tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post5677671299807683262..comments2023-12-11T03:37:10.895-08:00Comments on This Card Is Cool - My Life in Baseball Cards: Why Panini Deserves an MLB LicenseRyan Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12670458381967699663noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-59230522651838768512021-04-29T16:23:15.408-07:002021-04-29T16:23:15.408-07:00Panini is really trying to give Topps competition ...Panini is really trying to give Topps competition even without a license from MLB. They come out with multiple sets a year and the cards are really fancy. I've collected a few other non-MLB licensed cards (mostly from Onyx) and they seem to be small runs. Panini puts out hundreds of cards a year, all without a license. They could only get better with an MLB license. The Optik and Diamond Kings lines by Panini are two of my faves.Brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07936016964838872813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-87764015152370395002020-01-30T06:07:06.298-08:002020-01-30T06:07:06.298-08:00night owl: Topps screws a lot up too. Just ask Jus...night owl: Topps screws a lot up too. Just ask Justin Bieber. Er, I mean Shane Bieber. I think a lot of what Panini lacks in some of its images/designs is because they can't use logos. So I agree - Panini could make a better product with the logos.<br /><br />Bret Alan: Thank you for that info. I've heard about the gum/sticker/puzzle "compromise" before. I'm not an expert on monopoly laws, but from what I've read, aren't they more about unfair practices than just "this company can still survive without it"?<br /><br />JediJeff: I get the feeling that Panini doesn't want to concern themselves with statistics. I only have a few Panini cards in front of me, and every single one used the same photo on the back as it had on the front. That does seem lazy to me - if you're putting a photo on the back to take up space, it should be different. (BBM does that too, and it's really annoying.)<br /><br />GCA: I seem to recall a time when Topps and Upper Deck were both limited to a certain number of releases per year. Perhaps when Topps got its exclusive license they got all of UD's quota too, or that whole provision dropped away.<br /><br />Fuji: yes, and what I just said in the above paragraph!Ryan Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12670458381967699663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-27766998249531619082020-01-24T08:26:23.482-08:002020-01-24T08:26:23.482-08:00I'm 100% for giving Panini an MLB license. Up...I'm 100% for giving Panini an MLB license. Upper Deck too. And limit the number of products each company can release... so they'll invest their time and resources wisely and put out quality products for their customers.Fujihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00749100861086458307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-13465827326218955782020-01-24T07:33:48.282-08:002020-01-24T07:33:48.282-08:00There should be more than one company producing ea...There should be more than one company producing each sport. The total number of releases should remain the same (as you outline in the next post), but be equally divided among the licensed companines. This would weed out the chaff and make for more variety without the overwhelming volume that happened in the 90's.GCAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14713246271197550543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-42731484524320146452020-01-23T20:08:01.195-08:002020-01-23T20:08:01.195-08:00Panini can have a license when they figure out how...Panini can have a license when they figure out how to create a card back. Until then - no.JediJeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10261262040532716901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-28930343528355007362020-01-23T17:02:35.604-08:002020-01-23T17:02:35.604-08:00I can answer one of your points, which is why the ...I can answer one of your points, which is why the 1980 monopoly ruling doesn't apply anymore. <br /><br />The ruling was overturned on appeal just the following year. The appeals court found that there were other ways to compete with Topps, and that the earlier ruling was in error. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9862902462317484627&q=658+F.2d+139&hl=en&as_sdt=20006 Topps' exclusive rights were restored, and Topps was even able to successfully sue Fleer for some of the profits it made in 1981 under the 1980 ruling.<br /><br />What happened next, though, was that the MLBPA liked having the revenue from its direct deals with Fleer and Donruss, so they came up with a pretext: Fleer would sell baseball logo stickers, and Donruss would sell Hall of Famer jigsaw puzzles...and baseball cards would be a bonus. They were basically using the loophole set up to allow things like the Kellogg's and Hostess sets; Topps' exclusivity only applied to cards sold on their own, or with gum or other confectionery products. This is why for the rest of the 80s you will notice that non-Topps products always listed the baseball cards SECOND: "Logo Stickers and Baseball Cards" or something of that nature. It was probably a violation of Topps' rights, but Topps didn't want to alienate the players too much, so they reached a settlement, the terms of which I don't believe were ever disclosed. <br /><br />Of course today's Topps contracts don't have any such loophole (which is why there aren't food issues anymore unless Topps is involved!). If someone tried to challenge it in court, the fact that Panini stays in business without a license would be proof that Topps isn't violating the law, and in any event Topps would argue that they're competing against the licensed products from other sports and various other collectibles. Brett Alanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15909286892005353279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-20461214431629233792020-01-23T12:29:45.248-08:002020-01-23T12:29:45.248-08:00You're much kinder to Panini then I would be. ...You're much kinder to Panini then I would be. I think they screw up just about everything they touch when it comes to baseball.<br /><br />But giving them a license, would polish up some of those cards nicely, maybe even make a few of them collectible.night owlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11673973790245316059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-657985600764530650.post-8310512229652087362020-01-23T09:30:14.077-08:002020-01-23T09:30:14.077-08:00Can't disagree with any of this. Preach, brot...Can't disagree with any of this. Preach, brother!GCAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14713246271197550543noreply@blogger.com