Category: Business

• Archaeologists discovered secret structures in Giza, Egypt with ground-penetrating high-tech methods.
• The methods revealed an L-shaped structure and a deeper, larger anomaly hidden beneath bare sand.
• The findings could explain why a large section of the densely packed Western Cemetery is empty.

Egypt holds many secrets to its ancient past, and archaeologists may have discovered a new one hidden beneath the sands of the Western Cemetery in Giza.

The Western Cemetery holds hundreds of rectangular tombs called mastabas that line the base of Giza's Great Pyramid. These mastabas belong to elite citizens and relatives of the Ancient Egyptian king Khufu, who ruled around 4,500 years ago.

However, in stark contrast to the many rows of tombs, one area of the cemetery is bare, with no structures. Below the sand, it's a different story, archaeologists recently discovered.

What appears to be a flat, sandy surface might hide long-forgotten structures built thousands of years ago. Only a couple of feet below the surface lies what appears to be an L-shaped structure. Even deeper, there's another, larger structure connected to the first.

The L-shaped structure's corners are "too sharp" to be naturally occurring, researcher Motoyuki Sato, who helped find the anomaly, told Live Science.

That suggests humans constructed it and might explain why such a large swatch of the crowded necropolis remains empty above the sand, the researchers reported in a paper they recently published in the peer-reviewed journal Archaeological Prospection.

Both features could be remnants of an ancient tomb, according to the researchers. However, the discovery still leaves many unanswered questions.

High-tech archaeology uses radar and other tools to find buried secrets

In the early days of archaeology, it took years of careful digging to uncover the shape and size of a structure. Now, newer technologies can help scientists map previously unknown buildings without removing even a shovelful of dirt.

That's how researchers from Higashi Nippon International University, Tohoku University, and the National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics in Egypt uncovered this latest hidden piece of history.

Between 2021 and 2023, the team studied the location using not one but two high-tech methods: ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT). GPR uses electromagnetic waves to map shallow underground features in high resolution. For deeper structures, ERT can locate walls, shafts, and similar anomalies but without as much detail.

Combining GPR, ERT, and satellite data, the researchers discovered an L-shaped structure measuring roughly 32 by 50 feet buried 1.6 feet to 6.5 feet under the sand. They also found evidence of a 1,000-square-foot structure about 11.5 feet to 33 feet below ground, deeper than the L-shaped anomaly.

The next step is excavation

At some point, the shallower L-shaped structure was filled with sand, which could be a clue to its purpose. It may have served as a kind of passageway to a lower tomb, according to the researchers. Ancient Egyptians often filled up such shafts to keep out the living.

While GPR and ERT can offer a more complete picture of sub-surface archaeological finds, these techniques can only take archaeologists so far. The researchers noted that the two methods' data didn't precisely match, and the techniques can sometimes make anomalies appear larger than they are.

Other mysteries remain, too. They don't know what, if anything, is in the deeper structure. It could be filled with sand or totally empty.

To answer some of these questions, the archaeologists needed to start digging, literally. They're currently excavating the site, Live Science reported.

• Tesla rebuked Glass Lewis for urging shareholders to reject Elon Musk's $55 billion pay plan.
• Tesla said the firm demonstrated faulty reasoning in a letter to shareholders.
• Tesla is seeking approval from shareholders for the pay plan and moving its incorporation to Texas.

Tesla was quick to fire back at Glass Lewis after the advisory firm encouraged shareholders to vote against the company's $55 billion compensation plan for Elon Musk.

In a letter to shareholders on Wednesday, Tesla slammed Glass Lewis, accusing the firm of "scaremongering" and faulty reasoning.

"In its report, Glass Lewis omits key consideration, uses faulty logic, and relies on speculation and hypotheticals," Tesla wrote in a letter to investors titled "What Glass Lewis Got Wrong About Tesla."

The automaker hit back at multiple claims presented in Glass Lewis' 71-page report that was published Saturday and first reported by Bloomberg. Glass Lewis called Musk's pay package — which was originally approved in 2018 but struck down by a Delaware judge in January — "excessive" and advised investors to reject Tesla's bid to move its incorporation from Delaware to Texas.

In response, Tesla called the firm's claim that rescinding the award is acceptable "absurd." The company called Glass Lewis' concerns regarding moving the company's state of incorporation to Texas "scaremongering" and took issue with the firm's worries about Musk's commitment level to the company, saying its CEO created significant market value for investors between 2018 and 2023.

"Glass Lewis may believe that Elon should have done so with more 'focus,' but the fact is that Tesla's performance speaks for itself," Tesla wrote. "Stockholders should care enormously about value creation (which Glass Lewis inexplicably ignores), and not about whether Elon's perceived 'focus' was strong enough."

