Topps out---Fanatics in

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by SearchPatrol

They could be similar if done right. The problem for Panini Donruss is that the MLB cards are unlicensed, and Donruss never had football and basketball cards made in regular set form.

You're right, they could be similar. But Fanatics making a Topps Chrome card is not the same thing as Topps making a Topps Chrome card. Based on reading the forums, I was under the assumption that people are buying Topps because of the company legacy. Fanatics printing cards with the same brand name is still a new company making cards, not a continuation of history.

[JRX]

Topps has been under different ownerships. I had no idea until recently that Eisner was in charge.

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by whitmm

They don't need to set up the manufacturing. The major companies already outsource the manufacturing. Fanatics could easily work out a deal with one of those companies. It's not like those machines are proprietary to Topps or Panini.

You touched on the big thing. The rookie card. And the RC logos come with the licenses, those don't belong to the card companies. When that top prospect makes his pro debut in 2026 and finally gets a rookie card, people are going to still buy them up.

Not exactly true if I'm reading the following website correctly. At a minimum, it looks like Topps Allen & Ginter Rip card, Finest, and Chrome technologies are patented by Topps.

https://sabrbaseballcards.blog/2019/07/30/patent-dive/

https://sabrbaseballcards.blog/2019/...opaque-whites/

So most likely, they could not just have the outsourced companies Topps uses, just use these technologies for Fanatics cards.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by fulltritty

Not exactly true if I'm reading the following website correctly. At a minimum, it looks like Topps Allen & Ginter Rip card, Finest, and Chrome technologies are patented by Topps.

https://sabrbaseballcards.blog/2019/07/30/patent-dive/

https://sabrbaseballcards.blog/2019/...opaque-whites/

So most likely, they could not just have the outsourced companies Topps uses, just use these technologies for Fanatics cards.

Sorry, I was a little vague there. I wasn't refering to the specific cards. I was talking about the machines that stick pieces of cardboard with pictures and words on them and then cuts them into 2×3 inch rectangles. Those are just settings on a cutting machine. Topps holds rights to certain styles and whatever their foil is. Panini also makes a rip card. But these companies contract with the printers to make cards to their exact standards. No reason Fanatics couldn't do the same thing with the same printing company

[beaverman3001]

Yea, I work in the print industry, all of these products are done by a few different print companies who will gladly take business from whoever asks.

[Chicosbailbonds]

Originally Posted by whitmm

You're right, they could be similar. But Fanatics making a Topps Chrome card is not the same thing as Topps making a Topps Chrome card. Based on reading the forums, I was under the assumption that people are buying Topps because of the company legacy. Fanatics printing cards with the same brand name is still a new company making cards, not a continuation of history.

As long as they print cards with the same licensing that Topps had for chrome, it would basically be a continuation of history IMO.

[Pacmeyer]

Originally Posted by Kracer52

There's no longer a way to make a public takeover of Topps, because the SPAC merger never happened. Mudrick Capital can now find another merger target, or dissolve and pay out to shareholders at NAV.

Fanatics can always make a private deal to purchase Topps, but they have much less options other than inundating them with cash.

I also don't think its out of the question that they set up their own manufacturing and do it all themselves. They'll have a virtual monopoly on all the major sports in the US. If you want a rookie card of any NFL/NBA/MLB player, you have one place to go. So, while brands are important, they're less important when you're the only store in town and you have a co-op with the players unions and the leagues. They also won't be beholden to current distribution and manufacturing contracts that the long-standing companies have. They can sell through their own e-commerce and brick and mortar (Lids, in-stadium stores, etc) and big box and cut out everyone else. They have almost no reason to continue lower margin wholesale distribution outside of big box retail.

Distribution is one of the most interesting aspects of this deal. It's the big unknown. Giving equity to MLB, something that Topps never conceived of, shows that Fanatics may be expanding to become a media company as well as manufacturer which could entirely change the landscape of how people buy cards.

That's where some really big bucks can be made... data mining the buying and streaming habits of sports fans and collectors. All Fanatics would have to do, in order to monetize all that consumer data, would be to tie access to the most desirable card products to participation in apps, plug-ins, social media, and loyalty programs.

[Dave34]

The whole "MLB and Fanatics are going to sell a lot of cards at games" theory is laughable.

In the past 20 years the only thing I and everybody I know have bought at games is alcohol.

Whoever is the "official beer of [insert league here]" better watch out for Fanatics Brew.

