Topps to be replaced as the BB Card Manuracturer

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by Mark17

This is what will happen:

Some entrepreneur with $100,000 in capital will go to amateur state championship tournaments in various states, and put together a nice 500 card set of 20 or 30 top amateur teams. They'll pay the teams a very nominal amount, plus give them free cards. No additional licenses needed.

Then they'll print the cards on standard stock and package them in wax packs for retail sale at maybe 50 cents for 10 cards.

They'll make a fortune, and collectors, especially kids, will be able to have fun playing with cards again.

Mark, I can see something like this happening, but with college teams, and with all the major sports, not just baseball. I think this would take much more initial capital, say $25M or more, as the NCAA would demand a huge fee for an exclusive deal and college athletes can now be compensated.

[JustinD]

Topps has had the exclusive license since 2010 and there has not been one year without unlicensed logo competition. The Panini releases are always unlicensed and honestly the donruss diamond kings have consistently beat the Topps design in my mind.

They won’t have team logos but this is certainly not closing Topps doors, it won’t slow the release schedules at all.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Topps has had the exclusive license since 2010 and there has not been one year without unlicensed logo competition. The Panini releases are always unlicensed and honestly the donruss diamond kings have consistently beat the Topps design in my mind.

They won’t have team logos but this is certainly not closing Topps doors, it won’t slow the release schedules at all.

Without permission to use the players' pictures, what can they do on the Major League level without being sued? Even if they could produce a set, how ugly would it be with every player wearing a generic air brushed hat and uniform?

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Without permission to use the players' pictures, what can they do on the Major League level without being sued? Even if they could produce a set, how ugly would it be with every player wearing a generic air brushed hat and uniform?

I understand you are likely strictly a vintage collector but as was stated topps has had the exclusive license since 2010. For an example of how it can be done, just google any non-topps mlb release for the past 11 years. The mlb license is for logos not players.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I understand you are likely strictly a vintage collector but as was stated topps has had the exclusive license since 2010. For an example of how it can be done, just google any non-topps mlb release for the past 11 years. The mlb license is for logos not players.

Understood, but this deal also includes the Players' Association.

"That longevity was threatened Thursday, as The Action Network confirmed that Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players Association have given their exclusive licenses to Fanatics."

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Understood, but this deal also includes the Players' Association.

"That longevity was threatened Thursday, as The Action Network confirmed that Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players Association have given their exclusive licenses to Fanatics."

Apologies, I did not read the mlbpa note. It leaves me to wonder if they will issue multiple licenses for additional cash even as it says exclusive as they have no history of exclusive deals. If the players see additional cash not taken it could cause more problems than on the mlb side. I don’t see this working in a positive way to give exclusivity to a private company with zero production or distribution experience outside their own sites.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I don’t see this working in a positive way to give exclusivity to a private company with zero production or distribution experience outside their own sites.

If the deal involves huge, guaranteed, up-front cash, I could see it.

[Mungo Hungo]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Apologies, I did not read the mlbpa note. It leaves me to wonder if they will issue multiple licenses for additional cash even as it says exclusive as they have no history of exclusive deals. If the players see additional cash not taken it could cause more problems than on the mlb side. I don’t see this working in a positive way to give exclusivity to a private company with zero production or distribution experience outside their own sites.

Issuing multiple licenses seems very unlikely, since Fanatics, or whatever it is they're called, paid for an exclusive license. MLBPA would most certainly be in breach, and subject to substantial damages.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Apologies, I did not read the mlbpa note. It leaves me to wonder if they will issue multiple licenses for additional cash even as it says exclusive as they have no history of exclusive deals. If the players see additional cash not taken it could cause more problems than on the mlb side. I don’t see this working in a positive way to give exclusivity to a private company with zero production or distribution experience outside their own sites.

MLB and MLBPA have ownership in the new company. They gave themselves the exclusive license. The NFL and NFLPA have ownership, too. NBAPA does, too. So Panini can kiss their NFL license goodbye as well. The players from the NBA and NFL have already signed deals with the new company.

And these guys have 4 years to figure this stuff out. I expect distribution and production to be minor issues at best.

[ZenPop]

Okay... Little League teams, then.

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Mark, I can see something like this happening, but with college teams, and with all the major sports, not just baseball. I think this would take much more initial capital, say $25M or more, as the NCAA would demand a huge fee for an exclusive deal and college athletes can now be compensated.