A spokesperson for Glass Lewis did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment ahead of publication.

Tesla appears to be facing mounting pushback from institutional investors. On Wednesday, the CEO of CalPERS, the largest public pension fund in the US, said the fund plans to vote against the pay package. And earlier in May, a group of shareholders filed a letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission calling for investors to vote against both Musk's pay package and the proposal to reelect James Murdoch and Kimbal Musk.

For its part, Tesla has been pulling out all the stops to promote the proposal and encourage shareholders to participate. On Wednesday, the company began offering investors the chance for a tour of Tesla's Texas gigafactory alongside Musk in exchange for proof they'd voted ahead of the annual shareholder meeting. Tesla has also argued the compensation plan is "critical to the future success of Tesla" and has even paid for a handful of advertisements promoting the pay plan.

A spokesperson for Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Are you a Tesla investor, do you work for the company, or have a tip? Reach out to the reporter via a non-work email and device at gkay@businessinsider.com or 248-894-6012

• Jurors in Trump's hush-money trial asked the judge to re-read his 'rain metaphor' instructions.
• The jury is weighing 34 counts of falsifying business records related to Stormy Daniels.
• Jurors seem to want clarity on how to gauge Trump's intent in the hush-money scheme.

The jury in Donald Trump's criminal hush-money trial knows what it wants.

In another note to the judge at 9:32 a.m. Thursday, jurors asked the judge to re-read a portion of his instructions starting from what they called "the rain metaphor."

It suggests the jury is examining Trump's intent as it weighs whether to find the former president guilty.

The jurors are considering 34 counts of whether Trump falsified business records as part of a scheme to cover up a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election. They began deliberating at around 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday.

In the afternoon, they asked for the judge to read back four parts of the testimony. The segments indicate they were deep into the details of the alleged conspiracy to influence the 2016 election by keeping Daniels quiet about an affair she says she had with Trump.

The jury also asked New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan to read back the entire hourlong jury instructions they received.

But on Thursday morning, they narrowed down the request to only instructions on how to evaluate the evidence in the case.

The "rain metaphor," which the jury note referenced, is often used by judges in jury instructions.

It tells the jurors that they can infer certain facts from the surrounding circumstances using their common sense.

"Suppose you go to bed one night when it is not raining, and when you wake up in the morning, you look out your window. You do not see rain, but you see that the street and sidewalk are wet and that people are wearing raincoats and carrying umbrellas," Merchan told the jurors. "Under those circumstances, it may be reasonable to infer — that is, conclude — that it rained during the night."

"In other words, the fact of it having rained while you were asleep is an inference that might be drawn from the proven facts of the presence of the water on the street and sidewalk, and people in raincoats and carrying umbrellas," he continued.

Jurors are paying close attention

Trump, who is 77 years old, does not use email or send text messages.

There is no evidence that he ever typed up a memo saying something like, "I'm going to falsify documentation of payments to my lawyer Michael Cohen in order to violate section 17-152 of the New York Election Law, also breaking campaign finance and tax laws along the way."

So in order to find Trump guilty, jurors would need to infer his role in the hush-money scheme based on the testimony and documents in the case surrounding him.

Thursday morning's jury request may show that jurors are trying to parse out that evidence.

As Merchan re-read the instructions Thursday, they appeared to be at heightened attention.

Juror 3, a young corporate lawyer, and Juror 5, a charter school teacher, each leaned forward in their seats in the front row of the jury box as Merchan read the so-called "rain metaphor."

Juror 4, a young male security engineer who sat between them, took notes.

Also taking notes was Juror 7, a middle-aged lawyer who had said during jury selection that "I'm a litigator, so I take the law seriously and I take the judge's instructions very seriously."

As the judge described how to infer Trump's intent "beyond a reasonable doubt," all of them scribbled hard.

Meanwhile, Juror 12, a physical therapist, held her hand to her chin as if she were concentrating during the recitation of the rain metaphor. And Juror 10 took notes as the judge explained how Trump may have violated campaign finance laws — a possible path to finding him guilty of the business falsification charges.

After the judge completed his recitation of the jury instructions, two of the court stenographers re-read portions of the testimony. They playacted as the questioning lawyers and the witnesses who previously took the stand.

A middle-aged court stenographer with glasses sat in the witness stand seat and played the roles of ex-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker and of Michael Cohen.

The jurors had also asked if they could have a pair of headphones with a 35-millimeter jack so that they could listen to audio recordings included on the laptop of evidence they have with them in the jury deliberations room.

The judge said they could. And that he'd throw in speakers, too.

• I loved my job, but my coworker hated me and started badmouthing me to everyone. 
• It got so bad that I quit the job, and enrolled in grad school.
• In school, I learned to move on and accept myself and others.