P.S. - don't tell the unions and owners about this. They might steal my idea...

[Kracer52]

Originally Posted by Mister2Bits

I'm not sure why you posted that as a gotcha, as we know all know the SPAC deal with Topps didn't happen. There are other ways to purchase the company. (edit: I see now that I said public offering - misstatement on my part)

Regardless, someone is going to need to manufacture baseball cards. Building an entirely new facility to manufacture that much stock doesn't just happen. If Fanatics tries to rebuild the wheel and simultaneously releases new brands for baseball, football and basketball in an entirely new facility, it will be a disaster. Why take on that risk and capital expenditure when there are experts already doing it who now find themselves without a once expected massive future revenue stream? Topps can't survive without the license and they know it.

It wasn't intended to be a "gotcha". I was just saying that with Topps private, that closes a few of the avenues that can be used in a takeover of a public company.

I also don't think that they will necessarily print and manufacture on their own, but they don't need existing trading card companies to do it either.

[Kracer52]

Originally Posted by Dave34

The whole "MLB and Fanatics are going to sell a lot of cards at games" theory is laughable.

In the past 20 years the only thing I and everybody I know have bought at games is alcohol.

Whoever is the "official beer of [insert league here]" better watch out for Fanatics Brew.

P.S. - don't tell the unions and owners about this. They might steal my idea...

I don't think anyone has implied that they will sell a ton of cards at games. Just that they aren't locked into current wholesale distribution channels. They can cut out a lot of middle men. They already have a large footprint. There are 1100 Lids stores alone. They also operate the e-commerce sites for the NBA/NHL/NFL/MLB/UFC/MLS/PGA/US Olympics. They have a ton of channels they can use to sell cards with much better margins than your local hobby store.

[Silent George]

Originally Posted by Chicosbailbonds

As long as they print cards with the same licensing that Topps had for chrome, it would basically be a continuation of history IMO.

I certainly get the logic either way, but really in a collectible world it's how people choose to see it.

For years we've collected Bowman without saying "well, it's not REALLY Bowman"

I want the continuity, so it it says topps on the front, It's going to satisfy me. It's not going to satisfy me to have some rip-off heritage set that hints at the original design. Has to be that design. Has to have the rights one way or another to actually copy the look, and I'd be satisfied.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by Silent George

I certainly get the logic either way, but really in a collectible world it's how people choose to see it.

For years we've collected Bowman without saying "well, it's not REALLY Bowman"

I want the continuity, so it it says topps on the front, It's going to satisfy me. It's not going to satisfy me to have some rip-off heritage set that hints at the original design. Has to be that design. Has to have the rights one way or another to actually copy the look, and I'd be satisfied.

That's fascinating. Because Topps bought Bowman in 1956 and sat on it for 33 years before resurrecting the name. Bought the company, not licensed the name. And they just bought the company instead of fighting them for exclusive contracts. But they actually are Bowman cards, because Topps bought the company. So if somehow Fanatics buys Topps, I'll buy into that reasoning.

But if it's just they purchase the right to use the name, it's not quite the same to me. Like when Queen made Adam Lambert their frontman, sure it's Queen, but not really, because it's not Freddie Mercury, or Gun N Roses without Slash, or how there's Bon Scott's AC/DC and there's Brian Johnson's AC/DC. Yeah, it's the same name, but it's not really the same thing. That's my thought on if Fanatics just gets the right to use the name.

That being said, if Fanatics produces a set in the Flagship style, whether it's Fanatics Topps Series 1 or it's just Fanatics base series 1, if it's in the proper flagship price range, I'm buying it and building a base set. Because that's what I'm into, I do it with Topps and Panini already, for sports and non-sports alike

[ThoseBackPages]

as someone that enjoys collecting TOPPS Flagship RCs, i dont know if i can bring myself to collect Fanatics Flagship RCs

not sure how many reading like NBA cards, but Panini tried to make a Panini FLagship product when they got into NBA cards in 2009. It sucked, and was a one and done release.

that is a fear i have with Fanatics tring to make their own brands

[dasiegel]

Originally Posted by ThoseBackPages

as someone that enjoys collecting TOPPS Flagship RCs, i dont know if i can bring myself to collect Fanatics Flagship RCs

not sure how many reading like NBA cards, but Panini tried to make a Panini FLagship product when they got into NBA cards in 2009. It sucked, and was a one and done release.

that is a fear i have with Fanatics tring to make their own brands

I hear ya, but NBA cards have also still exploded under Panini. Fanatics would have to find their "Prizm."

