Jenna Frain: I think I like McDonald’s better than Shake Shack.

Owen Burke: I think In-N-Out tastes better than Shake Shack.

Monica Humphries: I don't think I would go to Shake Shack specifically to get the burger again or the 'Shroom Burger again, but I wouldn't be upset if all of my friends and I ended up at Shake Shack.

What do you think of Shake Shack?

Join the conversation about this story »

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

Amazon Prime’s free two-day shipping has led to an industry paradigm shift. Online retailers — small and large — are increasingly offering the perk to keep from losing customers to the behemoth marketplace. But free shipping comes at a steep cost: Rising shipping expenditures are eating away at retailers' margins. 

Larger retailers that can better afford to eat the cost of free shipping are battling to gain an advantage over Amazon. But most retailers, particularly small ones, lack the resources necessary to compete with the massive online retailer. This has set off a race in the logistics industry: Large logistics providers are creating new services for small retailers, while logistics startups aiming to address the same market are growing in numbers. 

In a new report, BI Intelligence weighs the costs and benefits of free shipping for retailers and analyzes the effects of the perk on the industry. It assesses the technologies that could become commonplace as retailers and logistics providers fight rising shipping costs. However, implementing a cost-effective free shipping strategy can be difficult, so the report also discusses various techniques that both small and large retailers can use to make free shipping work for them.

Here are some key takeaways from the report:

• Small and large retailers alike are turning to free shipping to better compete in an Amazon-dominated market. But rising shipping expenditures are eating away at retailers' margins — even Amazon reported in 2016 that its shipping costs jumped 40%.
• Small retailers face even more challenges than their larger counterparts, as they often lack the resources to invest in supply chain improvements and can’t benefit from the generous shipping discounts large retailers receive. Typically, retailers can get discounts of up to 70%, while boutique shops may only see discounts of about 5%.
• Both retailers and logistics companies will likely invest in technologies that help to lower shipping costs. These include augmented reality (AR), artificial intelligence (AI), and radio frequency identification (RFID) tracking. Additionally, as logistics providers continue to raise shipping rates, large retailers may move some logistics operations in-house.

In full, the report: 

• Provides an overview of how consumers' demand for free shipping is shaping the retail and logistics industries.
• Examines the technologies that may be implemented as a result of  companies seeking to lower shipping costs.
• Discusses various strategies to implement with free shipping for small and large retailers.

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

1. Subscribe to an All-Access pass to BI 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
2. Purchase & download the full report from our research store. >> Purchase & Download Now

Join the conversation about this story »

• Sen. Jeff Flake said his shock move in calling for a delay of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation vote was because the Senate is "just falling apart."
• In an interview published Saturday, Flake said he was overwhelmed by the frenzy surrounding the vote and discouraged by lawmakers on the Senate Judiciary Committee, where "there's no trust" across party lines. 
• Despite his call for the investigation, the Arizona senator said he still intends to vote for Kavanaugh "unless they turn up something."

Sen. Jeff Flake said he decided to call for a delay of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation vote because the Senate is "just falling apart."

In an interview published Saturday in The Atlanic, Flake said his refusal to issue a vote on Kavanaugh without a week-long "pause" for an FBI investigation into the allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh was a last-ditch effort to overcome partisan battles that have plagued the confirmation process.

"The US Senate as an institution—we’re coming apart at the seams," the Arizona senator said. "There’s no currency, no market for reaching across the aisle. It just makes it so difficult."

Flake, a key Republican swing vote, was the center of attention on Friday as he conferred with longtime friend and Democratic Sen. Chris Coons, as well as other Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, before making his surprise proposal.

After three women came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh, lawmakers disagreed along party lines about how to proceed. Republicans pushed to move forward with Kavanaugh's confirmation after hearing testimony from him and one of his accusers, the California professor Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. But Democrats said there had to be an FBI background check into the claims against Kavanaugh before a final confirmation vote. They also slammed Republicans for refusing to call other witnesses to testify.

"We can’t just have the committee acting like this," Flake said. "The majority and minority parties and their staffs just don’t work well together. There’s no trust. In the investigation, they can’t issue subpoenas like they should. It’s just falling apart."

Flake said he was overwhelmed by "the hearing itself, the aftermath of the hearing, watching pundits talk about it on cable TV, seeing the protesters outside, encountering them in the hall." He added that he found an ally in Coons.

"I told Chris, 'Our country's coming apart on this — and it can't,'" Flake said. "And he felt the same."

Coons and Flake stepped into the spotlight Friday, both with impassioned appeals to the committee for an FBI investigation minutes after two women who say they are sexual assault survivors cornered Flake in an elevator and said that by voting in favor of Kavanaugh's confirmation, he was telling women that "assault doesn't matter."

Flake said their "poignant" accounts came after he and other lawmakers saw an emotional and widespread response to Ford's testimony Thursday. He added that all those things weighed on him leading up to the Friday afternoon vote.

Flake had released a statement that morning announcing that he would vote in favor of moving Kavanaugh's nomination out of committee and onto the Senate floor. He told The Atlantic that despite his call for an investigation, he still intended to support Kavanaugh, "unless they turn up something — and they might."

