 |
|
|
|||||
You dont have to be a gamer to know who Mario of Super Mario Bros. fame is. The plumbers presence has permeated popular culture since the Nintendo video games release in Japan on September 13, 1985. It reached the United States about a month later. Ahead of the game’s big 40th anniversary, Nintendo is hosting a Nintendo Direct live stream event today (Friday, September 12) at 9 a.m. ET. It’s expected to last around an hour. Lets take a look at the history of this popular gaming franchise before we get into how to watch Fridays event. Mario could have been Popeye In 1977 Marios creator, Shigeru Miyamoto, was hired by Nintendo when he was 24 years old, having recently finished a degree in industrial design, as the New Yorker reported. He started out working in the planning department. After a game called Radar Scope failed to be a commercial success, he was tasked with creating a new one. Miyamoto wanted to use the characters from the popular comic Popeye, but when Nintendo could not secure the rights, he was forced to get creative. Mario made his debut in ‘Donkey Kong’ Instead Miyamoto came up with characters of his own. His final product was called Donkey Kong, which was released in 1981. Players were transformed into the avatar of Jumpman, who was on a mission to get his girlfriend back from his pet gorilla. Eventually, Jumpman would evolve into the Mario that fans know and love today. Mario got his name thanks to American executives Nintendo executives in America were skeptical of Miyamotos platform game. They didnt think it would be a hit. They also couldnt help but notice that Jumpman looked similar to their landlord, so they started to call the character Mario. The execs might have been wrong about Donkey Kongit was a huge successbut the new moniker stuck. Miyamoto even gave his seal of approval. ‘Super Mario Bros.’ reinvigorated video games In 1985, the gaming industry was in shambles, due to a crash two years earlier caused by market saturation and too many lackluster games. Instead of getting out of the business, Nintendo doubled down by releasing the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES). Super Mario Bros. was the console’s calling card. About a year after the release of the NES, the Super Mario Bros. game was bundled with the system, meaning the two products were sold together. This only strengthened Marios popularity. Mario was now a plumber with a brother named Luigi on a mission to rescue Princess Toadstool, the ruler of the Mushroom Kingdom, from the evil Bowser. This one game has inspired over 200 spinoffs in the Nintendo catalog alone. There are also three movies with a fourth one set to be released on April 3, 2026. How to watch Fridays Nintendo Direct live stream Fans are already speculating about what Nintendo is going to announce during its live stream. It is safe to assume that there will be some Mario news ahead of the big anniversary. Its simple to catch Nintendo Direct and see for yourself. You can watch it on Nintendo’s YouTube or Twitch channels. It will also be available on the Nintendo Today app. Finally, we’ve embedded the stream below.
Category:
E-Commerce
Hello again from Fast Companyand thank you for reading this edition of Plugged In. Last Tuesday, the world marked International Apple Day, a name I just made up to describe a very real annual ritual. Certainly, the annual unveiling of new iPhonesalong with updated Apple Watches and AirPodsis the biggest day on Apples product calendar. Its the moment when many people either decide a new iPhone is in their future or that they can eke another year out of the one theyve already got. The headline this week was the long-anticipated debut of the iPhone Air, a new phone whose selling point is that its an iPhone, except thinner and lighter. Much of the other announcements involved new Apple products that offer even more of what folks liked about predecessorslonger battery life, additional megapixels, improved noise cancellation. Apple gave the base iPhone 17 the ProMotion and always-on display technologies formerly reserved for the iPhone Pro and (finally!) decided to release an iPhone Pro in an exuberantly fun color, Cosmic Orange. It also gave all the new iPhones front-facing camera a square sensor, allowing you to shoot in landscape mode even if youre holding the phone vertically, a feature I never realized I wanted but now crave. Even when Apple doesnt have anything radically new to reveal (like, oh, a folding iPhone), its good at the kind of incrementalism that keeps its hardware progressing in logical directions with clear benefits. This weeks launch was dominated by that sort of news. But Apple didnt have much to say about AI, an area thats critical to the future of the companys products. For now, its quietly trying to regain its footing after a period of embarrassingly public failure with the technology, leaving the details of whats ahead uncertain. Lets recap. At its WWDC conference in June 2024, Apple introduced a portfolio of AI-powered features called Apple Intelligence. Among the most ambitious was the Siri voice assistants new ability to answer questions that involved seamlessly plucking bits of information from different apps on the flysuch as Siri, when is my Moms flight landing?; Whats our lunch plan?; and How long will it take us to get there from the airport? Apple stoked expectations: This year marks the beginning of a new era for Siri, explained the executive who demonstrated the mom-visit scenario in the WWDC keynote video. By the end of