Fanatics buys PWCC
 

Whelp, there goes the neighbourhood.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/genera...s-collectibles

This will be interesting to follow. Not sure where this fits into Fanatics business model. But they are gonna have to do some fence mending as it pertains to PWCC.

Interesting times indeed.

B. Turner

Wow the market is consolidating and Fanatics is now in online auctions.

I wonder if they truly looked at PWCC full access

I thought this was an interesting part;

At the height of the card craze, vault members were allowed to take out loans against their vaulted cards, using those cards as collateral.

That helped light the card market on fire as some of those people then took their loan money to buy more.

But when the market plummeted, there were enough of those people who just said, “I’ll keep my money, you keep my cards.”

The article refers to the vault in the past tense?

The article stated "undisclosed sum" wonder what the # was?
& will Brent & Betsy go off in the sunset or will they try something else in the hobby?

Fanatics can now take cards fresh off the presses with defects, use PWCC certified trimmers, get them over to some buddies at PSA, and move cards through auctions.

Brilliant move

It is gonna be interesting to see how they burnish that turd.

How great would it be if the flips identified the trimmer? PWCC-GM.

GM print run might water down his market since it will be so high, but the lower print run, or mare scarce pieces by other trimmers is where the $ will be at

Would love to see the indemnity clauses in the purchase contract.

I guess I've bought my last ever box of Topps now. Shame.

Not to mention the reps and warranties.

DFs could command premiums.

DMs do amazingly well and have for a very long time.:D

Strange move IMO. Not sure they needed to do that but so be it. Hopefully Brent and the known card doctors are no longer involved.

When are they Changing the Name...that would be the first order of business. Rid themselves of their past history.

Fanatics says no plans for now to change operations or branding, but that won't last IMO.

Totally Agree

So what happens to the ongoing FBI investigation surrounding PWCC

Who says there is one?:mad:

Price of a dime , 1/10th of a dollar.


After collectable, I'd be worried about my vault holdings

Fun times, fun times.

I guess we'll see what changes they decide to make, and how those play out. It's hard to imagine that they're just buying it without plans to make some significant changes to operations, and not just to personnel.

Here's hoping that the changes are positive for the industry. Although from the sound of it, plenty around here seem to be cheering the possibility of regime change, although I suspect the outgoing regime is laughing all the way to the bank with one of those "9 figure bank accounts" we hear so much about from some quarters.

Brentsy have been laughing all the way to the bank for years I would guess.

Well if they truly want to make money rebranding would make more sense but perhaps they want to see what the brand can do with them running it. Many may not like it or trust them but a lot of people are buying from them, selling with them and vaulting with them.

But I think the real value is in the vault and the following/data clients, etc

Now if they can rebuild the trust of many doubters then it becomes a home run from them.

Not really surprising at all. Fanatics is partially owned by the major U.S. sports leagues, and their relative player's unions/associations. They are in the process of buiiding a complete vertical market to control (and profit) from as many aspects of their respective sports as they can. By going vertical, instead of horizontal, they can better escape anti-trust scrutiny, and with the various leagues/player's associations involved, they control they rights as to who can even issue cards of current/future players. Exactly how they cut Topps, and their IPO aspirations, right off at the knees, and then swooped in to buy and take over Topps at about half of what their IPO had projected as their entity value. The next step I can see is Fanatics now looking for their own grading company as well.

Based on their previous/current actions, Fanatics looks for current existing companies to take over and work with, so I would expect them to attempt to try getting an already established and accepted TPG. Based on that thinking, I would assume PSA, which is privately owned by the group that took over Collectors Universe (and also has Golding Auctions in their holdings) is likely not available for sale. Nor would one think that Fanatics would have bothered picking up PWCC if they were looking to acquire the PSA parent company that already owns Goldin Auctions. They wouldn't need both PWCC AND Goldin.

Meanwhile, CSG is part of a larger, world-wide third-party grading company, Certified Collectibles Group (CCG), that includes companies/divisions that also grade currency, comic books, and such. And since they (CSG) entered the sports card TPG industry not that long ago, I don't see their parent company looking to sell off this newest division of theirs's, and I don't see Fanatics having any interest looking in taking over the entire CCG parent company and additionally getting into grading currency, comics, and such. So to my thinking, that would eliminate CSG from being a target of Fanatics as well.