In my early 30s, my job involved extensive traveling with a team. During my first year with a luxury car company, we worked hard, bonded quickly, and had a blast together. When I moved to a new team, we didn't become fast friends the same way, but I enjoyed the job, the pay, and the opportunity to visit new and familiar places.

Over time, I realized one of my new coworkers did not like me. She ignored me, cut me out of conversations, rolled her eyes at my suggestions, and directly contradicted me whenever she could. She complained about me to our teammates — some of whom would quietly tell me what she was saying behind my back.

When we had a break in our travel, I hoped the time apart would change the dynamic. Instead, her anger toward me escalated. I tried to stay out of her way and focus on work, but when she started complaining about me to my boss, I worried about keeping my job.

I knew I had to quit

My coworker's behavior was making me miserable. Her behavior was making it impossible for me to do my job. Quitting would have meant a financial loss, and I would miss the travel, but working with her was torture.

I told my supervisor I was leaving. She was sympathetic but saw it as a simple personality conflict, implying I was also to blame. I felt undervalued and misunderstood. It turned out to be the best work-related decision I've ever made.

I enrolled in a master's degree program in clinical psychology. I'd been fascinated by human nature my whole life, and this disorienting experience with my coworker made me even more curious.

Going back to school helped me move forward

When I took a break from the professional world, I was able to analyze myself and see myself in a new light.

I learned that not everyone needs to like me. This seems obvious, but I have always tried to shape myself into who I thought people wanted me to be. The fact that someone hated me no matter what I did or said was painful, but it helped me realize that some people aren't worth trying to please and some relationships are impossible to fix. I still want to be liked these days, but I've stopped trying to please everyone I interact with.

I also realized that in my personal life, I'm creative, a little messy, and wear my heart on my sleeve. But at work, my personality tended to be structured, no-nonsense, and leadership-oriented. That sometimes rubbed people the wrong way.

I've learned to soften that first impression by bringing genuine curiosity and more of my "inner me" — the one I naturally show when I'm more comfortable — to early interactions.

Studying human nature helped me feel less powerless

One of my favorite psychology professors used to say, "You're not responsible for your first thought in a situation, but you are responsible for every subsequent thought and action."

I learned not to beat myself up for an initial reaction I wasn't proud of, which was often deeply conditioned and unconscious. Now I notice when I'm reacting badly. I then choose a different thought and decide how to move forward. Having this skill might have changed how my coworker acted toward me, and it would have helped me feel less powerless and frustrated around her.

One of the most valuable lessons I learned was "hurt people, hurt people." This simple truth reminds me to bring understanding and compassion to every personal interaction. I don't know what happened in my coworker's life to cause her intense dislike for me. As hurtful as it was on my end, I can look back and see there was a bigger picture I didn't understand.

While compassion is not a reason to tolerate bad behavior, I also learned to set clear boundaries for how people treat me. It helps me see each person as multifaceted, with a lifetime of shaping experiences. It reminds me to be kind to everyone I meet, even if we're never going to be close.

I learned all this by simply stepping back from my job, taking a break, and immersing myself in an entirely new field. It turned out to be the best professional decision I ever made.

• The housing market appears to be entering a recovery period, Charles Schwab said in a recent note.
• They say supply, price growth, and home sales all look to be improving from past conditions.
• "That comes with an important distinction, though: A recovery is not synonymous with a booming expansion."

The housing market is on a slow climb out of its affordability crisis, though time is still needed to properly relieve consumer pain, Charles Schwab said in a note on Wednesday. 

"As housing was the first sector to kick off the rolling recessions we've pointed out for more than two years, it now looks like it's participating in the start of rolling recoveries," the bank said. "That comes with an important distinction, though: A recovery is not synonymous with a booming expansion."

Instead, it's more that runaway price and sale trends are easing from extremes, while supply-side conditions are showing signs of meaningful improvement. 

First, the steep acceleration in home-price growth looks to be over, Schwab said. That's in reference to the marked increases seen between 2022 and 2023, as pandemic buying fever turbocharged pricing. Just four years into this decade, prices have rocketed 47% higher.

While growth has normalized, prices still remain elevated, with median prices of existing and new homes both near all-time highs. Prices for the two property types average $412,000 and $433,000, respectively.

But according to a new report from Redfin, sale-price growth could keep softening in the coming months. That's amid a rebound of sellers that are slashing their asking prices.

Second, sales are steadily picking up, though meaningful bounce-back hasn't happened yet, Schwab said. 

In the past few years, home sales plummeted, falling by a maximum drop of 41%. That's been outdone by new home sales, which fell almost 50%. 

Though still below their cycle peaks, both are up 9% and 22% from their recent troughs.