Read the rest of the interview here»

SEE ALSO: FBI agents reportedly sought interviews with one of Brett Kavanaugh's accusers 'as early as' Friday night

DON'T MISS: 'I had tears running down my cheeks': Christine Blasey Ford's sisters commend her decision to testify in Kavanaugh hearing

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside the Trump 'MAGA' hat factory

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.

As headlines like "Amazon Is Secretly Becoming a Bank" and "Google Wants to Be a Bank Now" increasingly crop up in the news, tech giants are coming into the spotlight as the next potential payments disruptors.

And with these firms' broad reach and hefty resources, the possibility that they'll descend on financial services is a hard narrative to shy away from. To mitigate potential losses under this scenario, traditional players will have to grasp not only the level of the threat, but also which segments of the financial industry are most at risk of disruption.

Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft, collectively known as GAFAM, are already active investors in the payments industry, and they're slowly encroaching on legacy providers' core offerings. Each of these five companies has introduced features and offerings that have the potential to disrupt specific parts of the banking system. And we expect a plethora of additional offerings to hit the market as these companies look to build out their ecosystems.

However, it remains unlikely that any of these firms will become full-blown banks or entirely upend incumbents, due to regulatory barriers and the entrenched positions of big banks. Moreover, consumers still trust traditional firms first and foremost with their financial data. That means these companies are far more likely to rattle the cages of incumbents than they are to cause their total demise. That said, these companies have a proven capacity to revolutionize industries, making their entry into payments critical to watch for legacy players, especially as their moves demonstrate an intent to be a disruptive force in the industry.

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence analyzes the current impact GAFAM is having on the financial services industry, and the strengths and weaknesses of each firm's position in payments. We also discuss the barriers these companies face as they push deeper into financial services, as well as which aspects of a bank’s core business provide the biggest opportunities for the new players. Lastly, we assess these companies' future potential in payments and the broader financial services industry, and examine ways incumbents can manage the threat.

Here are some of the key takeaways: 

• GAFAM has been actively encroaching on the payments space. This includes offering mobile wallets for in-store and online payments, peer-to-peer money transfer services, and even loans for small- and medium-sized businesses. 
• These firms' broad reach and hefty resources have put them in a strong position to take on legacy players. GAFAM has products that have been adopted by millions of users, and in some cases, billions. They also have access to a tremendous amount of capital — Apple, Microsoft, and Google had over $400 billion combined in cash at the end of 2016.
• However, these firms have to overcome major barriers to compete against legacy players, which includes regulation and trust. For example, 60% of respondents to a Business Insider Intelligence survey stated that they trust their bank most to provide them financial services.
•  As a result of these barriers, it's more likely that GAFAM will make a dent in very specific segments of the financial services industry rather than completely disrupt it. 

In full, the report:

• Explains what GAFAM's done to place themselves in a position to be the next potential payments disruptors.
• Breaks down the strengths and weaknesses of each company as it relates to their ability to build out an extensive financial ecosystem. 
• Looks at the potential barriers that could limit GAFAM's ability to capture a significant share of the payments industry from traditional players. 
• Identifies what strategies legacy players will have to deploy to mitigate the threat by these tech giants.

Join the conversation about this story »

• CNN founder Ted Turner has revealed he's battling Lewy body dementia. 
• The neurodegenerative disease alters his memory, mood, movement, and behavior. 
• Turner opened up about his battle with the disease in an interview with CBS set to air on Sunday morning.

CNN founder Ted Turner revealed he is suffering from Lewy body dementia, a neurodegenerative disease that alters his memory, mood, movement and behavior.

In an interview set to air on CBS on Sunday, Turner, 79, opened up about his struggle with the disease and said he has a hard time remembering its name.

"It's a mild case of what people have as Alzheimer's," Turner said in the interview. "It's similar to that. But not nearly as bad. Alzheimer's is fatal. Thank goodness I don't have that. But, I also have got... I can't remember the name of it."

Then Turner said: "Dementia. I can't remember what my disease is."

Lewy body dementia affects more than a million individuals in the United States, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services.

In excerpts of the interview released by CBS, Turner said he was misdiagnosed with depression before doctors realized it was actually dementia that was affecting him.

He added that his main symptoms are being tired, exhausted and forgetful.

The billionaire philanthropist launched CNN in 1980 as the country’s first 24-hour all-news network.

He later became the vice chairman of Time Warner but resigned in 2003 and is no longer involved in the company. He said that other than occasionally watching CNN, he doesn't watch much news anymore.

"I think they're sticking with politics a little too much," Turner said. "They'd do better to have a more balanced agenda. But that's, you know, just one person's opinion."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A top movie actor reveals how he learns different accents

• For the first time since the original "Minecraft," the series is getting a new entry.
• It's not a sequel — the game is named "Minecraft: Dungeons," and it's a dungeon crawler along the lines of "Diablo."
• "Minecraft: Dungeons" is scheduled to arrive on PC in 2019. It's not clear when it will come to other platforms.