Also, both PSA and CSG currently have deals/arrangements with Ebay as their Authentication Program partners. Acquiring PWCC would tend to make one think that Fanatics is looking for their own, separate market place, and not be involved with selling on Ebay at all. So, looking at either PSA or CSG doesn't make sense since that would suddenly tie Fanatics to Ebay as well.

That leaves SGC and Beckett grading services as the remaining two possible/most likely targets IMO. Due to some of the other areas that Beckett is involved in, such as their magazines/periodicals, not so sure Fanatics would be looking to jump into that area, and not sure Beckett would be willing to just sell off their grading services alone. That leaves me thinking that SGC would be the most likely target for Fanatics if they do decide to also shoot for their own grading service. Though SGC is known/favored more in the hobby as a vintage card grading company, can only imagine the leaps forward they could take with the financial backing of the likes of those behind Fanatics, including maybe getting a registry up and running again.

After, or maybe even before, that, I wonder if a major Breaker may not be in Fanatics acquisition crosshairs as well. Or they may just create their own alternative to the Breakers as they are already a well-established direct marketing company themselves.

Will be interesting to see where Fanatics goes with this PWCC acquisition and how they utilize the company going forward. I would fully expect Fanatics to retain current top management to continue running their new company/division (ie: Brent and Betsy), at least for a period of time to properly transition PWCC operations to Fanatics' control/direction. This acquisition may also explain, at least partially, the recent news about layoffs having occurred at PWCC. Possibly a little "house cleaning" prior to the new owners moving in? I can imagine this is just another piece in Fanatic's overall plans going forward to develop, expand and further control their vertical market of sports related cards/collectibles.

Bob

You should be writing some of the articles we see out there.

Well written and well thought out

Rumors exist that "Brentsy" will soon become Brent and Bestsy, as they were before marriage. As they were both partners in this organization, guessing this is the easiest way for both to leave the ownership of this organization with a good amount of $$$.

This buy-out might be a better explanation for the release of 30 employees last month....highly unlikely Brent decided to sell right after the layoffs and follow-up with discussing the organization's upcoming streamlining plans for no reason. This buy-out has clearly been in the works for a while. My guess is that Brent will stay on(as a non-owner), at least for a while.

Take the rumor's source for what it is worth:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqa1TKAikYE

That's a very long relationship, I seem to recall Brent had a picture of he and Betsy on his listings way way back in the day when they were not much older than kids. Things happen I guess.

+1.

LOL!

Thanks Jeff. I'm sure there are many here on the forum that don't like my writing at all. But after 40-50 years as a CPA working in both the public and private sectors, and being involved with various company/entity sales and acquisitions over the many years, I know how to look at and discuss things from the business and tax standpoints as well as from the pure hobby standpoint. Let's be honest and face it, with all these bigger and bigger companies and entities getting involved in our hobby, and their expansion of the hobby industry (and an industry it now truly is), collectors tend to forget, or ignore, the fact that these hobby industry businesses are doing just that, thinking and operating like businesses first, and not really thinking like a true hobbyist/collector does.

At this point, the major U.S. sports leagues and players unions/associations are flexing their muscles and moving into the collectibles/card area of their respective sports to better control, and ultimately profit even more from, what they do in their respective sports. What will be truly interesting is how they act going forward in regard to the sports card markets, and if they continue to see it grow while also morphing and adopting to changing technology and collector/fan interests. Right now, the modern market is still primarily run through the Breakers, and thus the reason for all the manufactured rarities, crazy multiple inserts and subsets, and so on. The products are tailored for the Breaker market, and the idea that people can get big hits when buying into breaks. Set collecting is pretty much gone with modern collectors, unless you count the minority who still go to buy say a complete Topps base set every year. But even so, they tend to just buy the complete sets, not work on putting any together by buying packs/breaks. As the early Topps/baby boomer generation, that grew up buying Topps packs back then at virtually every five and dime/drugstore in the country, starts to leave us, those kinds of collectors are disappearing, along with their way of collecting and putting together sets and such. The real old vintage, pre-war stuff will always have a market and collector interest, but it will be interesting to see how things will be going forward in the modern markets, especially if Fanatics and others still involved in creating cards start doing things that in some way or manner negatively impact the Breaker distribution system/network as it currently stands. Again, will be curious to see how Fanatics and the major U.S. sports leagues and their players work together to continue, and hopefully/potentially even grow, the current sports card/collectibles market.