Third, new inventory supply has soared, as homebuilders hurried to respond to unmet demand. Even before the pandemic, a shortage of housing has been a point of pressure for consumers, only made worse by homeowners that have been kept from moving due to today's high mortgage rates.

"For any recent or aspiring homeowner, it's no surprise that affordability is significantly constrained in this cycle. This has prevented individuals and families from purchasing a home, forced them into intense bidding wars, or caused them to make more painful financial tradeoffs in order to purchase a home," Schwab said.

In fact, the Housing Affordability Index fell to its all-time low last year, but Schwab noted that it seems to be pushing back up from the bottom. However, investors should expect this recovery to be sluggish.

The bank added that mortgage rates are likely to keep drifting higher, as federal interest rates normalize at around current levels. Though mortgage highs have been a headwind for consumers, buyers are likely to adjust to this over time.

"That doesn't mean housing can only fully recover if prices and rates come down dramatically, given there are other (perhaps stronger) factors at play, such as supply," Schwab said. "Yet, a stabilization in activity, price growth, and interest rate volatility will likely provide a more stable foundation for the sector."

• Carnival Cruise Line is set to launch its new private destination, Celebration Key, in 2025.
• The $600 million project has amenities similar to Royal Caribbean's private island.
• Carnival is "clearly following Royal Caribbean's footsteps," one analyst told Business Insider.

Step aside, CocoCay. Royal Caribbean's private island could soon face some serious competition.

About 140 miles east of Miami, Royal Caribbean's Perfect Day at CocoCay receives thousands of eager families virtually every day of the year, drawn to the private Caribbean island's irresistible waterpark, beach clubs, and family-friendly amenities.

The tropical destination has become a massive hit with the cruise line's guests. And it seems Carnival, which also targets cruising families, wants a slice of its competitor's winning pie.

Carnival already operates its own private island, Half Moon Cay.

But what's better than one exclusive port? Two of them.

The cruise giant is now building another destination just for its guests: Celebration Key, a mile-long resort-like getaway on Grand Bahama Island.

The $600 million project, Carnival Corp's largest, is set to open in 2025 — a sign that the company is "clearly following Royal Caribbean's footsteps," Patrick Scholes, lodging and leisure research analyst at Truist Securities, told Business Insider in March.

Carnival’s promises for its private destination might sound familiar.

Royal Caribbean's private island has a waterpark with 14 slides and children's play areas.

Similarly, according to Carnival's recent announcement, Celebration Key will have a large, family-friendly freshwater lagoon with two 350-foot-long waterslides and a children's water playground.

It's a scaled-back version of CocoCay's popular feature — for now. Looking ahead, Carnival said it plans to build a waterpark and zipline course, too.

Celebration Key would also offer amenities like ping-pong, basketball, and volleyball.

As you might've guessed, these activities are also available on Royal Caribbean's island as well.

Looking to escape the sound of screaming children? Carnival says Celebration Key will have a separate adult-only section, again with frills reminiscent of CocoCay's recently opened pool club (as in, a swim-up pool bar, a DJ, and no kids in sight).

It wouldn’t be a cruise-owned private island without up-charged amenities.

Travelers at Perfect Day at CocoCay can splurge on private beach clubs, cabanas, shopping, food, and alcohol.

The same goes for Celebration Key. In fact, "You'd be surprised at how much people are willing to pay to rent cabanas for the day," Josh Weinstein, president and CEO of Carnival Corp, told investors in late March.

Like CocoCay, Carnival expects its private destination to be a big money maker with increased ticket revenue and "incremental in-port spending," Weinstein said. Plus, it'll be near Florida's major cruise ports, allowing Carnival to save money on fuel — another major benefit to owning private Caribbean properties.

Celebration Key is already included in over 500 of Carnival’s itineraries across 18 ships.

We're still a year from its debut, but that's not stopping the company from planning the expansion of its upcoming property.

Carnival said it'll spend $100 million extending Celebration Key's pier, which, when completed in 2026, will allow it to accommodate four of Carnival's largest cruise ships.

By 2028, the cruise line says the destination will be able to accommodate 4 million travelers annually.

• US presidents are driven in a heavily armored limousine nicknamed "The Beast." 
• It features a secure communications system and fridge stocked with the president's blood type.
• Military cargo aircraft transport the presidential limousine for use abroad.

When US presidents aren't flying on Air Force One or taking helicopter trips in Marine One, they're driven around in a presidential limousine nicknamed "The Beast."

Weighing in at 20,000 pounds and outfitted with advanced security and communications systems, the newest model of "The Beast" debuted during the Trump administration in 2018.

Take a look inside the famous vehicle.

US presidents travel in a secure limousine nicknamed "The Beast."

