Category: Business

• Over the last three decades, Hollywood has leaned into sequels.
• Now, sequels regularly make more at the box office than the original movies.
• "Inside Out 2" made $295 million worldwide on its first weekend. The first film made $130.7 million.

If you look at the top 20 highest-grossing movies of the 21st century, 13 are sequels.

At this point, if a sequel doesn't make more than the original, it could even be considered a failure.

But Hollywood wasn't always this way. "Star Wars," for example, was a huge phenomenon when it came out in 1977, making $307 million domestically for its initial release, according to Box Office Mojo. But even though they were also huge hits, making $209 million and $252 million respectively, neither "The Empire Strikes Back" nor "Return of the Jedi" was able to outgross it.

But the sequels on this list are part of why the expectation has now changed.

Here are some of the most iconic sequels that outperformed the originals.

"Inside Out 2" made significantly more than "Inside Out" did its opening weekend.

"Inside Out 2" has been huge for Pixar, which has been struggling since 2020 and the pandemic. The film, which is a sequel to the 2015 film "Inside Out," has also been a much-needed boost for the 2024 box office.

In fact, "Inside Out 2" had the best opening weekend since "Barbie" in July 2023. As BI previously reported, "Inside Out 2" made an estimated $295 million worldwide. Its predecessor debuted to $90 million.

We don't know yet if this sequel will outperform the first film, which grossed a massive $858 million worldwide, but it's certainly on track.

"Incredibles 2" made almost double what "The Incredibles" did.

The last huge Pixar sequel was 2018's "Incredibles 2," the long-awaited sequel to the 2004 film "The Incredibles."

Perhaps the wait was why the second movie made a whopping $1.24 billion at the box office, while "The Incredibles" made $631 million, according to Box Office Mojo.

However, only the 2004 original won the Academy Award for best animated feature. "Incredibles 2" lost to "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse."

"Top Gun: Maverick" made four times as much as the original "Top Gun."

When "Top Gun" was released in 1986, it was a hit. It made $357 million worldwide, according to Box Office Mojo, making it the No. 1 movie of the year, and won an Academy Award for its song "Take My Breath Away."

But nothing could have prepared us for what happened 36 years later, when "Top Gun: Maverick" brought Pete "Maverick" Mitchell (played by Tom Cruise) back to our screens.

"Maverick" reportedly grossed a staggering $1.49 billion — over four times as much as the original. It was the second-highest-grossing film of 2022, the highest-grossing Tom Cruise film, and was nominated for best picture at the Academy Awards.

All four sequels to "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" outperformed the original.

To put it simply: People did not think the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" was going to work. It was based on a creaky old ride at Disney World that had no story or recognizable characters. But with the introduction of Captain Jack Sparrow, played by Johnny Depp, the first movie made $654 million upon its release in 2003, according to Box Office Mojo.

But would Disney be able to replicate the success? Yes, and then some. "Dead Man's Chest," released in 2006, made $1 billion. The 2007 sequel, "At World's End," made $961 million.

The franchise took a break and got a new director, but that didn't stop audiences. The 2011 sequel "On Stranger Tides" made another $1 billion, per Box Office Mojo.

And even though it may feel like not many people cared about 2017's "Dead Men Tell No Tales," it still reportedly made $795.9 million.

Only "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 2" managed to outgross "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."

"Harry Potter" was the rare modern franchise where the subsequent films never outgrossed the original — until the epic 2011 conclusion, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 2," which earned $1.34 billion worldwide, according to Box Office Mojo.

It took 10 years to topple the $974 million gross of 2001's "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," which has reached $1 billion after years of re-releases. "Chamber of Secrets, "Prisoner of Azkaban," "Goblet of Fire," "Order of the Phoenix," "Half-Blood Prince," and "Deathly Hallows — Part 1" all came close, but couldn't quite do it.

"Twilight" made $408 million at the box office. The next film, "New Moon," made $711 million.

Summit may have underestimated the power of the Twihards when the studio commissioned a film adaptation of the popular YA novel, "Twilight." The budget was just $37 million, Entertainment Weekly reported. It went on to make $408 million upon its release in 2008, as reported by Box Office Mojo.

That's nothing compared to what came next. The budget went up to $50 million for 2009's "New Moon" … and the gross went up to $711 million.

It didn't end there. The 2010 sequel "Eclipse" made $698 million, 2011's "Breaking Dawn — Part 1" made $712 million, and the epic conclusion, 2012's "Breaking Dawn — Part 2," made $848 million.

"The Best Man Holiday" reunited the cast of "The Best Man" to great financial success.

When the rom-com "The Best Man" was released in 1999, it was a modest hit, making $34.5 million at the box office, according to Box Office Mojo.

It wasn't a no-brainer to make a legacy sequel 14 years later in 2013, called "The Best Man Holiday," but we bet Universal is pleased it did since that film earned $72.8 million, making twice as much as the original.

Both "The Dark Knight" and "The Dark Knight Rises" crossed the billion-dollar threshold. But the first movie, "Batman Begins," couldn't crack $375 million.

When you think of Christopher Nolan's "Batman" films, the first you probably think of is 2008's "The Dark Knight," which was a full-blown phenomenon, grossing $1 billion worldwide and earning Heath Ledger a posthumous Oscar for his turn as the Joker.

But don't forget it's a sequel to 2005's "Batman Begins," which made a respectable $375 million (even though, now, a comic-book film making less than $500 million is considered a catastrophe).

According to Box Office Mojo data, the 2012 sequel to "The Dark Knight," "The Dark Knight Rises" also cracked $1 billion.

After a dip with "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom," the third "Indy" movie was able to surpass "Raiders of the Lost Ark."

"Indiana Jones" is one of the most beloved film franchises of all time, led by one of the most beloved movie stars ever, Harrison Ford. The first film about Jones's adventures, 1981's "Raiders of the Lost Ark," earned $389 million around the world, per Box Office Mojo.

While the 1984 sequel, "Temple of Doom," was highly anticipated, it fell slightly short of its predecessor, earning $333 million.