With my background and experience, I tend to look at the hobby with both a collector's eye, and that of a businessperson as well. Not very many collectors/hobbyists tend to like discussing the business aspects behind a lot of these industry moves. Like when it was first announced that CSG had agreed to work with and partner in grading cards for PWCC customers, not all that long after they had first entered the sports card TPG service market. In that thread, I mentioned trying to start a serious discussion about the merits and such of what CSG was doing, from a business standpoint, and politely asked that the typical forum trolls cease their crap for at least a little bit to not just blindly start attacking PWCC again so we could possibly have a reasonably intelligent discussion for once, about the business aspects of what CSG was possibly trying to do back then. Of course, the trolls came right out and made any such discussion impossible, even to the point of some accusing CSG being as guilty as they felt PWCC allegedly was, despite the fact that CSG hadn't even graded a card for PWCC yet. There were even those who swore to never do any business with CSG ever, because they dared to do business with PWCC. But wasn't it the other TPGS that had all those supposedly altered/doctored cards in their holders that had previously worked with PWCC, yet none of those people declared they would no longer do business with any of them. I thought that was so stupid and comical, get mad and blame the new TPG business that hadn't done anything wrong yet, but don't really say anything about the earlier TPGs that had all the bad cards in their holders from supposedly working with PWCC. The absolute idiocy of some people here on the forum making such comments, observations, and allegations, and their inability or refusal to ever think about reasonably discussing such matters from the business/industry side, is often very frustrating. The way the current hobby/industry operates, you have to look at it from different viewpoints/aspects, and with a somewhat open mind. Sadly, finding people in the hobby willing and able to be open minded and discuss and look at such things from all sides isn't always that easy to do.

And speaking of moves and such by Fanatics, can't remember where but, I thought I had recently read/heard somewhere that in conjunction with MLB, the teams in future years were going to start having their rookies wear some kind of MLB Debut patch on their uniforms the first few games or so they appear in. My understanding is those patches will then be removed after those first few games, and then get turned over to Topps for inclusion on designated rookie cards for those same players. Shades of the Logoman card successes NBA player cards have seen in recent years. How many of you think Topps would have been able to so easily set up and do something like that, before they were acquired and now owned by Fanatics? Being partly owned by MLB and the MLB Players Association can sure make doing such things happen that likely would never have happened when Topps was independent and on their own. Just another instance/example of how times are changing. Wonder what is next that they'll come up with.

A couple of observations about Fanatics:

• They seem to have no limits on where they will insert themselves. If it involves sports and a profit can be made, they're in.
• I agree with BobC that a TPG might be the next company in their crosshairs. I'll posit that it will be FCG - a new entry into grading, but one that seems to be higher on the technology ladder than most of the others.
• Fanatics is just getting started and I believe they will squeeze every last bit of 'hobby' out of the sportscard market. If you were disillusioned with the new card market now, you ain't seen nothing yet.

We sure are a long way from Topps printing cards and kids buying packs in stores. And maybe not for the better.

LOL, he said "ongoing"

They already own CSG. Or rather the majority stakeholder of Fanatics owns CSG.

Not familiar with FCG, and know literally nothing about them. Seems Fanatics and their owners tend to go for well-established, long-term/time companies to acquire, at least so far. That is why it is an interesting topic to discuss, and will be fun to see where they are going and what they may do next. Despite any possible technological advantages this FCG company may have, I'm guessing the Fanatics people may be more interested in some significant market share and hobby acceptance in a TPG they my look to acquire, for now.

Good points/questions. Like you, I'm curious as to what else may be done in the future to change the sports card/collectibles market going forward.

Just saw this in this thread and I am jumping to part two already. I can't wait for what's next in this acquisition and when it hits the fan. Nothing against Fanatics.

Yes, there were some "articles" (really just dressed up press releases) about this at the end of March. Each player's patch, or part(s) of it, will be used for 1/1s in a yet-to-be-named set later this year or next year. But the larger context was left unsaid and undiscussed. If Topps/Fanatics will be releasing a 1/1 of every player who debuts, what else will they be doing for the same players? It hardly seems likely that the entire effort will go to issuing 300 1/1 cards. Presumably each debut player will get cards that are produced in sufficient volume so that more than one person can buy in ...

Exactly right. And this is probably just a start for them. Like I mentioned earlier, people are going crazy for those NBA Logoman cards. These MLB Debut patches are sort of the same thing, but specifically for rookies. Can already imagine people clamoring for these whenever they do finally come out. And like you, am interested in what else they'll come up with now that the league and the players are basically in on making money off these cards also. I can see Fanatics/Topps churning out team specific items/sets, maybe special cards/items for players/teams that reach certain thresholds or accomplishments, and who knows what else. Will be interesting to see what else they come up with, and how well it takes off and how the hobby community sees and reacts to whatever they do.