US presidents rode Lincoln limousines for most of the 20th century until the 1980s, when the Reagan administration switched to Cadillacs.

The latest model of the presidential limousine was commissioned by the US Secret Service in 2014 and used for the first time in 2018 by President Donald Trump.

Designed to look like a longer version of a Cadillac XT6, the chassis of the car is actually that of a Chevrolet Kodiak truck produced by General Motors, NBC News reported. The vehicle weighs around 20,000 pounds and cost around $1.5 million to build.

The heavily armored vehicle is bulletproof, blast-resistant, and sealed to withstand biochemical attacks.

While details about the limousine's security measures remain classified, NBC News reported that the vehicle features a night-vision system, tear gas firing capabilities, and door handles that can be electrified to prevent intruders.

The windows are believed to be 3 inches thick and the vehicle's armor around 8 inches thick.

"The Beast" is also equipped with medical supplies, including a refrigerator stocked with the president's blood type.

The limousine's secure communications system is able to dispatch the launch codes for nuclear weapons.

The presidential seal appears throughout the design of the car.

The seal, featuring an eagle holding an olive branch and 13 arrows in its talons below a banner reading "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of many, one"), appears on both the interior and exterior of the passenger door.

The limousine can seat up to seven people.

The interior features water bottle holders and plush leather seats. Previous presidential limousines have also included a fold-out desk, according to the US Secret Service.

"The Beast" travels with the president.

Presidential limousines are transported by military cargo aircraft, such as US Air Force C-17s, for use during the president's travels, according to the US Secret Service.

When abroad, the presidential limousine flies the American flag and the flag of the host country.

When Biden visited the UK in June 2021, the presidential limousine flew both the American flag and the Union Jack.

On Inauguration Day, Secret Service agents change the car's license plates as a new president takes power.

Some presidents have used the Washington, DC, "End Taxation Without Representation" license plates, while others have removed the slogan, Axios reported.

Accompanied by the presidential motorcade, "The Beast" remains an instantly recognizable symbol of the power of the presidency.

"It is safe to say that this car's security and coded communications systems make it the most technologically advanced protection vehicle in the world," the assistant director for the US Secret Service's Office of Protective Operations said of "The Beast, " according to the US Secret Service's official website.

• A major supplier of ammunition for Ukraine described the struggle to get quality components.
• Czech defense CEO Michal Strnad told the FT that soaring prices and poor quality made the job difficult.
• Ukraine has been experiencing chronic ammunition shortages.

Central Europe's largest ammunition supplier said that quality and cost issues meant that half of the shells it's sourcing for Ukraine can't be sent directly to the country, according to the Financial Times.

"Every week the price is going up and there are big issues with the components," Michal Strnad, CEO of Czechoslovak Group, or CSG, told the paper.

"It's not an easy job," he added.

CSG, which has been acquiring ammo on behalf of the Czech government for Ukraine, has found that supplies being brought in from Asia or Africa are often missing components, or need work, the paper reported.

As such, the company is being forced to add missing components of its own, which has slowed delivery.

Strnad told the paper the initiative is still "on track," with deliveries expected in June.

Strnad's remarks came as five European leaders met in Prague on Tuesday to discuss plans to obtain 800,000 155 mm artillery shells from non-EU countries to send to Ukraine, Radio Free Europe reported.

The $1.7 billion project is funded by 15 EU states as well as NATO, per the outlet.

In a joint statement, the group of leaders said that half a million rounds of ammunition would be delivered by the end of the year.

In January, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that the war in Ukraine had "become a battle for ammunition."

It's a message Strnad wishes Western leaders had taken on earlier.

He told the FT that he had warned policymakers two years ago that the ready availability of ammunition would define the war, but says his message went unheard.

"They didn't think that there could be some war where artillery would play the major role," he said. "Everybody thought about drones, artificial intelligence and new trends."

Rapidly developing technologies such as drones and electronic warfare have indeed played a crucial role in the conflict. But Ukraine's inability to advance along the front line this year — and its losses — have been attributed to a chronic shortage of soldiers and ammunition.

In April, the situation led one US veteran serving there to describe Russia as the "alpha predator" of the war, as Business Insider's Sinéad Baker reported.

Ukraine has been forced to limit itself to firing 2,000 shells per day for much of this year, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said.

And it's only been since mid-May that its forces have started to breathe more easily over their ability to expend shells, Zelenskyy said.

Since the outbreak of Russia's full-scale invasion, CSG has derived much of its profits from supplying Ukrainian forces.

In March, it announced that it was looking to start several joint ventures in Ukraine for the manufacture of heavy ammunition and equipment, Reuters reported.