However, with the addition of Sean Connery, the 1989 trilogy capper, "Last Crusade," earned $474 million.

The first "Fast and Furious" movie in 2001 made a respectable $207 million. By 2015, "Furious 7" made $1.5 billion.

Much like the subject matter, the budgets and box-office grosses of "The Fast and the Furious" films have spiraled out of control.

The first installment, released in 2001, was a simple story about an undercover cop infiltrating a gang of street racers. According to Box Office Mojo, it made $207.3 million.

By 2015, there had been six more films, with almost all drastically outperforming the original. "Furious 7" sees the family playing defense as an international super-spy seeks revenge for the team almost killing his brother.

Their cars get parachuted off planes, they drive from one ultra-high-rise to another in Abu Dhabi, and the Rock flexes so hard his cast pops off. It made $1.5 billion.

Subsequent sequels ("The Fate of the Furious," "F9," and "Fast X") have all made money, but none as much as "Furious 7."

• Russia appears to have used its 6,600-pound glide bomb in Ukraine for the first time.
• Battlefield footage captures the moment the FAB-3000 strikes in the Kharkiv region. 
• War analysts say this highly destructive capability could be a huge problem for Ukrainian forces.

New video footage appears to capture the first combat employment of Russia's 6,600-pound glide bomb in Ukraine, a highly destructive capability that analysts say could be a tremendous problem for Kyiv.

Russian sources published footage to the Telegram messaging app purportedly showing a FAB-3000 M-54 bomb strike Ukrainian positions in the northeastern Kharkiv region on Thursday.

The munition was outfitted with a unified planning and correction module that turns it into a glide bomb, meaning it could have been air-launched from far away.

Upon impact, the bomb causes a massive fireball. With a large blast radius, the explosion rips through just about everything in its path — though it's mostly rubble from previous fighting.

One Russian milblogger, Fighterbomber, noted that the strike actually missed its target by a few meters, but the devastating blast radius makes up for any inaccuracies. Fragments from the explosion can travel more than 4,000 feet out, the channel suggested.

In March, Russia's defense ministry announced increased production of the FAB-3000 — and several other munitions, like the 1,100-pound FAB-500 and 3,300-pound FAB-1500. All three of these can be modified and turned into glide bombs, but it was unclear whether the heaviest one would be an issue for aircraft to carry.

Analysts at the Institute for the Study of War think tank said the use of the FAB-3000 bomb awards Russia a new weapon that carries a "high potential for destruction" if it can be launched with impunity.

"The fact that Russian forces have figured out how to launch FAB-3000s is a significant development and will increase the destructive potential of Russia's ongoing glide bomb attacks against Ukrainian forces and infrastructure," the analysts wrote in a Thursday assessment.

"Russian forces have already increased guided and unguided glide bomb use against Ukraine, particularly in Kharkiv Oblast, to devastating effect," they said.

"Should Russian forces be able to launch massive barrages of FAB-3000s (or even heavier guided glide bombs), they will be able to cause even more widespread damage to Ukrainian frontline positions and critical infrastructure," the analysts added.

Russia's glide-bomb strikes have caused headaches for Ukraine throughout the war, but these munitions have been especially problematic over the past few months. Unlike conventional gravity bombs, glide bombs have flight control surfaces and are standoff weapons. Attacking aircraft can release them at a distance — in many cases, well beyond the reach of Ukraine's air-defense systems.

Because these munitions have short flight times, small radar signatures, and non-ballistic trajectories, they are extremely difficult to intercept. The only way to really defeat them is by either intercepting the aircraft mid-flight or destroying it at its base.

With the Kharkiv region bearing the brunt of Moscow's glide-bomb strikes in recent months, Ukrainian officials called for Western countries to relax restrictions on Kyiv using their weapons to strike inside Russian territory so that the country could better tackle this deadly and destructive threat. Some of those restrictions have since been lifted.

• A Philippine general called China's coast guard pirates after a violent confrontation.
• China's Coast Guard disrupted a Philippine resupply mission at Second Thomas Shoal.
• Experts say it's not piracy, but it's a troubling escalation all the same.

The Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines accused China of behaving like pirates after members of China's coast guard aggressively clashed with Philippine vessels running a resupply mission on Monday, wielding bladed weapons.

"Only pirates do this," General Romeo Brawner Jr. said in a social media post regarding the recent actions of the Chinese coast guard. "Only pirates board, steal, and destroy ships, equipment, and belongings."

Beijing has blamed the Philippines for the incident, with a foreign ministry spokesperson saying Thursday that "the Philippine side has been calling white black and falsely accusing China."

Footage of the encounter showed China's Coast Guard fleet surrounding Philippine vessels in the South China Sea that were in the process of conducting a resupply and rotation mission. The Chinese vessels closed in and tensions flared. The incident marked an escalation amid months of confrontations in the area.

Members of the Coast Guard are seen in the videos wielding blades and removing objects from the Philippine vessel.

The Philippine general added that the crew members aboard the ambushed vessels were outnumbered and "fought with bare hands" against the Chinese coast guard personnel.

Though the Chinese coast guard behavior documented by the Philippines is aggressive, it's not piracy, an expert explained, but it's still a serious problem.

The Chinese coast guard might have used pirate-like tactics, but it's not legally piracy. The incident wasn't on the high seas beyond a country's jurisdiction, and as Harrison Prétat, deputy director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies' Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, told Business Insider, it wasn't for monetary gain.

The Chinese Coast Guard is "trying to prevent the Philippines from resupplying the BRP Sierra Madre, a ship grounded on Second Thomas Shoal since 1999 where the Philippines maintains a garrison of marines," Prétat explained.

He added that the Permanent Court of Arbitration declared in 2016 that Second Thomas Shoal was a part of the Philippines' exclusive economic zone. Therefore, the Philippines should be able to access Second Thomas and even build artificial structures there in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, to which China is a signatory.