For the first time since "Minecraft" arrived in 2011, a new entry in the series is in the works from the same studio that created the original. It's named "Minecraft: Dungeons"— it was revealed on Saturday during an annual "Minecraft" live broadcast known as Minecon Earth 2018.

From what we've seen so far, it looks like a very"Minecraft-y" version of beloved classics like "Diablo." It sounds lke that, too! 

"Dungeons" is described as, "an all-new action-adventure game inspired by classic dungeon crawlers," in its announcement. Alone, or with a group of up to four friends, you'll tackle, "a ruthless swarm of new-and-nasty mobs" in a variety of locations: "canyons, swamps and — of course — mines." 

The game is said to be a passion project for the folks at Mojang — the Swedish studio that was founded to create the original "Minecraft." It's the first of several new initiatives within Mojang aimed at expanding the universe of "Minecraft."

Unlike "Minecraft," the focus in "Minecraft: Dungeons" is action. 

"We wanted to focus on making sure that we made the dungeon crawler part as good as possible," Mojang creative lead Jens Bergentsen told me in a phone interview last week. 

To that end, don't expect to see a lot of the usual mining and crafting. 

"I would say that it's a distilled version of 'Minecraft,'" Bergentsen said. "Building in the game is something that we've talked about a lot, but we were concerned that it would distract from what the game was about. So in 'Minecraft Dungeons,' it's strictly an adventure game with a story attached to it."

The game is scheduled to arrive on PC first in 2019 — a beta will precede its arrival, but don't expect anything like the soft launch "Minecraft" had. "Minecraft: Dungeons" is getting a relatively standard beta before a "traditional" release, we're told. 

Check out the game's debut trailer right here:

SEE ALSO: 'Minecraft' for the Nintendo Switch proves what's so great about both the game and the console

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Apple unveil a new, bigger watch

This too shall pass.

When gambling, it's always important, whether you're in the midst of a hot streak or on the coldest run of your life, to remember that nothing last forever.

If you're hot, ride it out, but know that fortunes can disappear in a second. If you're cold, maybe take a step back and double-check your bankroll, but know that the tides will eventually turn.

So has been our first three weeks of Westgate SuperContest picks. After a dismal 1-4 effort in Week 1, we bounced back the following week, and in Week 3, went a brilliant 4-1 on our weekly picks to get right back into the running.

But there's no time to celebrate. This week, there's a brand new slate, and with bye weeks starting, the margin for error is getting thinner. While winners are becoming harder to find, finding them is all the more rewarding.

SuperContest Pick 1: Indianapolis Colts (-1) over Houston Texans

There's one big trend that goes against this bet — Tom Fornelli at CBS Sports points out, 0-3 teams are 16-9 ATS as dogs in Week 4 since 2010, and a whopping 11-4 when they're on the road as well.

This might be a rookie move, but I'm backing the Colts to buck that trend, mostly because this line feels off. The Colts just pushed the reigning Super Bowl champions to the brink on the road, and Andrew Luck is still looking for his first home win since returning to the Colts from his extended injury. The Texans have shown nothing, and other than a desperation to avoid an 0-4 start, I don't see why they should be expected to keep this one close.

I was sure the Colts would be at least a 3-point favorite in this spot, and when it was put at essentially a pick'em, the deal felt too good to pass up. Next week we may be licking out wounds on this one as we remind ourselves that we're not smarter than the trends, but until then, I feel confident on this one.

SuperContest Pick 2: Cincinnati Bengals (+5) over Atlanta Falcons

The Bengals might not be the first team you think of when asked to name an NFL offensive powerhouse, but through three games they've averaged almost 30 points per outing, and this week will face off against a Falcons defense that has been absolutely battered by injury.

The Falcons are a solid team, but after the overtime slugfest against the Saints last weekend, I don't think they're in a position to be laying points, let alone almost a touchdown.

SuperContest Pick 3: Green Bay Packers (-9.5) over Buffalo Bills

It's never fun to lay such a big line, but after the Bills shocked the world with their performance in Minnesota last weekend, this feels like the perfect spot to fade them. The Vikings were set as 16.5-point favorites over the Bills heading into that game — is Minnesota really seven points better than Green Bay?

Even as high as this line is, it feels like an overcorrection based on both teams' Week 3 performances. Aaron Rodgers may still not be as mobile as he usually is, but he can still make throws, and the Packers will be looking to roll in front of the Lambeau faithful.

It's a scary line until the Packers score on their first drive. Then everything will feel much, much easier.

• A $446 million mansion for sale in Hong Kong's exclusive Peak neighborhood would break the record for most expensive home sold in Hong Kong — and potentially all of Asia.
• The current known record is held by a home in the same neighborhood that sold for $360 million in January 2017.
• Hong Kong is now home to more super-wealthy people than any other city in the world, and housing prices continue to climb. 
• It has been named the least affordable housing market in the world for eight years in a row.

A mansion for sale in Hong Kong's exclusive and wealthy Peak neighborhood could break the record for the most expensive home sold in the territory — and possibly in all of Asia.