• Ride-hailing drivers are reporting sub-$3 fares, often earning less than a cup of coffee per trip.
• It's part of a broader trend of gig drivers saying they're seeing lower pay.
• Uber and Lyft told BI that drivers earn more than $30 an hour while engaged on the apps.

The Uber or Lyft driver who took you from the office to a nearby restaurant downtown might not be able to even buy a cup of coffee with the money made from your trip.

Eight ride-hailing and delivery drivers shared screenshots this month with Business Insider showing nearly two dozen recent trips, ranging from five minutes to 15 minutes, that paid at or below $3, excluding tips.

One screenshot from a Lyft driver based in Arizona showed a $2.62 ride that took 15 minutes and traveled 4.32 miles, not counting the few minutes it took to drive to the passenger. This was the amount offered to the driver on the platform before it was accepted and before tips. Similar screenshots came from drivers in Cleveland, Houston, Fort Lauderdale, and Orange County.

Sergio Avedian, a gig driver and senior contributor at the gig-driver-advocacy blog and YouTube channel The Rideshare Guy, has started encountering sub-$3 rides over the last several weeks in Los Angeles. He said many drivers across the country have written to him recently complaining about these rides, which can be unprofitable after accounting for driving expenses.

"These short trips actually put more wear and tear on your car than these long trips because you're braking and accelerating constantly," Avedian said, noting it's becoming increasingly rare he gets well-paying rides.

For some drivers, these sub-$3 trips are a symbol of their broader frustrations with their pay. In recent months, several gig drivers have told Business Insider that driving is less profitable than it used to be and that ride-hailing giants are taking a larger cut of rider fares. Research shows that drivers across six ride-hailing and delivery platforms earned well below the local minimum wage after accounting for expenses, even with tips included. Drivers' frustrations have led to protests and calls for higher guaranteed pay nationwide.

To be sure, gig drivers who come across a sub-$3 trip can always reject it — but many say profitable trips have become harder to come by.

$3 trips aren't worth it for many drivers

The screenshots showed that the sub-$3 trips generally required drivers to drive no more than 10 minutes, including the time spent driving to the pickup location and then to the customer's destination.

According to some drivers, shorter rides can be preferable if they pay more per mile. But for many, the math on these rides doesn't add up.

For example, a Florida-based driver sent a screenshot of a ride that paid $2.36 after deductions and required an estimated four-minute drive to the pickup location — and then an additional six-minute drive to the destination. Less than $3 in earnings for 10 minutes of work translates to almost $15 an hour, slightly above the state's $12 minimum wage.

But this doesn't account for the time drivers wait for customers to find them at a pickup location. Nor does it account for driving expenses like gas, maintenance, and depreciation that can eat into a driver's profits. In February, Lyft estimated the typical driver had about $7 each hour in vehicle expenses.

A customer tip can tilt the math back in the driver's favor, but they're not guaranteed. A study of over 500,000 US gig drivers by Gridwise, a data analytics company that helps drivers track their earnings, found that 28% of Uber and Lyft ride-hailing trips received tips.

Business Insider reached out to Uber and Lyft for comment. An Uber spokesperson said that across the US, drivers are "earning more than $30 an hour while engaged on the app." They added that in states like California, where a minimum pay standard is in effect, drivers can count on a certain level of pay.

A Lyft spokesperson wrote in an email: "In Q1 of this year, the median US Lyft driver earned $31.10, including tips and bonuses per hour of engaged time. After considering estimated expenses such as gas and maintenance, that's around $24.25 per engaged hour."

Earlier this year, Lyft announced it would start guaranteeing drivers earn 70% of their riders' payments each week after external fees. In December, Uber said that its "take rate" — the share of ride-hailing revenue as a percentage of gross fares — is well below 20% when one excludes the commercial insurance costs the company provides to drivers.

To be sure, rides with bottom-of-the-barrel fares appear to be rare. Data provided to Business Insider by Gridwise showed that so far in 2024, fewer than 1% of completed US Uber and Lyft trips paid drivers below $3, excluding tips. In comparison, over 36% of Uber Eats, DoorDash, and Grubhub completed deliveries paid less than $3 before tips. However, after tips, the share of sub-$3 deliveries fell to below 2% on all three platforms.

Compared to January 2023, sub-$3 trips — excluding tips — have become more common for DoorDash, Grubhub, and Uber Eats drivers and less common for Uber and Lyft drivers, per Gridwise.

Gridwise noted that its earning data does not include earnings tied to promotions or minimum pay standards. Given it only included completed trips, it doesn't account for the sub-$3 trips, for example, that a driver sees and declines.

The $3 ride could have a future if drivers stay desperate

Avedian explained that because of the oversaturation of ride-hailing drivers, desperate drivers are bound to accept these trips. He said even if he rejects a low-paying ride, it "gets snapped up immediately." Otherwise, the pay would likely increase if drivers rejected these rides since drivers would be more likely to accept a higher-paying ride.