Although the country is a signatory, "China rejects the 2016 ruling and is attempting to enforce its control over maritime activity within its nine-dash line claim," Prétat said. The nine-dash line is a map marking designating China's sweeping and controversial claims to the South China Sea.

This isn't the first time China's coast guard has acted aggressively toward the Philippines at sea, especially over parts of the hotly contested Spratley Islands. In recent months, Chinese ships have also fired water canons at Philippine vessels and even rammed them. Equipment has been damaged, and crew members have been injured. But this week's incident was notable, reaching a new level.

Per other reporting on the incident, Brawner said that the Chinese guardsmen "took guns and other equipment, destroyed our equipment onboard, including the motors. They punctured our rigid-hulled inflatable boats." One of the Filipino crewmembers even lost his thumb in the incident.

"This latest incident is a significant escalation from recent tensions, which previously involved water cannons targeting Philippine civilian boats—this time, the inflatable boat that was boarded and destroyed by Chinese personnel was a Philippine Navy vessel," Prétat said. That raises the stakes.

The maritime expert noted that the attack "could trigger US obligations under the Mutual Defense Treaty." Prétat said it could raise the risk of a conflict between the US and China. Manila does not, however, plan to invoke the treaty. It's a means to prevent further escalation, but the Philippines is demanding China return seized equipment and pay for damages.

US ambassador to the Philippines MaryKay Carlson said this week in a post on X that the US "condemns the PRC's aggressive, dangerous maneuvers," referring to China by the acronym for People's Republic of China.

• Perplexity's CEO Aravind Srinivas recently shared his advice for founders on startup success.
• Srinivas emphasized creating products based on personal passion over market trends.
• Founders should understand what gives them "dopamine hits," he said.

Perplexity's CEO may be weathering a current controversy over the way his startup's AI product produces content online, but he also has some advice for people starting their own company — and it involves understanding your "dopamine system."

Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas recently sat for an interview with podcaster Lex Fridman that was published Wednesday and acknowledged that the traditional business wisdom still applies: relentless determination, grit, and believing in yourself.

However, Srinivas also stressed working on ideas you are passionate about — not just what the market wants, or what you think will get you VC funding.

"If you work from that perspective, I think you'll give up beyond a point because it's very hard to work toward something that isn't truly important to you," Srinivas said. "Like, do you really care?"

Srinivas said founders should start with something that they personally love and use, rather than what they think is most likely to be profitable. If you attempt to mold your interests into what you think will be lucrative, he said, "eventually you'll give up, or you'll be supplanted by someone who actually has a genuine passion for that thing."

"If you're not a person who gets that and you're really only getting dopamine hits from making money, then it's hard to work on hard problems," he said.

Srinivas said he and his Perplexity cofounders, Denis Yarats and Johnny Ho, were already "obsessed" with search and knowledge-based products even prior to starting Perplexity, including work at Quora.

Having already cultivated a passion for improving search quality made it easier for them to work on Perplexity without any "immediate dopamine hits."

"It's important to know what your dopamine system is — where do you get your dopamine?" Srinivas said.

Most startups fail. And with their fickle nature, Srinivas said support systems are necessary to avoid getting discouraged. He also encouraged people, especially those in their late teens to mid-twenties, to relentlessly pursue their passions while they have the time and energy.

"If there is a certain idea that really just occupies your mind all the time," Srinivas said. "It's worth making your life about that idea."

• Prosecutors urged Donald Trump's hush-money judge to keep most of his gag order.
• But they agreed that Trump could now attack witnesses like Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels.
• They warned Trump could still be found liable for defamation, citing the two E. Jean Carroll verdicts against him.

The prosecutors in Donald Trump's criminal hush-money case say they're OK with the former president resuming his attacks on Michael Cohen, Stormy Daniels, and other witnesses in the case — but that they want the judge to maintain other parts of his gag order.

In a court filing Friday morning, the Manhattan District Attorney's Office urged the judge overseeing the case not to terminate the gag order ahead of Trump's July 11 sentencing hearing.

Trump shouldn't be able to freely attack jurors, court staff, prosecution staff, and their families — all of whom have been the subject of numerous violent threats, they wrote.

But they agreed with Trump's lawyers that he should no longer be banned from talking about trial witnesses, which included nemeses like Cohen and Daniels, now that the trial is over.

"Now that the jury has delivered a verdict, however, the compelling interest in protecting the witnesses' ability to testify without interference is no longer present," prosecutors wrote.

A jury found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in May, finding he illegally disguised hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels, a porn star who says she had an affair with him, ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Ahead of the trial, the presiding judge, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, issued a gag order restricting how Trump could talk about the case in public. They forbade Trump from talking about court staff, prosecution, staff, their families, jurors, witnesses, and people who would likely be called to the witness stand.

Merchan found that Trump violated the orders on 10 different occasions during the trial, and threatened him with jail if he did it again.

"You are the former President of the United States and possibly the next President, as well," Merchan told Trump at a hearing. "There are many reasons why incarceration is truly a last resort for me. To take that step would be disruptive to these proceedings, which I imagine you want to end as quickly as possible."

After the jury verdict, Trump's lead defense attorney, Todd Blanche, asked for the gag order to be lifted, saying the First Amendment's protections should take precedence.

Blanche claimed the order prevented Trump from responding to social media criticism from Daniels and Cohen — Trump's former personal lawyer who was the key witness in the trial — as well as President Joe Biden as the June 27 presidential debate looms.

"Predictably, Cohen and Daniels have continued to assail President Trump, and his qualifications for office in an election he is winning, based on their deeply biased views about the evidence and to make even more money for themselves," Blanche wrote. "More troubling, President Biden, his campaign staff, and his surrogates have gleefully entered the fray by commenting on this case and the jury's verdict in a course of conduct that Biden initiated outside the courthouse during defense summations."

In Friday's filing, prosecutors for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office said Blanche's claim that Trump couldn't respond to Biden's political attacks was "categorically false."

(Trump criticized Biden in near-daily courthouse hallway speeches during the trial.)