I wonder if pwcc (or whatever their new name is) will be allowed back on eBay. Stranger things have happened.

Some good points, but I don't see them buying a grading company or a breaker as a move that would be seen as anything but a huge conflict.

Owning a manufacturer and a breaker? No, no way they'd feed the handful of "special" cards to the breaker....

Same for having a manufacturer, auction and grader. How could anyone take those grades seriously if it was the same owner?

Fanatics is becoming a monopoly in the industry. You can decide yourself whether its good or bad.

They got their cards.
They got their Vault.
They got their auction site.
They need there grading company.

I dont see them "buying" any breakers, breakers are a subcategory of this hobby in my opinion.

As long as they dont buy net 54 ill be happy😎😎

54 Fanatics sounds like LIV golf to me.:eek:

They already have their grading company, Michael Rubin, owner of Fanatics is a major investor in CSG. This will not end well for the "hobby" collector.

+1 Exhibitman #8, and

+1 BobC #26.


I lament the demise of Topps. Tradition can be wonderful; you can't buy tradition... Topps had Tradition, and that's now gone.

The athletes and sham graders will be better off for this Fanatics transition; ball card collectors, ball fans, and the hobby will not be.

Like everything else, the greed will ruin it, and placate to the "new investors" who will subsequently have substantial losses and leave.

Mentally playing the first track of Fiddler on the Roof. I guess people are always nostalgic for the good old days, but I neither like nor understand the massive business this has become.

Based on the article above, it looks like PWCC may have been in trouble financially. Reading between the lines, it looks like PWCC borrowed a bunch of money to lend on cards, the interest rate on that loan went way up while the value of the cards they lent on plummeted. PWCC takes back a ton of cards. PWCC cannot service it’s debt bc the lender does not want to get paid in cards. Now the entire company is at risk bc the assets are pledged as collateral; and perhaps the owners have personal liability too. Fanatics comes in and effectively assumes the position of the lender- they pay off the lender and take all of PWCC’s assets. I am not sure the owners got paid anything- it depends on how desperate they were; maybe they kept a slice of ownership.

Bottom line, I am guessing Fanatics had all the leverage in this deal, meaning they not only got a new platform/business, but they probably got a pretty good deal to boot

Again, I know nothing about this deal other than what is in the article and my (likely poor) intuition

Nice summation of a good possibility.

Well said Ryan and completely agree

Big Money Is Not Stupid.
 

.. Some of us graybeard observers of baseball cards and big money are pretty sure that there were a lot of I's dotted and a lot of T's crossed and a lot of questions asked and answered before this thing occurred . Just call it a hunch.

..Watch that space. And here's some cards , just for the joy that's in it :



..http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/204295...OSLINS_NEW.JPG

I would certainly hope that during their due diligence Fantastics made a thorough audit of the Vault to make sure all was in order, no cards missing, rightful owners, etc. Ryan makes a great point that if PWCC is in a financial jam who knows where they are getting money to service their debt outside of their weekly auctions, which have had lesser quality material than in the past.

And I would think that Fantastics made it part of the sale agreement for a PWCC reduced headcount.

I wonder what size yacht Brent and Betsy are going to buy? Gotta be bigger than some of those Russian oligarchs

This is the thing that caught my eye also.

Agree I did it Ryan

Makes a lot of sense Ryan, and also may point to an obvious technique/tactic used in business to take advantage of situations. Fanatics ownership/management appear to be quite savvy and up to the task from a business standpoint. After the move was made to strip Topps of their future player licensing agreements to be able to print cards of MLB players a little while back, the IPO Topps was in the process of completing was crushed, and soon after Fanatics swooped in and bought them for what would seem to be a huge discount. Whether the timing of the move by Fanatics to take over those future licensing rights was calculated and intentional, we'll probably never know for certain. But I wouldn't put it past Fanatics to have made that announcement, stripping Topps of future MLB licensing rights when they did on the eve of Topps' IPO, as a way to inflict the most noticeable and public damage to Topps' name and brand, and most significantly, its value. The timing of all those factors seems almost too good for Fanatics ultimate benefit to be simply coincidental.

