Revival Brainstorming

[abothebear]

Barry, I think the Topps retro sets don't go far enough. Some of their sets have a portion of the appeal, where they succeed illustrates that there is a market, but their efforts are also illustrative for their failure - exposing the limits of modern mass printing as well as the distribution issues. The distribution is the same as all modern cards which resigns these sets to mere filler material for insert speculation purchasing like all the other modern cards.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by abothebear

but their efforts are also illustrative for their failure - exposing the limits of modern mass printing

I think that's the key. A Topps T206 has no more eye appeal than the best T206 reprint.

[barrysloate]

Yes, those Topps retro sets leave a lot to be desired. But how would you get the equipment to take your printing up to the next level? My favorite printing style was the chromolithography that was widely used in the 1880's, but I doubt there is any way to duplicate that today. Same with the 1910 style of printing. You would have to find something finer than the glossy mass produced designs used by Topps, even if it wasn't exactly the style of a century ago. Maybe we need a print expert to come on and explain what can be done with our current technology.

[abothebear]

This is me writing out of ignorance, but I wonder how a multi-pass, thicker ink, on a textured card stock (maybe like a linen postcard style stock) would look? I think it would be awesome to duplicate the old litho process, but if it is extremely cost prohibitive then maybe something like what I described would give it the same degree of eye-appeal if not exactly the same kind.

Here is an example from the 2007 Upper Deck Masterpieces set (I incorrectly referred to it as a Topps set above). I would make them smaller and still do something refining with the printing but I think it at least conveys the potential of alternate card stocks for adding texture and depth.

[ullmandds]

Sadly...I think the only way to create a beautiful...cost effective bb card today...would be to have it made in china...or india...where labor is so cheap.

[jp1216]

When I was 8 - I didn't collect cards for their future value. It was cheap & fun. Topps or whoever, needs to get back to 50 cent packs without all the autos, 1/1s, pre-war stuff etc. Let kids be kids and let them enjoy the basic, common cards. My best memories were picking up 7 packs a week of 1980 Topps for about $2. Trading with friends and building sets. Not looking for 1/1s and throwing the rest away. Most kids that enjoy collecting today, will enjoy collecting tomorrow.
Cost effective? Probably not....
Unfortunately in 20 years, Pokemon PSA 10s will be all the rage...

[steve B]

The technology is still around. There are places doing fine art prints from stones. So the process wouldn't be the problem.

What would be the problem is the licensing. The license for current players would be hard to get, and pretty expensive. Probably expensive enough that you'd be forced to overproduce somewhat, or have a very expensive set.

Steve B

[veloce]

I think cereal boxes are a natural fit. I know this has been tried in recent years, but mostly with small sets. The 200 card Post sets of the '60s appeal more to the right personality type to become serious collectors, in part because they would be more difficult to complete. I also think of breakfast as a perfect time to capture a kid's attention... you sit there for 10 minutes eating your cereal and admiring the cards.

Other than that, why not make them secondary to the gum again? Take a package of extra, and throw in a couple baseball cards. Kids will always love candy.

I wish MLB and the player's association would give Topps a cheap or free license to distribute kid friendly sets. No inserts, errors, short prints. It would probably be worth something to Topps and MLB in terms of promoting love of the sport and the hobby. Unfortunately, I don't think of MLB or card companies as thinking long term.

[barrysloate]

How many kids today, say under the age of 12, try to piece together complete Topps sets by opening packs? Does anybody do that anymore?

[abothebear]

Barry, I would doubt any kid would. It would cost a fortune, and you can go to Target and buy a factory set for $50. Or wait a year and get one cheaper from ebay. or you can buy base card lots of already opened packs for much cheaper. But I can't imagine anyone trying to do it the old fashion way.

The whole system discourages set collecting and thereby discourages any real demand for base cards. commons used to be have a minimal value because of set collecting. Not anymore. Any attempts at reintroducing the set collecting element to the hobby needs to begin with creating a demand for the common card. No facgtory sets. No inserts. Affordable access to the cards' entry point.

[BleedinBlue]

I think distribution is key. For most of us older collectors, the cards were an insert that came with something of value. Granted, the Topps gum of the 70's wasn't really "valuable" but you got something with the cards. I think part of the decline of the industry has been the transition of cards from being an "insert" in a product to becomming the product itself. In today's world you don't "collect" the cards when you buy a product, you buy the cards direct. There is no cross-over. Either you buy the cards because you want them or you don't buy the cards. But, to gain some traction you need to get the cards into the hands of people who don't want them. Once they see them then perhaps they will develop the interest.

In re-creating the "vintage" feel to this new venture, deciding what product to include the cards with will be important. As an example, what if cards were included with fast food meals. I don't want to encourage the consumption of more fast food but go with me on this. The card is something that is included as an incentive to encourage a purchase. But there are sufficient brands out there to re-create some of the magic that the T206 set offers. Imagine a product where the same cards are labeled with the logo of the distributing restaurants. A McDonalds backed set, A Burger King backed set, Wendy's, Taco Bell, Sonic, etc. Regional issues could be available such as Carl's Jr, Jack in the Box, White Castle, In N Out Burger. I think collectors would really go for this. Especially with the internet out there to help them pick up the more difficult brands for their sets. One problem though is most of these brands would not want to run a promotion like this for more than 4-6 weeks and would not want the product competing with other brands. Perhaps a Candy Bar manufacturer would be interested and would brand the different backs with the candy product it was distributed with. I hate the idea of using Fast Food restaurants and Candy Bars but I just don't see a Carrot, Celery and Apple backed set going anywhere. Perhaps Grocery Stores would be interested in handing out the cards with every $10 purchased. Somehow we need to get many millions of these cards out there and keep the distribution going for an extended period of time.

The look is important as well. There have been food issue sets in the past but the airbrushing away of the logos seriously harms the attractiveness of the product so you need an MLB license. I don't think that the image needs to be artwork either. A photo is probably more attractive to kids at this point anyway but adults will buy in either way so long as there is some sense of accomplishment in the pursuit.

[ullmandds]

I agree with Jon P!

[abothebear]

I agree with Jon P. too. That is kinda the point. I buy my son base card cast offs from insert hounds. I'll get the occasional "special" card for him if the price is right and it is a worthy player. The inserts and high pack prices have really narrowed the modern hobby in such a way that refined collectors (and kids' with budgets) have little to no interest in it.

Topps and others have tried various cheap sets but they don't have the staying power or the depth of engagement that the kind of set I am envisioning would have.

[abothebear]

Brian, I agree, distribution is the key. I like everything you outlined about he fast food scenario except the fast food part - for two reasons (just my amateur opinion), fast food is considered the bottom dweller of the food world, associating with the lowest common denominator of a particular group might have a negative marketing impact. Fast food used to be cooler than it is these days. But the biggest reason I don't like it is the price point and frequency of purchase. I think something more in the one to two dollar range, and something that could reasonably be purchased/consumed 5 days a week.

But, the fast food thing is almost perfect for the multi-back plus regional markets of the same master set aspect.