They also wrote that violent threats from Trump's supporters to district attorney staff members have continued to flow.

According to an affidavit from a New York Police Department officer, included as an exhibit in Friday's motion, police have logged 61 "actionable threats" against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, his family, and other staff members of the district attorney's office between April and June, in addition to hundreds of emails. The prosecutors in the case will continue to be engaged in Trump's appeal, so they should continue to be protected by the gag order, prosecutors wrote.

Just because the gag order should no longer restrict Trump's attacks on witnesses doesn't mean they won't have other protections, prosecutors wrote.

Trump could still be liable for harassment or defamation, they noted, citing his court losses against E. Jean Carroll, and Rudy Giuliani's defamation trial loss at the hands of two Georgia election workers.

"This change of circumstance does not mean that defendant has carte blanche to resume his reprehensible practice of publicly attacking individuals involved in litigation against him," they wrote.

"But protections against such attacks will now derive from separate criminal-law protections against harassment or similar misconduct," prosecutors continued, citing the relevant legal statute, "as well as the prospect of civil liability for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, or similar claims."

• Many people report feeling lonely and isolated, especially after the pandemic.
• The 5-3-1 rule helps you reflect on the quality and quantity of your social interactions.
• Just like drinking 8 glasses of water or walking 10,000 steps daily, it's a guideline more than a hard rule.

Loneliness is considered an epidemic, with an estimated quarter of the world feeling lonesome. Post-pandemic, some people feel more isolated than ever, whether they work fully remote or have gotten into the habit of foregoing weekend plans.

Kasley Killam, author of "The Art and Science of Connection," told Business Insider that she can relate to loneliness sneaking up on her, "as someone who's introverted and will happily stay at home by myself or with my husband."

In researching the habits of socially healthy people, she was struck by how often they reach out to others and how deep their relationships are.

Killam wanted to create a structure to make sure she was getting enough meaningful social interaction in her life. Her research inspired her to create the 5-3-1 rule, a guideline for measuring social health. "We need to be intentional about connection, just like we are with exercise and eating healthy foods," Killam said. As with skipping sleep or not moving your body enough, avoiding meaningful social interaction can snowball into adverse health consequences.

"If I get three workouts in, I know I'm going to feel super good," Killam said of physical exercise. "If I get just one in or none at all, I'm immediately going to feel the effects on my body." The same could be said for socializing.

Killam broke down the 5-3-1 rule — and what to do if you find it hard to follow.

Spend time with five different people a week

According to a 2022 Harvard Business School study, more diverse social connections were linked to higher well-being.

Killam told Business Insider that these people can include "friends, family members, coworkers, neighbors," and that it's good to prioritize a diverse range of interactions, from long walks with a best friend to brief chats with acquaintances at your gym.

To branch out of your immediate family or friend circle, you can join groups around your hobbies to meet new people or talk to more strangers.

Nurture at least three close relationships

While it's great to expand your social network, Killam stressed the importance of focusing on about three deep relationships, based on her research of socially happy people across various cultures. "We need a few people who we can reach out to for support," she said.

In the book, she said a good way to gauge who these people are is to think of who tends to be at the top of your phone messages or who you'd list as an emergency contact.

Aim for one hour of quality connection every day

The last step is to shoot for one hour of social interaction each day. "That doesn't have to be all at once," Killam said, " It could be 10 minutes here, 10 minutes there."

If you're pressed for time, you can always run an errand with a friend or hop on a short call with a parent. The only hard rule is it has to feel meaningful.

Use 5-3-1 as a rule of thumb

If you feel like you're great at talking to seven people a day but only have two very close relationships, Killam said not to worry — the 5-3-1 rule is more of a rule of thumb.

"There is no exact number that's right for any given person," she said, comparing the rule to drinking eight glasses of water a day or aiming to walk 10,000 steps daily. Depending on your social style, you might yearn for more than three close relationships or be fine with less than one hour of chatting a day sometimes.

Killam struggles the most with getting one hour of socializing a day because she works from home. "I'm guaranteed to see my husband, but not necessarily friends or other people," she said. "That anchor point has helped me be more intentional about FaceTiming with a family member or calling a friend when I go for a walk."

In the end, Killam said the goal is to help you be more aware of the relationships in your life. If you've felt lonely but haven't known how to address it, the 5-3-1 rule can help you pinpoint where to start.

• Neuralink's first human patient discussed hacking concerns on Joe Rogan's podcast.
• Noland Arbaugh said a hacker could, in theory, see his brain data or access his PC by controlling a cursor.
• However, Arbaugh said he isn't too worried about getting hacked.

Neuralink's brain chip has already shown promising results for its first recipient Noland Arbaugh, since he received it in January.

But is it possible the chip could be hacked?

"The short answer is yes," Arbaugh said in a podcast interview with Joe Rogan released Thursday.

While Rogan lightheartedly discussed the possibility of humans being hijacked and becoming cyborgs, Arbaugh said hacking his brain implant wouldn't do much — at least at this point.

"You might be able to see like some of the brain signals," Arbaugh said. "You might be able to see some of the data that Neuralink's collecting."

It's unclear what this kind of data would look like. The Neuralink chip, which is about the size of a coin, contains thousands of electrodes that monitor and stimulate brain activity. The information is then digitally transmitted to researchers.

Arbaugh, a 29-year-old quadriplegic, previously told Business Insider that the brain chip has given him more independence and helped him reconnect socially.

The chip allows him to control a cursor on his computer using only his brain.

"I've been using it to message people on X, use Instagram, reply to emails, play fantasy sports, read comics online, and access a site I use to learn Japanese," he said. "I also used it to book a hotel for when I visited Neuralink's headquarters."

Arbaugh told Rogan that if he was connected to his computer at the time of the hacking, someone could steer and control his mouse cursor. They could also potentially access his messages and emails by getting into his computer, Arbaugh said.

The possibility of hacking isn't a taboo subject for Arbaugh, though. He said he was warned about the risk before he started the study, but he's not worried about it.