This PWCC acquisition looks to be maybe a little more of an opportunistic move by Fanatics, rather than one they may have helped create. But again, shows their apparent ability, and desire, to take full advantage of the potential distress of other companies in the hobby industry, and possibly be able to grab them at greatly discounted prices.

As for Fanatics possibly going after a TPG next, I did not know about the relationship of Michael Rubin being a major owner/investor in Fanatics and also in CSG. Thanks for pointing that out Casey. with that kind of mutual ownership/rapport between Fanatics and CSG already existing. can easily see some kind of working arrangement/partnership, so to speak, being set up to mutually benefit the two companies. Sort of like the already existing partnership between CSG and Ebay regarding Ebay's Authenticity Program, and the services provided by CSG for it. Or even the existing partnership that CSG already had with PWCC prior to this acquisition of PWCC by Fanatics. In nothing else, this likely strengthens that pre-existing partnership between CSG and PWCC. And I wouldn't put it past Michael Rubin's involvement with CSG as a possible source of info that Fanatics used that allowed them to better negotiate and step in to acquire PWCC as well. After the fact, when more and more coincidences seem to start turning up, it becomes more likely those weren't all just random coincidences to begin with. LOL

So maybe Fanatics doesn't go after a TPG after all. Seems they don't necessarily need to in order to have a special working relationship with one that they can use to their mutual advantage. And as others have opined, not so sure that Fanatics would need to acquire a Breaker, as they already have their distribution system/network in place. And this acquisition of PWCC just further expanded their own marketing platform as well. The trick for Fanatics and their owners/investors will be to somehow supplant/replace the current Breaker distribution/sales system/network in place for the sale/distribution of sports cards so they can take those profits the Breakers have been realizing for more than a decade now, and put those in their own pockets instead going forward. And it may not be that difficult. Just like Fanatics saw to Topps being cut off from the future licensing to provide images of MLB players/teams, what is to stop Fanatics/Topps from figuring out ways to circumvent and not have to sell to Breakers? Breakers are really nothing more than retailers, and are totally dependent on being able to buy and acquire products they "Break" from wholesalers/manufacturers. I don't believe there are any laws that would force a company like Topps to have to sell their product through Breakers. Quite a few businesses these days directly market to the public, especially with the added ease and pervasiveness of the internet and online marketing and retailing. And Breakers would still be able to acquire products from other card manufacturers, like Panini, so trying to play the illegal monopoly card likely wouldn't work in their favor either. There can be many different ways for Fanatics/Topps to work things going forward. Hopefully what they choose to maximize their profits won't boomerang and work against the hobby itself, sort of how the junk wax era turned out for everyone, and turned many off to the hobby. But look how the hobby survived and came back anyway. These corporate entities may need to learn to temper their profit aspirations and goals at times, so as to not jeopardize the hobby itself, and the desire and passion of collectors/investors who are the sole reason for those profits to begin with. Sort of like the old adage, "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face!"

Will be very interesting to see and follow where this all goes.

Don't disagree at all Steve, but the TPGs have already been rife with huge biases and conflicts from their virtual start. Look at all the people who have owned/controlled these TPGs over the years, and also been involved in the hobby as collectors themselves to some extent. Want to make a bet on which TPG they would submit their cards to be graded to? LOL Or what about TPG contingent grading fees based on cards values? In supposedly providing a completely unbiased and equal service to ALL submitters, it should take approximately the exact same amount of time and efforts to grade and slab a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle card as it does for say a common '52 Topps card from the low series. So why the huge difference in grading fees? This is an absolutely inexcusable, direct bias and conflict of interest on the part of the TPGs, yet the hobby community forgives and allows it to happen anyway.

So, before you go saying these acquisitions of related hobby companies would make for unacceptable conflicts of interest, the hobby community for decades now has already shown they don't really care about such conflicts of interest. At least not as long as they can still get the "stuff" they want. Again, another old adage at work, "Stuff trumps everything!?"

Was it a Topps IPO? I thought they were selling to someone else. Either way the point remains the same. The Fanatics announcement torpedoed Topps' plans.