The $446 million home, which was built in 1991, went on the market in April 2018 and was available for lease before that, Joyce Lee, a representative for Christie's International Real Estate, told Business Insider. 

Hong Kong, which is now home to more super-rich individuals than any other city in the world, is seeing property prices continuing to climb, particularly in the luxury market. 

Christie's International Real Estate named Hong Kong the prime luxury market in the world for the second year in a row in its 2017 "Luxury Index" that evaluated growth and demand of premium real estate.

Hong Kong claimed the world's first and second most expensive home sales of 2017, according to the South China Morning Post, breaking several property records in the process, as Business Insider's Rosie Perper reported. An estate on The Peak was sold for $360 million to billionaire technology manufacturer Yeung Kin-man in January 2017, the South China Morning Post reported.

In November 2017, the most expensive apartments in Asia sold for a combined $149 million. And the city-state continues to break records in the luxury housing market in 2018.

In March 2018, a buyer paid $178.4 million, or $19,400 per square foot, for a mansion in Hong Kong's super-exclusive and wealthy Peak neighborhood, making it the most expensive residential sale in all of Asia, according to Bloomberg.

But this $446 million home could break even those staggering records. Here's a look inside the mansion and the exclusive, super-wealthy neighborhood where it sits. 

SEE ALSO: Inside the Hong Kong billionaire enclave name-dropped in 'Crazy Rich Asians,' where Alibaba founder Jack Ma may have bought a $191 million mansion

DON'T MISS: Hong Kong now has more mega-millionaires than New York City

The four-bedroom mansion sits on 7,725 square feet on Middle Gap Road, one of the most prestigious gated communities in Hong Kong, according to the real estate listing. The home is surrounded by dense woods.

Source: Landscope Christie's International Real Estate

The colonial-style home was built in 1991 and includes an outdoor swimming pool.

Source: Landscope Christie's International Real Estate

Views of the hilly, greenery-filled neighborhood surround the pool area.

Source: Landscope Christie's International Real Estate

• Primark, a low-cost, European apparel chain, is the fastest-growing retailer in the United States, according to a report from the National Retail Federation's Stores magazine, which used sales data from Kantar Consulting.
• It currently has nine stores in the US but does not sell its products online. 
• Primark's business model of offering rock-bottom prices does not lend itself well to e-commerce, executives say.

Primark is the fastest-growing retailer in the United States, but many Americans will never have the chance to shop there. 

The European-headquartered cheap clothing chain has set its sights on expansion in the US. Since 2015, it has opened nine stores along the East Coast, and it has more in the pipeline. It's the fastest-growing retailer in America based on year-over-year domestic sales growth — US sales are up 103% year-over-year, according to a report from the National Retail Federation's Stores magazine, which used sales data from Kantar Consulting.

However, Primark's national reach is severely stunted by the fact that it doesn't sell its products online. Its website is meant purely for browsing items; to make a purchase, you'd need to head to one of its stores. 

Primark isn't out to hinder its own growth, but its business model doesn't lend itself well to e-commerce, according to company executives.

The retailer tested out e-commerce in 2013, selling its products on ASOS' website. This test was expected to turn into a long-term partnership, but it promptly ended after 12 weeks. 

The reason executives are so adverse to e-commerce is that Primark offers rock-bottom prices, and as a result, it has meager profit margins. If it were to go online, it would have to absorb shipping and returns costs or pass them onto the consumer. 

"The cost to support home delivery can't be supported with our price points," John Bason, finance director of Primark parent company Associated British Foods, told The Wall Street Journal.

The store makes its profits on volume and relies on these low prices to entice customers into spending more. 

And it appears to be working: The typical Primark shopper buys in large quantities. The baskets at the front of the store are a nod to this grocery-like shopping experience.

"Consumers shop at Primark differently than they shop at a lot of retailers," Bernstein's Jamie Merriman told The Economist in 2015. "It's almost like shopping at a Costco, where you're thinking about it in terms of volume."

As a result, Primark is ahead of its competitors in terms of the volume of clothing sold in each store. According to Bernstein data from 2015, H&M sells an annual average of $5,250 worth of clothes per square meter in Britain, while Primark sells approximately $8,200 worth.

While some analysts are skeptical about its strategy to steer clear of online sales, Primark is undoubtedly able to dodge some of the large expenses associated with it. 

According to retail consultancy AlixPartners, it's actually more expensive for brick-and-mortar stores to sell online than in stores on a per-item basis. Moreover, items bought online are more likely to be returned. 

Around 30-40% of clothing ordered online is returned, and these returns can be six times more expensive compared to in-store, according to Coresight Research.

SEE ALSO: An Irish clothing chain is suddenly the fastest-growing retailer in America. Here's everything you need to know about it.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why horseshoe crab blood is so expensive

• Arby's parent company, Inspire Brands, announced plans to acquire burger chain Sonic in a $2.3 billion deal on Tuesday. 
• With the deal, Inspire Brands' portfolio — which also includes Buffalo Wild Wings and Rusty Taco — will comprise more than 8,000 locations with combined system sales exceeding $12 billion. 
• Here's how the new restaurant empire is shaping up. 