the year, however, the company hadnt shipped the most ambitious elements of its Siri improvements. Last March, it acknowledged, Its going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year. At this years WWDC, it didnt say anything about Siris AI future other than to reiterate the coming year timetable. A new twist developed last month when Bloombergs Mark Gurman reported that Apple was in early talks with Google to build a new version of Siri on top of Googles Gemini LLM. Given that more than 15 months had passed since Apples announcements at WWDC 2024, I did a double-take at Gurmans scoop. How could Apple still be in the process of assembling third-party ingredients to build something it had already demoed and claimed was an era-shifting step forward? Any Gemini partnership might have as much to do with Siris longer-term AI trajectory as implementing the specific features Apple announced and then failed to complete. Still, considering the companys instinctive preference to develop its own technologies rather than rely on others, even a whiff of Google AI becoming essential to one of the iPhones highest-profile features would be a big deal. Particularly given that Apple and Google are both long-time partners and fierce competitors. Clarity about Siris smarter, more personalized future is probably months off and wont arrive all at once. After burning itself with premature hoopla, Apple has every incentive to stay mum until its absolutely, positively certain its ready to deploy the features it announced at WWDC 2024. According to Gurman, its shooting for next spring. That would make them an off-cycle update before Apples standard round of OS upgrades for fall 2026, which will likely bring another round of AI enhancements to Siri. Meanwhile, Google has been bounding forward with its own AI game plan for Android. At its Pixel 10 phone launch last month, it showed off a feature called Magic Cue. Its not a precise counterpart to the new, unreleased Siri, but also relates to dynamically weaving together data from multiple apps to keep users informed about everyday life. Having lost time to its Siri mishap, Apple may still be scrambling to catch up with Googles version of this helpful AI vision a year from now. Now, Apple has hardly dug itself an AI hole it can never emerge from. For one thing, its not clear to me that most consumers are prioritizing AI when choosing which devices to buy. The new iPhones, Apple Watches, and AirPods Pro have plenty of other new features that should appeal to upgraders even if elements of their AI story remain fuzzy, giving Apple some breathing room to figure out whats next. Deciding to build a Siri experience on top of Gemini might be a healthy sign that Apple understands its own limitations and is willing to try new approaches to overcoming them. From the Apple II to the iPod to the iPhone to the iPad to the Apple Watch, Apple is legenary not for inventing product categories but for reinventing them. Once it shows up, its offerings are often so well thought-out that people forget it was late to the party. So far, nobody else has figured out how to build AI into smartphones and other consumer devices in a way thats so life-changing that Apple cant theoretically top it. Im not arguing that the new-and-improved Siris delayed rollout is a classically Apple-esque act of confidence. Instead, it reflects the enormous pressure the company is under to deliver tangible AI in its products, and its relative inexperience with the technology. But the company still has a shot at turning its misadventures in AI into a fresh start that works to its advantage. That might be the biggest challengeand opportunityit faces in 2026. Youve been reading Plugged In, Fast Companys weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to youor if you’re reading it on FastCompany.comyou can check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself every Friday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at hmccracken@fastcompany.com with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters. I’m also on Bluesky, Mastodon, and Threads, and you can follow Plugged In on Flipboard. More top tech stories from Fast Company Thanks to AI, this guy is running a Google rival from his laundry roomLarge language models aren’t just making mainstream search engines worse; they’re making the next generation of search engines easier to develop. Read More Millennials refuse to give up ‘lol’Once merely shorthand for laughter, ‘lol’ has become a new flashpoint in the online generation wars. Read More Why most AI wearables are still terribleAnd how beauty, privacy, and expression can fix them. Read More X has been CEO-less for months. Oddsmakers don’t believe that’s changingTwo months after Yaccarino bailed, Musk hasn’t picked a new chief. Polymarket bettors don’t anticipate he will anytime soon. Read More Ralph Lauren’s new AI app is paving the way for a shopping revolutionThe 58-year-old fashion brand partnered with Microsoft to create Ask Ralph, an AI agent that mimics the experience of speaking with a stylist. Read More This startup is bringing AI to an Excel-style spreadsheetSourcetable’s AI agents can fetch data from cloud services and databases, then write code to analyze itall from a familiar spreadsheet environment. Read More
Category:
E-Commerce