[unclebuggy]

Fanatics licensing the Topps brand would work just fine for me. Topps has been bad and getting worse, especially with quality control. This isn't a fine automobile. I won't worry for a second that the cards were not actually made by the same Topps guys issuing "relics" without relics, unsigned auto cards, 80 percent of flagship variant cards badly oc, obnoxious cards advertising their own other cards, saying "1/1 authentic autograph" on reprints, or selling cards of child rapist Felipe Vazquez on their website for 6 months after his arrest, etc.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[Zauron]

Originally Posted by dasiegel

I hear ya, but NBA cards have also still exploded under Panini. Fanatics would have to find their "Prizm."

It took what, 4-5 years before Prizm even really began to become popular?

I am very curious what Fanatics gameplan is here. I really think they have the capability of cutting out distributors though, and thus make the product more affordable.

Instead of nearly everything going to a distributor like in today's game, a good chunk could go through their own portal website with limitations based on your account with them. They could offer various loyalty programs that would distinguish the amount you could buy, and of course also offer resale businesses(ie Blowout) specific accounts that would allow a good chunk of bulk.

I feel this is how Panini and Topps really missed out on trying to build, because they missed out on a good chunk of profit. Instead of selling Topps Chrome to a distributor for $100, seeing that distributor sell the box for $250, they can sell all their product for $250 right away. The bulk buyers business accounts they can offer a discount, and sell for say $175/$200 depending on the quantity.

Of course, they have tons of their own stores they can put out cards in now as well. Maybe in 5 years we will have lines waiting to get into a Lids for the release of the new premier NFL/NBA cards lol.

I feel they have to have a plan on place though for releasing 20-30 products in a year in 5 years though, otherwise they wouldn't go through with this.

[jjcan]

I hope fanatics buys Topps next year. So they can be on top of things from the "gecko".

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by ThoseBackPages

as someone that enjoys collecting TOPPS Flagship RCs, i dont know if i can bring myself to collect Fanatics Flagship RCs

not sure how many reading like NBA cards, but Panini tried to make a Panini FLagship product when they got into NBA cards in 2009. It sucked, and was a one and done release.

that is a fear i have with Fanatics tring to make their own brands

That brought that set back for the 2012-13 season and ran it for a couple seasons before they replaced it with the Hoops set.

And if you're worried about a flagship design sucking because it's a new set, remember all of the pushback there was for the last few years of Topps flagship.

[FT35]

Originally Posted by ThoseBackPages

as someone that enjoys collecting TOPPS Flagship RCs, i dont know if i can bring myself to collect Fanatics Flagship RCs

not sure how many reading like NBA cards, but Panini tried to make a Panini FLagship product when they got into NBA cards in 2009. It sucked, and was a one and done release.

that is a fear i have with Fanatics tring to make their own brands

I agree. “Topps Flagship rookies” IS the collection. If someone tries to push a different brand—to the collector, it’s now become a matter of whether or not to start a new collection. Which…to a collector…is a big deal because it requires an interest and a commitment to see the new collection takes root.

It’s more than…”well it’s what we have so it’ll have to do.” “Fanatics rookies” are a different collection than “Topps Flagship rookies.” It would be the same if someone who is a basketball only collector tries to get talked in to collecting hockey. The interest, commitment, and large funds all need to be there to make it happen and for collecting hockey to take root—otherwise burnout will lead the collector away from the new hockey collection experiment and back to what they know and already appreciate…because what we know and already appreciate is what we ultimately collect!

You can’t commoditize a 70-year commitment to a particular brand and expect everyone to just seamlessly transition to “whatever they’re selling now” or “whatever is available.”

[Grid]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

This. The most similar analogy would be Topps buying Donruss, Leaf or Fleer after these companies stopped producing cards. Could Topps have bought them? Sure, probably. But there wasn’t a reason for them to. I suppose they could’ve hired some of their out of work staff to shore up operations.

Topps had no use for Donruss. Once Topps took over MLB. Donruss (DLP) was left to make unlicensed baseball cards, and both Topps and DLP could still make NFL cards. There was nothing in it for them to buy them out, outside of taking them out of the market.

Leaf was just a candy company that leased its logo and name to DLP. There was nothing for Topps to buy there. Panini gave up its license for the brand, and Brian Gray picked it up later.