"It is what it is," Arbaugh said. "I think if it happens, it happens."

The current focus on Neuralink is for medical uses.

Neuralink founder Elon Musk has predicted the chip will one day be able to "solve" mental conditions like autism and schizophrenia. That's been contested by some neuroscientists who don't think the chip will be able to change the developmental structure of the brain impacted by certain conditions. But the technology may be able to help paralyzed patients like Arbaugh experience improved movement.

Eventually, though, Musk hopes to make Neuralink chips mainstream and turn them into a "Fitbit in your skull." If that becomes a reality, hacking concerns might be more pressing.

Check out the full interview below.

• Chip and Joanna Gaines flipped a lakehouse to celebrate 10 years of "Fixer Upper."
• They used midcentury modern design in the home, which was built in 1965.
• Chip and Joanna also made natural light and the surrounding nature a focal point of the design.

Chip and Joanna Gaines have officially been household names for a decade, as the first full season of "Fixer Upper" premiered on HGTV in 2014.

Since their first show premiered, the Gaineses have created an empire through their home renovation series, the Magnolia network, the brick-and-mortar stores they opened in their hometown of Waco, Texas, and more.

In recent years, they've documented their renovation projects through spin-offs of their hit series, like "Fixer Upper: The Castle" and "Fixer Upper: The Hotel."

To mark a decade of the "Fixer Upper" franchise, Chip and Joanna flipped a lakehouse in Waco and documented the experience in a six-episode series called "Fixer Upper: The Lakehouse."

Take a look inside the renovated home.

Chip and Joanna Gaines celebrated 10 years of "Fixer Upper" by renovating a lakehouse.

Chip and Joanna shared in the first episode of the series that the lakehouse, which is a little over 5,100 square feet, was originally built in 1965 and later renovated in the 1990s.

Chip said on "Fixer Upper: The Lakehouse" that he had long dreamed of renovating a waterside property, making it ideal for their anniversary project.

"This house was the right price, the right lake view," Chip said of the property.

"For 10 years, we have been in the 'Fixer Upper' universe," he added. "And this lakehouse feels like the cherry on top of it."

The lakehouse has five bedrooms and five bathrooms. Chip and Joanna have not revealed how much they bought or sold the lakehouse for, but other similar-sized homes located near the lake range in price from $725,000 to $1.25 million, according to Zillow data.

Joanna embraced the home's original architecture with its design.

Joanna reviewed the home's original plans before she and Chip started their renovation, discovering that they were heavily influenced by midcentury modern and Spanish Revival design, as she shared in the series.

She decided to celebrate those styles with the design, marking a departure from the farmhouse aesthetic she favored in the early years of "Fixer Upper."

Joanna added angular windows to the front paneling of the home and rounded sconces, nodding to the midcentury feel.

The home also feels more luxurious than many of Chip and Joanna's earlier projects. For instance, Chip was inspired to add a koi pond and water feature to the courtyard near the front door, setting a high-end tone for the property.

Windows covered the entirety of one wall in the living room, providing a view of the nearby lake.

The living room wall originally had five shorter windows that overlooked the backyard.

But the Gaineses swapped the windows for two taller panes that added a foot of extra light to the living room, which they said was a bit of a splurge for the project on "Fixer Upper: The Lakehouse," though they didn't specify their budget for the flip.

Much of the living room featured Magnolia products, including the paint on the walls and the $1,899 Deco Marble Coffee Table in the center of the space.

The light fixtures throughout the home had a midcentury modern flair.

Chip and Joanna added bold chandeliers to several rooms in the home, including the living room and kitchen.

They chose retro fixtures for both rooms that pointed to the home's roots in the 1960s.

Though they made several updates, the Gaineses also kept some existing structures for the home, like the rounded fireplace in the living room.

The kitchen was originally just a breakfast nook.

As she designed the home, Joanna replaced the breakfast nook and laundry room with a new kitchen that overlooks the surrounding greenery.

The space's centerpiece is a large island with bar seating. The base features metal detailing, while the top is marble, creating contrast.

The marble continues on the counters and backsplash, and Joanna optimized the room's space by building the refrigerator and a walk-in pantry into one of the kitchen's walls.

They were covered with custom wood cabinetry, giving the wall a seamless look.

Skylights brightened the dining room.

Joanna and Chip wanted to brighten the dining room, so they added skylights to the sloped ceiling to fill it with more natural light.

The dining room also looks onto the koi pond, celebrating the home's interior and exterior. It features a tile wall that adds a sense of modernity to the space.

Like the living room and kitchen, the dining room features a massive $2,249 chandelier designed by Visual Comfort & Co. The gold hardware and round bulbs both incorporate the house's midcentury modern vibe.

The first floor also features a sophisticated library.

Like much of the home, the library has wood detailing, including a gridded wall of shelving with a lighter wallpaper backing that acts as a focal point.

Chip and Joanna also painted the walls and the ceiling dark green, making the room cozy yet moody.

The library sits opposite the staircase, as seen through its sliding glass doors.

The library spotlights the cherrywood staircase that leads to the second floor with its reeded glass sliding doors.

The built-in shelving in the library is made of the same wood, so the rooms feel cohesive.

Joanna also used greenery in the staging of the room, tying it to the exterior.

The recreation room pays homage to the 1960s.

Joanna turned the original kitchen into a rec room. She said on the series that she wanted to ensure the design would work for a big family, and she thought the rec room could be multifunctional.

"I don't have a buyer on the end, so I now have to create this family in my mind," she said of her thought process. "How do they live? How many kids do they have? How am I creating this space that's functional and beautiful for a larger family?"

The rec room features wood paneling on the walls and built-in seating in an L-shape that serves as a couch. A rounded, white fireplace from Malm Fireplaces fits with the space's retro vibe.

Chip and Joanna also added a skylight to the room.

Touches like built-in furniture add to the luxurious feel of the home.

The primary bedroom epitomizes the lakehouse's high-end feel with a built-in bed. The bed sits against a rounded wood panel and has a green headboard.