The current college football season enters its third weekend with something that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago: universities cutting actual paychecks to star players. Thanks to the $2.8 billion House v. NCAA settlement approved in June, schools can now share up to $20.5 million of their revenue directly with players across all college sports this year. That figure will climb by at least 4% annually over the decade-long agreement. It’s a far cry from the “they’re not employees” rhetoric we’ve heard from universities in recent decades and represents a fundamental reordering not just of college football but of college athletics in general. Until 2021, college athletes couldn’t profit from their talents at allno endorsements, no appearance fees, nothing. Then name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals provided the first crack in the dam, allowing players to finally monetize their name, image, and likeness through third-party deals. Welcome to the age of post-amateurism Now, direct payments from schools represent an even bigger shift. Under the new revenue-sharing model, roughly 75% of revenue will go to college football players, 15% to men’s basketball, 5% to women’s basketball, and 5% to all other sports. The booster collectives that dominated NIL since 2021 are being absorbed into athletic departments or fighting for their lives as NIL returns to actual endorsements rather than disguised pay-for-play. And now, as private equity money begins flowing into college sports through media rights deals and conference partnerships, the dam has officially collapsed. The rapid evolution has created a landscape where every move is scrutinized for potential conflicts of interest and precedent-setting implications. Even established players like OneTeam Partnerswhich represents over 20,000 professional and college athletes through a joint venture between the NFL and MLB players’ unionshave found themselves under scrutiny as regulators and stakeholders attempt to navigate the blurred lines between advocacy, representation, and business interests. But Sean Sansiveri, CEO of OneTeam Partners, views this regulatory complexity as expensive theaternecessary steps toward professionalization, but ultimately a detour from the real solution. OneTeam is not the target of the ongoing investigation and has fully cooperated from the beginning, the company says. During his previous 13-year tenure with the NFL Players Association (NFLPA), Sansiveri helped develop concussion protocols and grew the union’s licensing program from $90 million to nearly $400 million. Sansiveri spoke with Fast Company to discuss why unions are key to sustainable athlete compensation, how private equity could accelerate this process, and how the next three to five years have the potential to transform college sports as we know them. House v. NCAA The House v. NCAA settlement allows schools to pay players directly for the first time, but NIL deals have been the main source of athlete compensation since 2021. How do you see the relationship between these two compensation streams? NIL was never meant to replace fair compensation from the system itselfit was just a first step. The House settlement creates, for the first time, a direct compensation stream from schools to athletes. But it doesnt replace NILit sits alongside it. Increased revenue sharing is going to be the biggest determination of what the future looks like. Some schools and conferences are already exploring alternative direct payment models, and we expect that to accelerate. I think the issue thats going to continue to change everything is primarily employment status. Will college athletes be recognized as employees? They should be, but that’s going to carry the most significant implications for compensation, benefits, rights to organize, etc. So in this new world where schools can pay up to $20.5 million directly to athletes, what role do third-party NIL deals actually play? In the pros, you have revenue sharing from the league and the teams. Roughly 50% of the revenue generated in the NFL, for example, funds the salaries and benefits of players. But we also have a group licensing program and individual athlete endorsement deals. A comparable model is likely in the best interests of collegiate athleteseach existing in parallel. But if the schools assume the duty to represent athlete NIL directlyas opposed to a collective bargaining unitand fail to maximize the value of those rights, I anticipate there being a lot of legal pain for those schools down the line. Booster Collectives get the boot? Booster collectives have been the dominant force in NIL since 2021. With schools now able to pay players directly, what’s happening to these collective organizations? I think it depends on whether they’re going to professionalize themselves and find an athlete empowerment role. If they don’t, they’re probably not going to play much of a role at all. It’s no longer about donations. It’s about investing in systems that generate long-term value. Private equity money typically goes into media rights, licensing, and infrastructure. To meand I think to every athlete who’s focused on thisthat means players should benefit through structured revenue sharing, formal employment models, and eventually maybe even equity in the teams themselves. So it’s less of this one-off cash model and more of a long-term compensation model, very much similar to what the pros have. Private Equity is in the house Speaking of long-term value, private equity has started investing in college sports in ways that weren’t previously allowed. What’s the significance of that shift? Private equity (PE) seems to be quietly becoming one of the most consequential forces in