Wow...what you said led me to a stark realization. The way tobacco cards became a relic of an antiquated, bygone era, Topps cards, too, have now achieved that same obsolescent status. It's over. All that's left for us gum-chewing, card-collecting, perpetual adolescents are the memories of summer days at the corner store, begging our moms to let us rip open one more pack. :(

Don't disagree. They are more or less looking to take over a substantial portion of the industry and put more of the profits others are making off cards into their own pockets. However, a monopoly is usually considered more applicable in cases where you have control of a horizontal market, such as when the American Tobacco Company (ATC) owned virtually every big/major cigarette or tobacco brand/seller there was. What Fanatics, and the major U.S. sports leagues and players associations that are invested in them, is doing is what is known as a creating more a vertical market. This is where you acquire different businesses/companies involved in all the aspects of a business from the creation/manufacture of a product, all the way through its sale/final distribution to the public. This way you do away with having to deal with "middle men", wholesalers, retailers, and the like, and can potentially pocket at least some of the profit those others used to make off selling/distributing your products. It doesn't necessarily create a monopoly, as there are still (and will be) other card manufacturers, wholesalers, dealers, Breakers, TPGs, and so on. It does potentially provide some advantages to the business that can set up such a complete vertical marketing enterprise though, by way of allowing more flexibility, control, quicker decision making, cross-utilization of duplicated work or functions, taking advantage of economies of scale, better overall planning and projections, and so on.

And also keep in mind when mentioning a potential "monopoly" situation that MLB has the somewhat unique position/status of being exempted from the applicability of the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the same law that originally took down the ATC in 1911, via a SCOTUS decision back in 1922. This decision came about as a result of the lawsuit filed by the Federal League against MLB back in 1914, seeking to break MLB's stranglehold on the professional baseball market in the U.S. (And also why I've always felt MLB may have eventually made Kennesaw Mountain Landis its first Commissioner, as a sort bribe/payoff for his efforts in initially squelching this lawsuit as a federal judge himself, and maybe "assisting" through his federal court connections to the eventual favorable ruling by the SCOTUS.) So even if Fanatics, which is partly owned by MLB, were to end up in a more "monopolistic" situation, not sure how this exemption and MLB's ownership would ultimately impact anyone's ability to attack that business situation.

And as an FYI, ever since the exemption was passed just over 100 years ago, occasionally over the years different members of Congress have tried to present legislation to have the exemption removed, but all to no success, so far. The most recent unsuccessful attempt I'm aware of was just a couple of years ago as a matter of fact.

https://www.si.com/mlb/2021/04/14/ml...duced-congress

So, I don't think a potential monopoly issue is anything that Fanatics/Topps/MLB is worried about as being anywhere near the top of their current list of concerns.

This was on the ESPN article. Do you believe sportscards can balloon 10x in ten years? Honestly, where is that level of demand coming from?

"In 2021, the global sports memorabilia market, including trading cards, was valued at just over $26 billion; by 2032, it's expected to eclipse $220 billion. No company has a bigger footprint in that space, or stands to in the coming years, than Fanatics -- valued at $31 billion as recently as December, with a projected revenue of $8 billion in 2023."

https://www.espn.in/espn/story/_/id/...cc-marketplace

My mistake Scott, I misrepresented the deal as an IPO. I had heard that term used in regards to this Topps deal in the past from somewhere, and it sticks in my head. Sorry. LOL

Topps was going to do a merger with Mudrick Capital, which was already a publicly traded company, that would instantly make Topps considered a publicly traded company as well. The reported value assigned to Topps in the merger was something like a value of $10.87 per share of Topps stock, which I believe gave them a supposed market value of somewhere right around $1.3Billion. IIRC, the Fanatics purchase was for about half that amount, maybe $500K, a pretty serious cut in value just a few months after the Mudrick Capital merger fell through, and basically a perceived steal by Fanatics.

Definitely plausible and even likely. I wonder how many of the cards they held as collateral were the new/shiny ones and how many were vintage/pre war. The higher % of new/shiny, the more I'd think you're right, Ryan.

It will be interesting to see where this goes. My PWCC vault is now empty, that's for sure (not that there was ever much in it).

It was a proposed IPO. I can't remember if they were putting it in a SPAC or a more traditional IPO but I do remember thinking I'd buy some stock in Topps if it were public again.

Edited to link an article about the SPAC:

https://marketrealist.com/p/what-happened-to-topps-ipo/

I may have to admit myself to Smart Alecs' Anonymous because of the following lines:

"Betts wrote that buying PWCC “will give us the opportunity to further build and strengthen on the foundation that exists today and ultimately deliver a lot of value to our fans/collectors.”

The companies didn’t report terms of their deal.

PWCC’s 125 employees will remain with the business, according to Betts, who said “it’s business as usual” for the time being."

https://www.oregonlive.com/business/...-fanatics.html

Thank goodness he saved himself with the following:

"It is critical that we take the time to properly evaluate the business, best practices and compliance,” Betts wrote. “Long-term health is vital for our business and the ecosystem at large, which is why we’re going to thoughtfully integrate the PWCC platform into Fanatics Collectibles.”