The bedroom also features a seating nook built into the wall and multiple closets, as well as textured wallpaper.

The primary bathroom also looked high-end, thanks to its walk-in shower.

The bathroom is full of contrast, with dark tiles, white walls, and a large countertop covered in marble with wooden drawers.

It features a free-standing tub and a massive walk-in shower, which has privacy with reeded glass but still looks open.

The bathroom's rounded mirrors and angular sconces reflect the midcentury modern aesthetic.

The property also features a pool.

Chip and Joanna removed some of the greenery in the backyard, so it has a clear view of the nearby lake.

They made the pool a focal point of the yard and added a firepit to celebrate the property's exterior features. They revamped a greenhouse in the yard as well.

Chip and Joanna have already sold the lakehouse.

Throughout "Fixer Upper: The Lakehouse," Chip and Joanna said they intended to flip the lakehouse, and they already sold it. The Gaineses have not released information on how much the home sold for.

"It's been a really special project, and I'm so glad that you and I have gotten to do all of these incredible things together," Chip told Jo of the renovation on the series finale.

You can watch "Fixer Upper: The Lakehouse" on Magnolia and Max.

• Elon Musk has a lot of legal problems.
• BI scoured the dockets to find the biggest court cases and investigations posing a threat to the billionaire.
• If Musk throws his support behind Donald Trump, he stands to gain if Trump wins the presidency.

It's not unusual for a high-profile businessman to attract a lot of lawsuits. But by any standard, Elon Musk is spending a lot of time and money on lawsuits.

Musk and his companies — especially Tesla, SpaceX, and X (formerly known as Twitter) — keep running into controversies, whether it's over whether the products actually work as well as they're supposed to, the billionaire's pay structure, his hiring practices, and even his firing practices.

He has also become a magnet for personal lawsuits. Musk is involved in messy litigation with Claire Boucher, AKA Grimes, the mother of three of Musk's children. He has also launched lawsuits of his own through his companies, wading into arguments about free speech on the internet. Musk often relies on Alex Spiro, his longtime personal lawyer, to fight and coordinate the lawsuits.

Business Insider has combed through court records and created a list of the most significant legal challenges on Musk's docket. Tesla shareholders are weighing some of these issues as they decide whether to approve a pay package that was estimated to be worth $55 billion in 2018— which would be the largest pay package in history.

The lawsuits and government investigations into Musk and his companies range from discriminatory hiring practices to allegations that some of Tesla's features don't work as advertised.

Some of his highest-profile battles — such as the recent withdrawal of a lawsuit against OpenAI and founder Sam Altman, the court victories over Musk's "funding secured" tweet and "pedo guy" tweets, his losses against an anti-hate group and the SEC over a "Twitter sitter," and his settlement with a Black Tesla employee who was the victim of racist discrimination — have been resolved, and aren't included on this list.

With his vast wealth, Musk could stand to gain from supporting Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in the 2024 election. Over the past several years, Musk's politics have drifted rightward, and there were reports he was being considered for an advisory role in a second Trump administration if the former president wins the election. As the leader of the executive branch, Trump — who in his first term used the levers of the federal government for his own benefit — could seek to force agencies to drop investigations and ongoing cases against Musk and his companies.

Spiro and representatives for Elon Musk did not immediately respond to BI's requests for comment.

Lawsuits brought by Musk

Musk v. Media Matters

The issue: Musk's company X Corp. filed a lawsuit in Texas against the liberal advocacy group Media Matters in November, alleging the group launched a "blatant smear campaign" against X.

What's going on: Last year, Media Matters published a report that indicated X was placing advertising content next to pro-Nazi posts on the social media site. The nonprofit's report appeared to launch another advertising exodus from Musk's social media site.

Musk claims in his lawsuit that the group manipulated its findings and cherry-picked information. In response, Media Matters president Angelo Carusone called it "a frivolous lawsuit meant to bully X's critics into silence."

The issue has broadened into investigations from right-wing state attorneys general in Texas and Missouri, who are examining whether Media Matters broke civil laws with its reporting on Musk's social media company.

Media Matters laid off several employees in May, blaming the "legal assault" that it says restricted its resources.

What's next: Media Matters filed a motion to dismiss Musk's lawsuit in March, but a judge has yet to rule.

Gina Carano v. Disney

The issues: Actress Gina Carano is suing Disney after it fired her from "The Mandalorian" after she made posts on X comparing the treatment of conservatives in America to Jews in Nazi Germany. One post also engaged in Holocaust denial, claiming that "thousands" of Jews were "rounded up," rather than millions. X is funding the lawsuit, and Musk has championed it on the platform.

What's going on: Musk has promised to support lawsuits supporting people who were fired because of their X posts, and Carano's is a test case for that project, which Musk says is meant to protect free speech.

The lawsuit, crafted by boutique conservative law firm Schaerr Jaffe, focuses on California labor laws that protect political activism outside the workplace.

Disney has filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing the company has a First Amendment right not to associate with Carano's views, which also include criticism of vaccine mandates and questioning the results of the 2020 election.

What's next: The judge overseeing the case has yet to rule on the motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

Musk v. NLRB

The issues: Musk's Tesla is fighting a decision by the National Labor Relations Board that the electric-car company CEO violated labor laws back in 2018 when he tweeted that Tesla employees could lose their stock options if they unionized.

What's going on: A three-judge panel of the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals last year upheld the NLRB's finding that Musk's tweet unlawfully threatened Tesla employees' benefits. Musk's May 21, 2018 tweet at the center of the matter read: "Nothing stopping Tesla team at our car plant from voting union. Could do so tmrw if they wanted. But why pay union dues & give up stock options for nothing? Our safety record is 2X better than when plant was UAW & everybody already gets healthcare."

Attorneys for Tesla — which argued that Musk's tweet could not be interpreted as a threat — asked the federal appeals court to reconsider the ruling. That request was granted.