shaping the future of college sports. Unlike the NIL headlines, the story there is about who owns the ecosystem, not who’s getting paid within it. PE firms are eyeing long-term media deals as high upside investments. Infrastructure and commercializationthink stadium upgrades, campus entertainment districts, immersive fan experiencesare areas that private equity has a lot of experience in. If you can turn college athletics into a year-round multi-channel revenue engine, of course they’re interested. The problem, though, is that athletes aren’t formal stakeholders. Private equity is coming in to extract long-term value from the athletes who deserve and don’t currently have a seat at the table. How are they going to share in the upside? In my mind, that’s the biggest question. That raises an interesting question about power dynamics. Could private equity actually help athletes gain more leverage through unionzation? You could actually see an acceleration towards employment status and collective bargaining if private equity decides to really jump fully into this space. If you’re going to roll up schools, roll up conferences, you’re going to want an antitrust exemption, and you’re either going to get that from Congress or through a non-statutory labor exemption by having a union. In the professional models, if a union had decertified for purposes of antitrust in a lockout or strike, the first thing the professional leagues insist is that the union be reconstituted because of the antitrust exemption. So we could see private equity make a similar push in college sports. The licensing gold rush Your company, OneTeam Partners, focuses heavily on group licensing. How does that model work in college sports, and why is it important in this changing landscape? Group licensing can be a powerful equalizer. It allows athletes across entire teams, even in non-revenue-generating sports, to benefit collectively. What started as a mechanism primarily used by the professional sports unions is now unlocking revenue for college athletes through video games, jersey sales, and brand campaigns. It’s not just the stars who are participatingit’s the walk-ons, it’s the backups. They’re all earning alongside the All-Americans. At OneTeam, we have over 20,000 college athletes in our group licensing program today, and in just the first seven months of 2025, we’ve already delivered nearly $20 million in NIL payments to those athletes. But without a union in the space that actually represents those rights in an exclusive capacity, athletes aren’t achieving their full value. Looking ahead three to five years, what do you think the compensation landscape will look like for college athletes? Compensation packages would probably look more like their pro counterpartsanchored in direct payments from the schools, revenue sharing hopefully through union-negotiated agreements, and robust exclusive group licensing income from media, merchandise, gaming, trading cards, and jerseys. With organized labor at the table, that’ll make for a more transparent, structured, and sustainable system that addresses all of these issues. Whether it’s boosters, agent regulation, health and safety concerns, commercialization of data, AIall of that could be addressed through collective bargaining. What do you see as the biggest risk if college sports doesn’t move toward that professional model? The biggest risk is a fractured system with no central voice for athletes. As schools, private equity, and new pay models come into college, I don’t think the danger is chaos anymore. It’s overreach. When employees don’t have a strong voice representing them and without player unions or collective governance, the money is still going to flow. But the athlete rightsthe protections, the long-term sustainabilitywould fall through the cracks. The pro model: collective bargaining For someone trying to understand where all this is headed, how would you explain what college sports could, and maybe should, ultimately look like? The simplest way to explain it is to look at how it’s done in the pros. You have sustainable revenue models that fairly compensate athletes, focus on important issues like player safety, life after sporteverything ranging from prescription drug registry programs to protections for counterfeit merchandise. All of that is handled through a collective bargaining scheme that best serves the athletes. By serving the talent that drives the value of these sports, you are ensuring a sustainable model. Follow the blueprint that has been forged by the professional sports unions over the past several decades, and do that in college. That’s the simplest path to organization and eliminating the chaos and the potential for overreach. What advice would you give to college athletes as they navigate this rapidly changing landscape? When I’m looking at these NIL opportunities, especially in the context of group licensing, until there’s employee recognition and a professional-style union in place, so many of these entities that are participating in the value growth are doing so for their investors. The unique factor in professional sports is that if money from NIL is going to a union, that money is strengthening a union and advocating for fair wages, hours, and working conditions on behalf of the athletes. In the current ecosystem, we don’t have that. So who is participating in the value chain and what are their ultimate incentives? If I’m an athlete, those are the questions I’d be asking.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||