In my opinion you should have done more evaluation before you purchased this gelding.

I wonder if “shill” and “trim” are defined terms.

We can only speculate…but as long as we’re speculating…

I didn’t write the docs on this one, but I’m guessing they probably stuck to broad concepts like fraud rather than trying to get too specific.

But maybe they used both!

If PWCC was in a debt squeeze I'd guess Fanatics got it for nothing more than the debt. As for which TPG it will buy, I say BGS. Beckett spins off a division and still has its information empire, and BGS has a good following among the shiny crapsters, which is what Fanatics is all about. SGC isn't shiny or crappy enough.

Plus, the percentage of the debt they would actually have to pay the debtors would be a fraction of what was actually owed. I’m sure who guaranteed it, along with what role the debtors play going forward with their new business model, has a lot to do with what the percentage of monies owed to them, would be paid. Basically a per case basis.

Knew something was happening a while back when you see post like this.

I think you hit it on the head..."troubled asset".

This was a get out plan if I have ever saw one. It's just my thoughts, but buying like this gives me pause on not expecting anything other than "chapter" followed by one of 3 different numbers in a press release concerning Fanatics in a little more than a decade.

I expect a TPG buy also and BGS would not be out of the picture. You can see that already in the history of Topps Vault. They have already sold Beckett slabbed 1/1s, proofs, blank backed and whatever else they could drum up in the past. The new release slabbed 1/1s and proofs would often get listed multiple times just to get a starting bid price. It's an idea that will fizzle quickly.

Watch it happen at some point. One company is already 2/3 of the way there. Why not complete the trifecta of conflict of interest hypocrisy? Makes me sick.

A while back, I believe around the time of the last National, Fanatics was saying and teasing about a future release or news that would impact or change a whole generation. I sure hope that this PWCC thing is not what they were talking about. I had mentioned in the past what I would like to be the generation changer. Maybe some of you remember it. It was a very long post that dealt with a multi year, multi sport set that had no checklist or card numbers, and print runs of all cards would be secret, and the packs would only be issued in one format, back to the old school of 15 cards per pack, 36 packs per box, with a one dollar per pack price, and no inserts, auto's, serial numbered cards, or parallel's. Just simple cards, and back to building a set based on the card description. Almost as if the original T206's were released today, nobody would know who was in the set over the three years, or the different poses and print runs. The research and the hunt for the cards is the most fun part. Once you complete a set, it's no fun anymore, and most people end up selling what they finished and many also take a loss. Make a set that takes a generation to build, and keep it priced low, so everyone, including the kids can get involved in the same set as the most advanced collectors are building. A set where collectors everywhere are sharing information on the cards they have, including their extra's that other collector's would need. This would also eliminate the "common" card, because nobody would really know what is common, without research. Stop everyone from bypassing 99 percent of the pack, just to get to the section where the inserts and auto's could be, and toss the rest, I hate that. That's a generation changer.

Third party grading has been riddled with conflicts of interest and favoritism for a long long time, even if it wasn't institutionally inherent. As I like to say, all submitters are equal, some are more equal than others.

I hate to sound like a merchant of doom, but if DC doesn't get their crap together and raise the debt ceiling by 6/1 then all bets are off. Current asset values, including our beloved cards, will naturally plummet.

"My PSA 8 '52 Topps Mantle has dropped 50% and where the hell is my social security check?"

That would be AWESOME. That is when the real money is made and I have been waiting for a big crash for a while.:)

And - I guess typical. Brentsy has comments turned off on that LinkedIn post.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Bob: While you might pooh-pooh the notion that it's meaningful, PSA does offer faster turnaround time at the higher grading price points. So the upcharge also delivers faster service. And for a TPG with turnaround measured in multiple months at the lower price points, faster service isn't nothing.

Of course, there's room to debate whether that faster service is really commensurate with the upcharge.

As an added bonus, many of the service level price points cover value ranges, so if you happen to be right on the cusp of bumping into the next highest range, then your grading costs could double, for example, simply by going from $24,999 to $25,001 in value. I guess the good news from my perspective is that I've yet to see PSA attempt to get cute with it by bumping me up if I'm just a little over the limit.

Nic,

Are you kidding me?