"In 2024, putting a human in my car for $3 or less is asinine to me," Avedian told BI. "Gas prices in California are hitting $5.50, and to me, this goes to show how out of touch these companies are that our expenses have gone up 40%, 50%, even 80% in a lot of cases, and the fares have gone down."

He said the risk-reward is "completely upside down," arguing these companies should set minimum fares of at least $5.

"I will reject a million of those and then turn my app off and go home," Avedian said. "I cannot run a profitable business by doing $3 trips."

Drivers say they're seeing more sub-$3 trips

Randy Scott, 46, has driven for almost six years and has over 25,000 rides on Uber and Lyft. He drives in between managing local and state political campaigns. The South Florida resident said he's recently seen more rides under $5 coming in, which he suspects is because more immigrant drivers in his area regularly accept these rides.

A screenshot he shared with BI shows a ride for $2.30. From a business perspective, he said he understands why these companies would continue offering low rates if they'll always be accepted eventually.

"At the end of the day, people are out driving in good faith, trying to make money and work, but they don't necessarily have the knowledge to say, 'wait a minute here, they're offering me $2,'" Scott said. "There's got to be a line drawn somewhere."

He said the positives of driving still outweigh the negatives, as he's developed strategies for earning about $900 gross revenue driving 50 hours a week. Every week, his strategy is different, as his area is seasonal with tourists.

Still, he said even on slow days, he'll take the $4 ride as it's at least a couple of dollars, plus a tip.

He said gig driving feels like the "Wild West" right now, noting that state governments should work to regulate the driver market to help drivers earn a living wage."I don't think drivers are asking for the moon," Scott said.

Moises Diaz, a 41-year-old Uber and Lyft driver in California, started driving part-time in December. But May was the first month that he started seeing rides that paid roughly $3 or less, and now they're "coming in very often," he told Business Insider via email.

Even for longtime drivers, the appeals of driving may not be enough to overpower the declining pay.

Joe, a 53-year-old in Florida, has been driving for Uber since 2014. He asked to use a pseudonym for fear of retribution and told BI he's "never seen pay this low."

"I see these sub-$3 fares at least between five to 10 times during a six-hour shift," he said.

Are you a gig driver who is struggling to make ends meet? Reach out to these reporters at nsheidlower@businessinsider.com or jzinkula@businessinsider.com.

• I tried the biggest burgers at McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King, In-N-Out, and Shake Shack.
• Shake Shack's burger was a little overwhelming, in my opinion.
• Burger King's Triple Whopper impressed me with its flame-grilled patties and fresh toppings.

The biggest burgers at fast-food chains are usually more expensive, but how do they rank in terms of taste and value?

Price is a hot topic when it comes to fast food. Business Insider previously reported on how hikes in fast-food prices and the rumored practice of "shrinkflation" — a phenomenon in which customers claim menu items are getting smaller while either remaining the same price or costing more — are upsetting customers.

I recently compared six of the biggest burgers sold at fast-food chains, testing burgers from McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King, In-N-Out, and Shake Shack to see how they stacked up in terms of taste, price, and overall value.

Shake Shack's double cheeseburger was a little too heavy for my liking, while Wendy's and Burger King both impressed me with their triple-stacked burgers. 

Here's how the biggest burgers at five fast-food chains ranked, from worst to best.

Shake Shack's double cheeseburger, my personal least favorite, was particularly large.

It cost me $12.49, not including tax, making it the most expensive burger I tried. I chose pickles, onions, and Shack sauce as my toppings.

The burger patties were perfectly crispy on the outside and covered in gooey melted cheese.

The pickles were large and crunchy, and the amount of other toppings was generous. The chain's signature Shack sauce also added a ton of flavor, and the cheese was perfectly melted.

However, the burger was almost too heavy to pick up.

Biting into the Shake Shack burger was a little overwhelming, in my opinion.

I know I purposefully ordered the largest burger on the menu, but this burger was massive. I saw it as a hindrance rather than an asset, and I struggled to get through more than a few bites.

Despite being the most expensive burger, I'm not sure it was worth it. The burger patties were much thicker than quite a few of the other burgers I tried, and the toppings definitely enhanced the flavor. However, it was simply too big, to the point where it tasted like a giant meat-and-cheese grease-bomb. 

My second-to-least favorite burger was a classic: a McDonald's Big Mac.

I was conflicted over whether the biggest burger at McDonald's was the Big Mac — which is physically the largest thanks to the extra bun — or the Double Quarter-Pounder, which is the burger with the most meat. I decided to try both to appease both sets of McDonald's fans who argue for one over the other.