Arby's parent company Inspire Brands is creating a fast-food empire. 

On Tuesday, Inspire Brands announced it is acquiring burger chain Sonic for $2.3 billion, including debt. The deal follows Inspire Brands — which is majority owned by private-equity firm Roark Capital — closing on a deal to acquire Buffalo Wild Wings and Rusty Taco earlier this year. 

"We like brands that are great brands, that have gone through a period of great success, and may be in a temporary period with a little bit of a challenge, where there's an opportunity to come in and get it back on a path,"Inspire CEO Paul Brown told Business Insider at the time.

Restaurant conglomerates like Inspire Brands, Restaurant Brands International (parent company of Tim Hortons, Burger King, and Popeyes), Yum Brands (parent of Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, and KFC), and JAB Holdings (owner of a range of brands including Krispy Kreme, Panera, and Pret A Manger) are on the rise. 

With the deal, Inspire Brands' portfolio will comprise more than 8,000 locations with combined system sales exceeding $12 billion, according to figures provided by the company.

Here's how Arby's CEO has begun his quest to create a new restaurant empire.  

SEE ALSO: Arby's parent company is acquiring Sonic. Here's how the CEO says he picks which brands to buy.

Arby's

For Inspire Brands, Arby's is the chain that started it all. Brown led Arby's in an impressive turnaround effort after joining as CEO in 2013, taking risks designed to make Arby's stand out and grab headlines.

"We had to one, come up with a way of talking about ourselves in a voice that actually stood out, but we also had to be more creative about all the channels that you could use to get the message out,"Brown told Business Insider in 2017.

Buffalo Wild Wings

In November 2017, Arby's announced plans to acquire Buffalo Wild Wings for about $2.9 billion. In February, the company announced it had closed the deal and was forming Inspire Brands with Brown at the helm. 

"I think there's an opportunity to step way back and say it's not and let it define its own category — a little bit of what we did with Arby's," Brown told Business Insider in February. 

Rusty Taco

Rusty Taco, a chain with just 28 locations, was part of the Buffalo Wild Wings deal. But, it's unlikely that Inspire will purchase another similarly small brand.

"Buying really small brands and trying to really grow them is not part of the stated strategy," Brown said in February.

"We like R Taco, which came along with Buffalo Wild Wings, and that has some opportunity to do some fun and interesting things with it," Brown continued. "We like to incubate a brand or two along the way, but that's not our stated strategy."

• The Macy's store at the Landmark Mall in Alexandria, Virginia — and the mall itself — closed in January 2017. 
• A year later, a homeless shelter in search of a temporary home constructed a temporary shelter within the old Macy's store. The Carpenter's Shelter moved into the old Macy's store in June. 
• To hear the full story, listen to Business Insider's podcast, "Household Name." 

ALEXANDRIA, Virginia — What happens when a homeless shelter becomes homeless? 

If you're the Carpenter's Shelter in Alexandria, Virginia, you move into an old Macy's store in the closed Landmark Mall. 

Both the Macy's and the mall in which it operated closed in January 2017. According to an executive at the Howard Hughes Corporation, the real estate company that owns the mall, the closing was a long time coming. 

"When you show up on DeadMalls.com probably a decade before you close, it really is kind of the marketplace telling you you should get a different use there," said Mark Bulmash, senior vice president for development at Howard Hughes, in a recent interview with Business Insider's new podcast, "Household Name."

At the same time, the Carpenter's Shelter had a problem: it had been located in an old Department of Motor Vehicles office for about 20 years, but it was getting old, and they needed to do a lot of renovations. The shelter staff decided to tear down the building and rebuild a totally new shelter in its place. In the meantime, they moved into the former Macy's store in the defunct Landmark Mall.

There are very few signs that Macy's used to exist in the space.

"There are people who still come in and think this is a Macy's," said the Carpenter's Shelter's director of programming, Blair Copeland. 

"Occasionally, there'll be somebody that says, 'I want to return something,' and I'm like, 'How could you?' Stop. First of all, the mall has been closed for like 2 years. And secondly, it doesn't look like Macy's anymore."

From the outside, a sign for the Carpenter's Shelter covers smudged letters showing where the Macy's sign used to be displayed. Inside, the only real display of the old Macy's is the carpet and tile that line the floors. 

See inside the shelter in the photos below:

TO HEAR THE FULL STORY: Subscribe to "Household Podcast" for free here

HOW TO: Subscribe to a podcast

The old Macy's sign has been scrubbed away and partially covered with a new sign announcing the presence of the Carpenter's Shelter.

The Carpenter's Shelter's executive director, Shannon Steene, said his team considered several possible temporary locations for the shelter, including an old warehouse, a church, and an old school. 

"And then someone said, 'You know, the ideal place would be the Landmark Mall,'" Steene said. "And then there was sort of a pause in the conversation and many people chuckled. But the seed had been planted."