How long have you been a CPA now? You know as well as I that the ONLY thing that a CPA license allows you and I to do, that no one else can, is give our OPINION on a company's financial statements and how good they are. Not really much different than a TPG giving their OPINION on the condition of a card they grade. Both CPAs and TPGs are paid to give their honest, UNBIASED, and INDEPENDENT opinions on certain things they are looking at.

And as a CPA, you know we are supposed to be independent of the parties we give our opinions on, in both fact AND appearance. You also know as well as I do that as a CPA, if you go and charge any clients/customers a contingent fee, they will take our CPA license away as that is not allowed, as it may be deemed or viewed as a type of bias, conflict-of-interest, or lack of independence. (Fact AND appearance, remember!?!?!?)

TPGs charge contingent fees based on the value of a card they grade, correct? And I'm not talking about different service levels. In fact, I don't know where (or even how) you got the idea I was making any reference to service or service levels at all. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I submit a '52 Topps Mantle card to a TPG for grading in what turns out to be say a 5 grade, along with a low series, '52 Topps common card that also ends up grading a similar 5, and ask for the exact same service level for both cards, I'm guessing I'm going to pay a hell of a lot more money in grading fees for my '52 Mantle because they charge more for grading it simply because it has a higher value. And this is even though they are supposedly providing the exact same services, work and effort as they are putting forth to opine on, grade, and slab my '52 Topps common card as they are for my '52 Topps Mantle, right? That is a contingent grading fee.......PERIOD!!! They are charging based solely on the value of the card they are giving nothing more than their opinion on when they are grading it. And in the case of that '52 Mantle card, even a slight change in the grade given can significantly increase (or decrease) the value of that card dramatically, which can also then impact what the TPG can then charge me for grading and giving their opinion on it. So, tell me, and everyone here on the forum, what is there really to stop a TPG grader from maybe bumping up the grade they give a card so that it results in a higher value, that they can then charge you more for grading? And before you even dare to say that no TPG would ever do that, fact AND appearance, remember!!! That contingent fee charge by TPGs is such a blatant, unquestionable conflict-of-interest and bias that it is truly laughable that apparently almost no one in the hobby calls them out for it, and we just blindly continue to let them get away with it and accept all their potentially tainted opinions on virtually every graded card that exists!!!

And if the TPGs have no problem giving their supposedly honest and unbiased opinions when such blatant bias and conflicts-of interest so clearly exist in what they do, it can only make one wonder what other areas of conflict or bias might they also be ignoring. For another example, I seem to remember that David Hall was known to have one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) T206 collections ever assembled. And if memory also serves, wasn't he also a major owner/officer of Collector's Universe for quite a few years, the same corporation that also just happens to own PSA? I'll give you three guesses as to which TPG Hall likely had all his T206 cards graded by, and the first two guesses don't count.

As a fellow CPA, you know as well as I do that if you, or the firm you work for, audits a company to opine on its financial statements, you and the people working on the audit can't also own a piece of the company that is being audited. That is a totally unallowable, biased, conflict-of-interest, and could potentially result in the loss of one's CPA license once again. I know in all my years working in public accounting, at least once every year I had to go through the checklist and let whoever I was working with/for know what stock holdings/business interests I, or my close family members, owned or had, so they could make sure they weren't doing any audit work requiring the giving of an opinion on a business/firm for which there was a conflict-of-interest because I or someone else at the firm owned or was otherwise somehow directly associated with a company we were hired and paid to audit and opine on. Once again, a CPA/CPA firm has to have and maintain a totally independent and unbiased relationship with any company/client they provide their audit/opinion servicers for, in both fact AND appearance. So, what does that say about people like David Hall, Nat Turner, James Beckett, or David Forman, if they ever went and had cards they, or family members, owned, and had them graded by the TPG companies they owned/operated at the same time?

This is what I'm talking about. Not faster services or different service levels.

And your last comment about you personally not seeing PSA ever getting "cute" with you and their valuation/grading process, potentially resulting in you being charged a higher grading fee, doesn't mean the potential still doesn't exist. Independent and unbiased in fact AND appearance, remember that from your own profession. And since TPGs do nothing but give their opinions, similar to what CPAs do, I would hope that one day they start to be held to similar, honorable standards, like CPAs as well. The fact that the hobby community has let TPGs, and the rest of the major players in the hobby industry, get away with this continuing non-independent, biased, and completely filled with conflicts-of-interest crap for decades now, is truly sad, and in my opinion, almost downright criminal on so many levels.