What's next: The full 5th Circuit heard oral arguments in the case earlier this year, and the 17-judge panel has yet to issue a ruling.

Government lawsuits and investigations

SEC investigation into Musk's Twitter takeover

The issues: The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Elon Musk's Twitter purchase.

What's going on: The SEC and Musk have a long history together. In October, the agency announced it had opened an investigation into his $44 billion purchase of the social media company. The SEC hasn't said specifically what it's looking into — only that the probe concerns his purchase of Twitter stock and his 2022 statements and SEC filings relating to his purchase.

What's next: In May, Musk agreed to testify in the investigation, which remains ongoing.

Tesla Autopilot investigation

The issues: Justice Department prosecutors — as well as regulators from other federal agencies — are looking into Tesla's claims of self-driving.

What's going on: Federal prosecutors are examining whether Tesla committed wire fraud or securities fraud with exaggerated claims of self-driving using the cars' "Autopilot" feature. The Securities and Exchange Commission is also looking into whether investors were misled by the claims, according to Reuters. And in a separate probe, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is looking into reports of Tesla crashes involving the Autopilot feature.

What's next: Tesla has already issued recalls — which, in its case, just means a software update — to add more safeguards to its Autopilot feature. Tesla recalls are essentially just software updates, and the company already issued a recall on 2 million of its vehicles to add more safeguards to its Autopilot feature. The NHTSA is still looking into whether those updates were sufficient.

The company also recently settled a civil lawsuit over a crash that killed an Apple engineer while one of its cars was in Autopilot mode — one of several dozen Tesla deaths involving the feature.

Tesla steering loss investigation

The issues: The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating thousands of complaints that drivers of Tesla's Model Y and Model 3 vehicles suddenly lost steering control.

What's going on: The investigation began in 2023. Earlier this year, the agency advanced its investigation and sought more records from Tesla.

What's next: The probe's recent upgrade to the "engineering analysis" stage suggests the NHTSA may soon issue a Tesla recall.

NLRB v. SpaceX

The issues: In a complaint earlier this year, the NLRB accused Musk's SpaceX of illegally firing eight employees for criticizing Musk in an open letter.

What's going on: The former employees alleged that they were terminated in 2022 over their involvement in the open letter to SpaceX executives that called Musk's public behavior "a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us." The NLRB filed its complaint in connection with the matter earlier this year.

What's next: In response to the complaint, SpaceX sued the NLRB in federal court, alleging that the government agency's structure is unconstitutional. An appeals court handed Musk a legal win in May when it temporarily blocked the NLRB's case against the rocket company.

SpaceX lawsuit for not hiring refugees

The issues: The Justice Department's civil rights division filed a lawsuit alleging SpaceX illegally discriminated against asylees and refugees by refusing to hire them.

What's going on: The lawsuit, filed in August, pointed to Elon Musk's own social media posts where he claimed that US law requires "at least a green card" to be hired at SpaceX for national security reasons. That simply isn't true, the Justice Department alleged.

Instead of suing in a federal district court under a Senate-confirmed judge, the Justice Department brought the lawsuit through an administrative court, where the judges are appointed by the US Attorney General. SpaceX sued in a federal district court in Texas over this arrangement, and a judge agreed with the company, ruling in November that there were constitutional problems with the arrangement.

What's next: The case has been gummed up in the federal district court in Texas, as the Justice Department and SpaceX exchange volleys over the jurisdiction for different parts of the lawsuit. The US Supreme Court has also shown a willingness to reconsider the constitutionality of administrative law judges in different agencies, and pending decisions from the high court could continue to alter the trajectory of the SpaceX case.

Tesla racism lawsuit

The issues: The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Tesla in September, alleging Black employees at a California manufacturing facility have been subjected to racist harassment.

What's going on: The federal agency's lawsuit joined dozens of other cases from Tesla workers who've said they experienced racist abuse. One employee, Owen Diaz, won a major victory when Tesla was ordered to pay $3.2 million in a racial discrimination case.

What's next: A federal judge denied a motion to dismiss the EEOC lawsuit in March, putting it on the path for a trial.

Personal lawsuits against Musk

Tornetta v. Musk

The issues: Tesla shareholder Richard Tornetta sued Musk and Tesla in a class action lawsuit regarding Musk's compensation package, which was worth $55.8 billion at the time.

What's going on: In 2018, Tesla set up a pay plan for Musk that involved a 10-year grant of 12 tranches of stock options that would vest when Tesla hit certain targets tied to the automaker's market value and revenue. Musk was able to hit all 12 targets in 2023. With each milestone, Musk received stock equal to 1% of outstanding shares at the time of the grant.

Tornetta's lawsuit alleged that the pay package was "beyond the bounds of reasonable judgment" and claims Musk had influenced the board's approval of the plan, including through his close personal relationships with board members such as his brother Kimbal Musk.

Tesla has argued that compensation was needed to maintain Musk's attention and shareholders have benefited from the impact Musk's leadership has had on Tesla's stock, which has climbed dramatically since 2018.

The Delaware Court of Chancery struck down Musk's pay package in January. Musk is trying to regain the pay package by another route, with a Tesla shareholder vote this week.

What's next: Must is expected to use the vote to ask the Delaware Chancery Court to reconsider its decision, hoping that shareholder approval will help convince the judge that the pay package is sensible. He's also likely to continue appealing the case if he loses.

Boucher v. Musk

The issues: Claire Boucher, AKA Grimes, and Musk have each filed dueling lawsuits in a custody dispute in California and Texas, respectively.

What's going on: The Musk-Grimes custody battle began in September when the CEO sued his ex-partner to "establish the parent-child relationship" with their three kids: X Æ A-XII, Exa Dark Sideræl, and Techno Mechanicus. In his petition, the billionaire said he filed the lawsuit after he realized Grimes "was not returning to Texas with their younger children." Three-year-old X has remained with Musk.

A few weeks later, Grimes sued Musk in San Francisco court, seeking primary physical custody and joint legal custody of the pair's three children.