Howard Hughes has long-term plans to renovate the Landmark Mall into a mixed-use project that would include retail, restaurants, offices, and residences. But those plans were still a few years away, and Bulmash said he was intrigued by the idea. 

"It's an out-of-the-box idea, right?" Bulmash said. "I needed to convince our organization that we could do it, right? That we had the time between doing the planning and getting the entitlements that we could put them in and not delay our starting construction on our project."

Howard Hughes and the city of Alexandria signed off on an 18-month lease, and the Carpenter's Shelter began construction last spring. The shelter moved into the old Macy's in June.

Steene started working at the shelter in 2015, shortly before conversations about renovating the shelter began.

After making a deal with Howard Hughes to move into the old Macy's store at the Landmark Mall, Steene had to go to a public meeting with the city of Alexandria to make sure they would sign off on it. 

He had been concerned that the proposal would draw the ire of the community. After sitting through a long, contentious discussion about a schools issue, it was finally the Carpenter's Shelter's turn at 11 p.m. 

"And so imagine much to my surprise, that there was only one person who had registered to speak and testify at that hearing," Steene said. "And so she stood up and she said, 'This is exactly the project we want to see in our community.'"

Steene was pleasantly surprised. 

"It puts a lump in your throat," Steene said. "When you think about what I had expected and what so many of my peers that run homeless services have encountered when they've gone before public hearing, and that's not the standard reaction from a community."

A large common area at the entrance to the Carpenter's Shelter provides space for residents to eat their meals and hang out during the day.

The first thing visitors see upon entering the Carpenter's Shelter is a large common area. This is where residents gather to eat their meals, use the computer, or hang out during the day. If there is a community meeting with the residents, it will happen in this room. 

And though the visitor has just entered an old Macy's store, there is barely a sign of its historic past. 

"It doesn't look exactly like the inside of a Macy's other than when you look down at the flooring," Steene said. "You see that there's some tile walkways that in some ways head to doors and other places they just head to blanks walls. And so you do get a sense that there has been some sort of former life."

The room leads to a smaller television/library lounge, a pantry, two sets of offices, the David's Place day shelter, and a hallway that leads to the bedrooms. 

It looks like the four-figure price tag is here to stay when it comes to new iPhones from Apple. 

Indeed, the $1,000 iPhone XS and $1,100 iPhone XS Max may very well be out of reach for some who want the iPhone experience, and even for those who don't want to spend that much on principle.

The $750 iPhone XR may seem like the iPhone to get if you don't want to be a part of the $1,000 club, but there are actually a few things about the iPhone 7 that some might prefer over the XR.

Thankfully, Apple is keeping around its older iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus just in case you want the Apple experience for under $600. Surprisingly, you're not sacrificing that much by going with Apple's iPhone 7, which is now two generations old. The iPhone 7 is still a fantastic smartphone that stands strong in the face of its younger, shinier siblings, and it's still a great option for anyone who's clung onto an iPhone 4, iPhone 5, and even iPhone 6.

Check out eight great reasons why you should check out the iPhone 7 instead of Apple's latest iPhones:

SEE ALSO: 6 reasons you should buy the iPhone 8 over the new iPhone XS

1. It's not as expensive as the new iPhones.

First and foremost, the iPhone 7 now costs as low as $450, and it's $570 for the iPhone 7 Plus.

For the iPhone 7, that's $300 less to start than the iPhone XR, $550 less than the iPhone XS, and $650 less than the iPhone XS Max.

For the iPhone 7 Plus, that's $180 less than the iPhone XR, $430 less than the iPhone XS, and $530 less than the iPhone XS Max.

You could even get the iPhone 7 refurbished from Apple's Refurbished Mac Store for less. The word "refurbished" might not sound good, but my experience with a refurbished 2016 MacBook Pro directly from Apple has been nothing but positive. And you get a one-year warranty with refurbished devices, too. 

(To note, I did experience an issue with my MacBook's keyboard, but it's a common issue among 2016 and 2017 MacBook Pros that could easily happen on brand new MacBooks, too. Apple has recognized and is offering to repair for free.) 

2. You still get the same great iOS experience.

Despite paying significantly less for the iPhone 7, you still get to run the latest version of iOS, iOS 12. It includes better performance for older iPhones, as well as updates to the notifications system and other great tweaks that makes the iPhone operating system better and easier to use. 

3. The iPhone 7 is lighter and thinner than the new iPhones.

The iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus are lighter than all the new iPhones, although the iPhone 7 Plus is heavier than the $1,000 iPhone XS.

The iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus are also slightly thinner than all the new iPhones. 

The only way to get Apple's MacOS operating system is to buy one of Apple's own Macs. That's pretty much the way it's always been. Or at least, that's the only official way. 

The computer pictured above is running MacOS, but it's not a Mac. It's a so-called Hackintosh — a computer built by a hobbyist, made to run MacOS on non-Apple hardware.  

You read correctly: You don't need to buy a Mac to get the Apple experience (or official Apple apps), assuming you're willing to do the work of building one. 