Fleer was already bought out by Upper Deck. Topps would have had to buy it from them, or out bid UD for it when the IP came up for sale.

This deal is different than Topps buying up their competition. This deal is for a company with no brands at all, that would need to add brands to its stable before going live.

Topps didnt have to buy anyone, but Fanatics sure seems to have to.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by Zauron

It took what, 4-5 years before Prizm even really began to become popular?


I feel they have to have a plan on place though for releasing 20-30 products in a year in 5 years though, otherwise they wouldn't go through with this.

Panini didn't really have an American presence at the time, if I remember correctly. Looking at their history, the NBA announced Panini as the exclusive trading card company in January 2009 and Panini America was formed in March, and 2009-10 Panini basketball set came on in October. It was kind of a rushed product. Also don't remember quite how the hobby was doing then, but it certainly wasn't at the level it is now.

Fanatics is in a little different spot. They are already a large well-known name in America, and they have a couple years to get ready for their first release.

I do wonder what their first year requirements for sets will be. I can't imagine that the sports are going to let them drop much, if any, in comparison to how many are currently being produced.

[notoriousrmb]

Going to be funny to watch the reactions here when its found out that Topps isn't selling and Fanatics will be going on their own without the Topps name.

No one even knows if Fanatics will have a "flagship" series. What if their base set is packs you get only when buying a jersey? What if they have a bunch of multi-sport offerings?

I agree, there IS a lot of logic in the acquisition of existing brands, but let's prepare for the fact they go a completely different direction which is nothing like the current setup.

[BigRhino]

Originally Posted by whitmm

That brought that set back for the 2012-13 season and ran it for a couple seasons before they replaced it with the Hoops set.

And if you're worried about a flagship design sucking because it's a new set, remember all of the pushback there was for the last few years of Topps flagship.

Hoops didnt replace it, they were making hoops already and Panini basketball was a failure because it was like another hoops and the configuration of the boxes set it up to fail. I remember not purchasing it myself because there were way too many cards in each box to run a group break with.
Basically they didnt need panini bball as a flagship set b/c hoops already was their flagship set

[ForceChange77]

Anybody that thinks that Fanatics cutting out distributors is going to lower costs..good grief. Sure distributors play funny business with allocations, but Fanatics is going to cut out the middleman and keep the prices the same. I really wonder the logic in this, they are sure buying into industry at a high point, as everyone knows, these things go in circles. Not sure prices on sealed boxes is going to continue to stay high when the speculators realize they cant keep on winning with every release.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by FT35

I agree. “Topps Flagship rookies” IS the collection. If someone tries to push a different brand—to the collector, it’s now become a matter of whether or not to start a new collection. Which…to a collector…is a big deal because it requires an interest and a commitment to see the new collection takes root.

It’s more than…”well it’s what we have so it’ll have to do.” “Fanatics rookies” are a different collection than “Topps Flagship rookies.” It would be the same if someone who is a basketball only collector tries to get talked in to collecting hockey. The interest, commitment, and large funds all need to be there to make it happen and for collecting hockey to take root—otherwise burnout will lead the collector away from the new hockey collection experiment and back to what they know and already appreciate…because what we know and already appreciate is what we ultimately collect!

You can’t commoditize a 70-year commitment to a particular brand and expect everyone to just seamlessly transition to “whatever they’re selling now” or “whatever is available.”

I don't think this is that close to your getting a basketball collector to start collecting hockey analogy. This is like Tesla getting into the cellphone business, and oh, by the way, Apple and Samsung are no longer able to make cell phones. You're not trying to convince someone to switch what sport they collect, you telling them that the company that is producing the only licensed card for your sport is changing. I'm not going to try putting numbers to it, but I'd wager that the amount of baseball card collectors outweighs the number of Topps baseball card collectors.

What you're referring to is a Topps baseball collector, not a sports card collector. While there are plenty of people out there that only deal with Topps baseball products, there are tons that collect across multiple sports and multiple companies. As people who are prospecting or buying stacks of rookies as investments, the Topps name doesn't necessarily mean that much, it's the logos and licensing that plays into it. It's easy to associated Topps with "the card to have" because they've been the only licensed card for years now. But you look back to the heart of the junk wax era, and the most iconic cards and "the cards to have" are not dominated by Topps. 1989's most valuable cards were coming out of Upper Deck. 1990 has 3 or 4 companies in the top 10.