A Big Mac cost me $7.29 at my local McDonald's, excluding tax.

There was a generous layer of pickles, lettuce, and sauce on the sandwich.

The burger patties weren't overwhelming, nor was the sandwich as a whole. I also liked the tangy, creamy Big Mac sauce. However, I thought the added bun made the sandwich taste too much like bread and the other flavors were slightly lost, in my opinion.

The sandwich was a good size and very filling, but I wasn't crazy about the flavor profile.

I simply wanted more flavor happening. Between the extra bun and the generous serving of Big Mac sauce, that was all I could taste. Tomato, cheese, or simply other condiments might have taken the sandwich to the next level.

The 4×4 is the largest burger available at In-N-Out.

The burger, which is on In-N-Out's "not-so-secret" menu, is also referred to as the "Quad Quad," and comes with four beef patties, four cheese slices, lettuce, tomato, spread, and the option to add onions. It cost $9.49, excluding tax and fees.

The giant burger was difficult to hold in one hand, let alone bite into.

The burger was far too large for me to eat in one sitting, though the flavor made me want to. 

All of the elements of the burger were delicious, from the juicy beef patties to the layers of cheese and fresh lettuce and tomato.

However, the additional burger patties ended up detracting from the burger's overall ranking instead of enhancing it. The burger was overwhelmingly heavy, with the tomato and lettuce failing to offset the excessive amount of meat and cheese.

The buns couldn't contain the juicy beef patties, and they started disintegrating as I ate the burger. Truthfully, I wouldn't order this again. Although it was tasty, the amount of meat was just too much for me.

I also tried McDonald's Double Quarter-Pounder with cheese. I preferred it over the Big Mac.

Looking at the burger in the box, I immediately noticed that it had more meat than the Big Mac. The meat was clearly the star of the show, with the other toppings barely visible beneath the patties and bun.

The burger cost me $9.79, excluding tax. I thought this was a fair price for the meat-heavy burger.

The Double Quarter-Pounder with cheese comes with a whopping half-pound of meat, pickles, onions, ketchup, and mustard.

I found this burger to be pretty flavorful, especially thanks to the condiments and large slices of crunchy pickles. However, I wasn't crazy about the bun — while I normally love a sesame-seed bun, I found this one to be pretty bland, airy, and artificial-tasting.

I would order this burger again.

Despite having a ton of meat, the burger didn't feel too overwhelming to eat. I thought it was a realistic sandwich, especially compared to the gigantic burgers from Shake Shack and In-N-Out.

The second-best burger I tried was Wendy's Dave's Triple.

When I arrived at my local Wendy's drive-thru, this extra-large burger wasn't even on the menu. However, thanks to my online research, I knew it could be made and decided to order it anyway. I did wonder how popular this sandwich was, and if many people opt for the triple-patty burger.

The Dave's Triple burger cost $11.24, excluding tax.

Wendy's Dave's Triple burger comes with nearly a pound of beef, American cheese, crisp lettuce, tomato, pickle, ketchup, mayo, and onion.

The sandwich was difficult to pick up, but all of the ingredients appeared to be well-balanced. There was a large serving of tomatoes, pickles, and cheese, so it didn't look like the beef patties would be overpowered. 

I thought this burger had a ton of flavor. The cheese was perfectly melted, and the patties were super juicy.

While I personally couldn't finish the entire thing, I definitely thought the flavors were there and it was a good value for the price.

If I were to change one thing, it would be to remove the mayonnaise. It ended up mixing with the juice from the tomatoes in an unappetizing way, creating a tomato-mayo sauce that I thought brought the other flavors down.

My favorite burger I tried was the Triple Whopper with cheese from Burger King.

Similar to the Dave's Triple, the Triple Whopper also comes with three quarter-pound beef patties, although the ones at Burger King are flame-grilled. The burger cost me $11.29, excluding tax, making it the second-most expensive burger I tried.

Unlike the other burgers, the Triple Whopper only comes with one slice of cheese.

However, I felt that this allowed the other flavors to really come through, and it led to a less gut-filling, more appetizing eating experience.

The lettuce, tomatoes, and onions all tasted fresh, and they added a delicious crunch to the burger.

I also liked the beef patties on this burger the most out of the ones I tried.

The burger patties had a smoky, savory flavor that made the sandwich taste fresh off the grill. I also thought the patties' shape, which were larger in circumference but flatter than some of the other burgers, made the sandwich easier to eat. 

Overall, I really enjoyed this burger and would definitely order it again — if I have the appetite.

While I'm not sure I'm happy to pay more than $10 for any fast-food burger, it was a very generous serving and the most flavorful out of the bunch, without being overwhelmingly huge.