In a way, the reasons to buy, build, or turn your existing computer into a Hackintosh represent some of the less desirable aspects of buying a Mac from Apple — namely, that they're expensive, hard to customize, and often not exactly what you need. 

Check out some of the reasons why people build their own Hackintosh computers instead of buying a Mac from Apple, including some perspectives from tech YouTubers:

SEE ALSO: Everything that's wrong with the computers and laptops that Apple sells

With a Hackintosh, you can get the Apple experience for much less money than if you shelled out for a pricey Mac.

YouTuber Snazzy Labs made a $350 Hackintosh that "manages to hang with Apple's current lineup" as of January 2018, he says. 

Building your own Hackintosh also lets you run apps that only run on Macs, like Final Cut Pro X, without paying the premium that Apple's computers command at retail.

Something to note off the bat: Legally and ethically, building a Hackintosh is kind of a grey area.

To build a Hackintosh, you need a copy of Apple's MacOS to install on it, or else what's the point? The problem is that, generally speaking, the only Apple-sanctioned way to get a copy of MacOS is to have it already installed on a Mac. 

Most reputable Hackintosh guides advise you to take a Mac you already own, and copy the operating system off of that. But it's fair to say that this isn't what Apple had in mind for the MacOS software — and it could violate the terms of service that you agree to when you first got your Mac. 

So far, Apple hasn't taken action one way or another on the Hackintosh community, and has let it be. Just be advised that this may not always be the case. 

We've reached out to Apple for comment on its stance towards Hackintoshes, and will update if we hear back. 

YouTuber Marques Brownlee built a Hackintosh back in 2013 because Apple didn't have a computer that fit his needs at the time.

Truth be told, Apple doesn't make a computer that I'd be perfectly satisfied with.

Take my 2016 MacBook Pro, for example. I bought it because I wanted an Apple laptop with a 15-inch display. But the only models in that screen size come with a dedicated graphics chip — a chip with more power than I really need in my everyday life. Still, if I wanted the bigger screen size, I'd have to pay the price for that premium hardware. 

The same is true of the rest of Apple's Mac lineup, too. 

Apple might not always release computers with the specs that you need. Or, if a Mac does have the specs you want, it might also come with parts that you don't need. Apple's newest iMac Pro, for example, is essentially built into a 5K display —  a super-high-end display that contributes heavily to the $5,000 price tag. If you want the machine, but not the display, then you don't really have other options...apart from building your own Hackintosh. 

It's part of the reason why the popular tech YouTuber Marques Brownlee built a Hackintosh a while back:

• Apple's latest iPhones, the iPhone XS and XS Max, are on sale now.
• But if you choose to buy either of these new phones, there are two extra purchases you should also make: AppleCare+, and a phone case.
• If you don't purchase AppleCare+, and you break the front or back of your phone, you'll be stuck with exorbitant repair costs, which can cost more than a case and Apple's insurance combined.

Apple's all-glass iPhone designs are beautiful, but they can be very expensive to repair if you don't have AppleCare+.

Any new iPhone you buy, whether it's the new iPhone XS Max or the 2-year-old iPhone 7, comes with AppleCare, which includes complimentary phone support from Apple for the first 90 days, and a one-year limited warranty — but specifically against defects.

Notably, normal AppleCare doesn't cover accidental damage. This is only covered by Apple's premium insurance plan, AppleCare+, which anyone should purchase if they're buying the new iPhone XS or XS Max.

Breaking down the benefits of AppleCare+

AppleCare+ costs $300 to cover a new iPhone XS or XS Max, or $15 per month for 24 months. It's not cheap!

But, if you're already spending at least $1,000 on an iPhone XS, it's absolutely worth the purchase.

AppleCare+ basically extends AppleCare's warranty from one to two years, including the complimentary phone support from Apple. But it also adds coverage for accidental damage, either from drops or water. AppleCare+ will cover up to two "incidents," but if you have two incidents where part of your phone breaks, AppleCare+ pretty much pays for itself. AppleCare+ for the new iPhone XS models also covers theft and loss, something AppleCare+ didn't previously cover.

Check out this chart from Apple:

To break it down:

If you have AppleCare+, and you break your screen, you'll only be paying $29 to repair it.

If you don't have AppleCare+, and you break your screen, you'll be paying $279 if you have an iPhone XS, and $329 if you have the iPhone XS Max.

But that's just repairs for the screen! Check out this second chart from Apple, which shows the costs of "other repairs," including if you break the glass back of the phone:

To break it down:

If you have AppleCare+, and you break the back of your phone, you'll only be paying $99 to repair it.

If you don't have AppleCare+, and you break the back of your phone, you'll be paying $549 if you have an iPhone XS, and $599 if you have the iPhone XS Max.

So, let's say you buy an iPhone XS Max, and choose not to buy AppleCare+. If you have two incidents, where you break the front and back of your phone, you're paying $928 just to repair your phone! If you bought AppleCare+, the most you would have paid, in total, would be $527, which includes the $300 price of AppleCare+.