What's next: The case was sealed in January and remained ongoing as of April, when Business Insider was last able to view the docket. Neither side has publicly indicated that the case has been resolved.

Benjamin Brody v. Musk

The issues: California man Benjamin Brody filed a defamation lawsuit against Musk in Texas last year, alleging that the billionaire amplified a conspiracy theory that falsely affiliated the college graduate with a neo-Nazi extremist group.

What's going on: Brody's lawsuit accuses Musk of boosting the claims on his X social media site and says Brody endured "severe personal harassment and permanent damage to his reputation." Musk's "personal endorsement of the false accusation against" Brody reverberated across the internet, transforming the accusation from anonymous rumor to gospel truth for many individuals, and causing others to use Musk's endorsement to justify their desire to harass Ben Brody and his family," the lawsuit says. In a deposition, Musk said he didn't know who Brody was.

What's next: Brody's lawsuit is seeking $1 million in damages and a trial by jury. Musk's attorneys have filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

Twitter severance lawsuits

The issues: Hundreds of former Twitter employees are suing X for unpaid severance.

What's going on: When Elon Musk took over Twitter, he quickly fired thousands of employees — he claimed over 80% — and didn't pay any severance to many of them. In court filings, X claims the merger agreement that allowed Musk to control Twitter didn't require any payments and that the former employees have no standing to sue because they weren't part of the merger.

Even former Twitter executives have sued Musk over severance. Twitter's former chief accounting officer, Robert Kaiden, alleged the Musk falsely accused him of misconduct so he could fire him without paying out severance. Kaiden said he's owed $3.75 million in unpaid severance.

There are multiple different lawsuits in different districts. Litigation has stalled in most of them as a California court weighs whether to turn one of them — asking for $500 million in damages — into a class-action lawsuit. Several lawsuits also allege Musk discriminated against them because of their race, gender, or disability in choosing to fire them.

What's next: Deciding a class action certification for the California case could take years. In the meanwhile, Twitter has weighed settling some of the claims.

Agrawal v. Musk

The issues: Four former Twitter executives (ex-Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal, ex-Twitter CFO Ned Segal, ex-head of legal, policy, and trust at Twitter Vijaya Gadde, and ex-senior legal counsel at Twitter Sean Edgett) sued Musk and X in March, alleging the company failed to pay out millions of dollars in severance.

What's going on: After Musk took over Twitter in 2023, he terminated the four executives within minutes.

The executives were set to receive golden parachutes, but claim Musk and X have not paid them out. The group says X collectively owes them $128 million in severance.

Musk has said he fired the executives for cause and does not owe them anything. In August, Agrawal, Segal, and Gadde separately sued Twitter for over $1 million, alleging the social media company hadn't paid the legal fees they accrued during their time at Twitter.

What's next: The lawsuits are all in various stages, with judges having yet to rule on motions to dismiss them.

• Buying a home has become a pipe dream for millions of Americans, a Harvard University study shows.
• It found the monthly payment for a median-priced home after taxes and insurance is about $3,100.
• Just 6% of renters earn the $120,000 required to afford that payment and can cover buying costs.

Owning a home is quickly morphing from part of the American dream to an unattainable fantasy, as housing costs spiral beyond the reach of millions of people.

The median US home sold for 3.2 times the median household income in the 1990s. That ratio jumped to 4.1 in 2019, then 5.1 in 2022, and remained around that level last year.

The multiple exceeds 9 and approaches 12 in the hottest markets, rendering them "impossibly unaffordable," per a recent study.

Meanwhile, the monthly payment for a median-priced home after taxes and insurance has hit about $3,100, the highest level in more than three decades. That's according to "The State of the Nation's Housing 2024" report published by Harvard University this week.

Affording a payment of that size requires a household income of at least $120,000 a year, assuming a 3.5% downpayment and no more than 31% of income is spent on housing, the report said. Adjusted for inflation, that number was $82,000 in the first quarter of 2021.

Only 6.6 million — fewer than 15% — of the 45 million renter households in the US make enough to afford the median payment. That's down from 10.2 million in 2022.

Assume the household needs sufficient cash to make a 3.5% downpayment and cover 3% closing costs, and only 2.6 million or a dismal 5.8% of renter households make the cut, the report's authors calculated using data from the Survey of Consumer Finances.

The Harvard study also found that households must earn at least $100,000 to afford the median-priced home in 48% of all metro areas, up from 11% in the first quarter of 2021.

Cocktail of challenges

Buying a house has become so expensive partly because prices have soared: the median home cost almost $390,000 last quarter. The report noted that prices have jumped by about 50% since early 2020, and have more than doubled since 2010, to reach record highs this year.

Fewer houses are being listed for sale as well, pushing up prices. Only 1.11 million homes were on the market in March, down 34% from March 2019. Inventory also shrank in 94 of the 100 largest metro areas last quarter, with an average decline of 42% from 2019.

The slump contributed to the sale of only 4.1 million existing homes last year — the lowest figure in nearly 30 years and a 33% decline from 2021, the report found.

Experts have cited years of low interest rates and government stimulus programs during and after the pandemic as major drivers of house-price growth.

The Federal Reserve has also raised interest rates to curb historic levels of inflation, which has driven mortgage rates to two-decade highs and discouraged those who've locked in cheaper rates from selling. The combination of rising prices and more expensive mortgages has fueled an affordability crisis.

At the same time, households are paying higher prices for basics like food and fuel, and shelling out more each month to cover their credit cards, car loans, and other debts. Throw in rising insurance premiums and property taxes, and it's clear that both homeowners and renters face challenges.

Indeed, the Harvard study found that 23% of homeowner households were "stretched worryingly thin," and more than a quarter of renters were paying at least half their incomes toward housing and utilities in 2022. The brutal burden of housing costs has also left the lowest earners with only a few hundred dollars a month to get by.

Many homeowners are seeing their incomes squeezed by steeper prices and interest payments, and many renters have given up on buying a home. These new numbers help to quantify the scale and severity of those challenges and put them in sharp relief.