In other words, it pays to have insurance — even if you're extremely careful, you can't foresee certain circumstances, and you'll be glad you paid more money up front so you could save more money later on.

Getting insurance against your insurance

AppleCare+ is costly, but it's much more costly to deal with repairs, whether you have Apple's insurance plan or not.

AppleCare+ should be considered your last line of defense, so get some extra protection to ensure you don't have to pay for repairs at all. In other words, buy a phone case. Cases provide some protection for your screen, but more importantly, they protect the most fragile and most expensive parts of the iPhone XS and XS Max: their large glass backs.

My colleague Avery Hartmans rounded up the best iPhone X cases you can buy last year, and most of those should fit the new iPhone XS, but I would personally recommend you get a case from Apple (they make some very nice silicone and leather cases) or Society6, which has hundreds of thousands of different fun designs to choose from.

SEE ALSO: 9 reasons you should buy an iPhone XR instead of an iPhone XS

DON'T MISS: Here's how to decide between the red, blue, yellow, white, black, and 'coral' versions of the iPhone XR

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Apple took another subtle jab at Facebook during its iPhone XS event

Job-hunting site Comparably, which allows employees to anonymously review and rate their employers, has sifted through its 5 million+ employee reviews to create its annual list of the best paying small companies.

Comparably currently tracks about 10,000 companies, it says.

In order to qualify for this list, Comparably limited the list to companies that had fewer than 500 employees and had at least 15 ratings from employees between September 12, 2017 and September 12, 2018. Please note that the pay data listed below came from information that employees reported to Comparably themselves. And it centered mostly on salaried roles in engineering, product, marketing, design, sales and finance, as opposed to hourly-wage type roles.

In order to rank these companies, Comparably considered both pay and at how satisfied employees said they were with their pay.

The result is this list of the best paying small companies, according to employees.

SEE ALSO: The CEO of $4 billion McAfee explains how to know when to cut your losses on a project and change course

No 25: AgileCraft, $105,884

Headquarters: Austin, TX

Median salary: $105,884

AgileCraft offers project management software.

An AgileCraft employee says, “The best part of our compensation is the total package of salary, bonus, stock and benefits.”

No 24: Wibbitz, $105,755

Headquarters: New York, New York

Median salary: $105,755

Wibbitz is a video creation and editing platform.

A Wibbitz employee says, “Besides my above market salary, Wibbitz provides great benefits including healthcare, commuter, 401K and stock options.”

No 23: Billtrust, $108,706

Headquarters: Fountain Valley, California 

Median salary: $108,706

Billtrust offers cloud-based accounting and financial services software.

A Billtrust employee says, “I think it's really the total package. Stock options, great healthcare, a quality 401K match, and good pay. There isn't one thing that makes me say, ‘Yea, it is a good compensation package, buuuttttt....' Billtrust takes care of its employees.”

• Apple's phones are beautiful but have fragile designs full of glass.
• SquareTrade, a device insurer, has performed so-called "drop tests" on the two new iPhone XS devices.
• The glass on both devices broke when dropped from six feet. 
• But the test found that the iPhone XS Max, with a bigger screen, was only a "medium risk" to break, as compared to the smaller iPhone XS, which was scored as a "high risk" to break. 

Did you spend over $1000 on a new iPhone XS or iPhone XS Max this weekend?

You might want to be careful, because despite Apple saying they use the "most durable glass ever in a smartphone," the new iPhones tend to break when dropped, according to new drop tests by SquareTrade, a device insurer. 

The new iPhones, like last year's models, have a glass design — there's glass on the front, and a glass shell on the back to enable wireless charging. The glass is made by Corning, which Apple has invested in. 

Turns out, in the four tests SquareTrade performed, including a test where the new phones took a spin in a tumbler, Apple's phones broke nearly every time they were subjected to stress. 

Both the iPhone XS and the iPhone XS Max broke when dropped on their backs from 6 feet, and both phones failed when they were bent by a machine.

But when dropped face down, the iPhone XS Max proved to be more durable than its smaller sibling. While the screen shattered, the iPhone XS Max touchscreen was still usable. The smaller phone's screen did not work. 

Watch the video below:

That's why SquareTrade gave the iPhone XS Max a better durability score of 70, or "medium risk," compared to the iPhone XS's score of 86, which the insurer considers "high risk."

Both improve on the now-discontinued iPhone X, which scored a 90 in last year's SquareTrade test and was called the "most breakable iPhone ever." 

SquareTrade, owned by Allstate, uses these tests as a way to sell insurance plans for the new iPhone. If you don't have insurance or AppleCare, repairing the iPhone XS screen is $279, and any other damage — like a cracked back — costs $549.

A new screen for the iPhone XS Max is $329 and nearly $600 for other repairs.

But if you are more likely to drop your phone in your beer or other bodies of water than on concrete, you can rest easy. SquareTrade and repair advocate iFixit have both submerged the new phones in beer for hours — and they've survived. 

SEE ALSO: 27 great apps you should download first for your new iPhone XS

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The Samsung Galaxy Note 9 is a $1,000 phone that's actually worth it