Topps out---Fanatics in

[Grid]

Originally Posted by Kracer52

Disney is an awful example. They have a ton of competition for theme parks. Even within Orlando they have to compete with Universal. The reason they continually open new parks, new restaurants, and new attractions is for customer retainment and to compete with both Universal and various other vacation options. Fanatics won't have any of those problems within the card world.

Also, if Fanatics wanted an easy takeover of Topps, it would have been easier and likely cheaper to wait until after the merger to dump this news. With Topps staying private, it cuts down on a lot of methods to take over a company. Especially if Topps doesn't actually want to sell.

Im also not sure why you're being so adversarial and combative in this thread. Its been a fairly conversational thread without animus until this page.

Lastly, as far as Majestic goes, Under Armor ended up getting cut from that deal, and Majestic now uses their plant to manufacture the Nike labeled stuff for MLB. That was absolutely a vertical integration deal.

I'll reply in sections, as you have a lot going on here.

I used Disney to show, that even the biggest players in that space, still need to give people reasons to come back. The 2 Disneyland Parks bring in 30MIL people a year. Knottsberry Farm near by, 4MIL. In Orlando, the Disney Parks see 60MIL people a year. Triple that of the 2 Universal parks do.

By your own admission, you agree that Disney reinvesting in its parks helps with customer retainment, which was exactly why I said Fanatics cant just sell cards, because they make cards. They still need to give us a reason to buy. Think of it as Disney being Fanatics and Just Minors being the petting zoo down the street. There will still be competition for cards, but the biggest players still need to make sure they can get your money.

If the Topps merger and public sale were to happen, Fanatics would then have to buy stock on the open market. And that includes Topps, as a business, and not just their sports card division. I made that clear in my statement. Half of all Topps earnings comes from candy, gift cards and things outside of physical sports cards.

Its the whole "buy the cow to get the milk" scenario. When all Fanatics wants is the milk, hence, no need to buy the cow. Also, if Topps went public, outside of a hostile takeover, Fanatics would have to deal with a board of controlling shareholders that hold stock. And it is easier to get a handful of people to agree to a deal, then possible hundreds. Make no mistake, the timing of this announcement was done prior to the IPO for a good reason.

Not trying to be adversarial. But I was defending my statements to a handful of trolls. I know better, and that is why I gave up even trying to make sense with certain people.

Lastly, for sure the Majestic takeover was a vertical move. But, one that most likely would not have happened, had Fanatics not wrestled the MLB away from them months earlier.

That deal, among all the other buyouts that Fanatics had of their one time partners, was just too good of a parallel to not point out when it comes to cards. Seize the exclusive rights to something, limit the current making from running operations, business as usual, and come in buy them out once you made them weak.

[Archangel1775]

Originally Posted by Handsome Wes

Question: how does the MLBPA exclusivity deal affect players who have lifetime agreements with Topps to be the sole provider of their cards (e.g., Mike Trout).

Since Panini owns the MLBPA contract, does that supersede Trout’s with Topps?

I would imagine it's like basketball and LeBron James. Panini can make regular season cards of him because he's part of the NBPA but LeBron wont sign anything for them. If you look at this year, Panini still has Trout in their regular sets.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by Grid

I used Disney to show, that even the biggest players in that space, still need to give people reasons to come back. The 2 Disneyland Parks bring in 30MIL people a year. Knottsberry Farm near by, 4MIL. In Orlando, the Disney Parks see 60MIL people a year. Triple that of the 2 Universal parks do.

By your own admission, you agree that Disney reinvesting in its parks helps with customer retainment, which was exactly why I said Fanatics cant just sell cards, because they make cards. They still need to give us a reason to buy. Think of it as Disney being Fanatics and Just Minors being the petting zoo down the street. There will still be competition for cards, but the biggest players still need to make sure they can get your money.

I'm not sure where you got the idea the Fanatics would just produce the same stagnant product year after year, because nobody here has said that. That's not what anyone meant when it was being noted that Fanatics would be the only game in town. Topps, right now, is the only game in town that can produce licensed baseball cards, they continue to change things from year to year. What is meant is that in year 1, your options are buy Fanatics brand licensed cards or don't buy licensed cards.

And it's not like Disney and the petting zoo. This is Disney being the only place that can have a roller coaster. You seem to be missing the point that Fanatics will have both an exclusive MLB license and the exclusive MLBPA license. That means it's not going to be like now where Panini is still a small fry in the game with unlicensed baseball cards. And I can guarantee the MLBPA is telling their members to think twice before they go breaking away and signing individual deals. The fact that this contract gives the MLBPA skin in the Fanatics business as well is a key thing to prevent that. Not sure of any players that currently have individual card deals. There are players with individual exclusive auto (Think Mike Trout or LeBron James) deals, but not exclusive card deals

[Grid]

Originally Posted by whitmm

Is that because you can't actually argue against it? You want to think that normal marketing and brand recognition don't apply to the trading card industry.

You have still failed to tell me how Topps creating different sets is any different than a clothing company making different lines of t-shirts or Levi's making different jean lines, or Nike making different shoe lines.

I will repeat this, because it's true, Stadium Club being trademarked does not mean that Stadium Club makes cards. It means Topps trademarked that name so that no one else can use that name. And Topps applies that name to that annual design style.

You are also the only one that thinks Fanatics would potentially just make the Fanatics brand card and leave it at that. You're response to Kracer shows that. Nowhere did he say Fanatics wasn't going to continue change designs and be innovative. In fact, the idea of them needing to buy up the existing brand names goes directly against your "if they never change up their machines, people aren't going to come back." And honestly, casino slot machines for the most part stay the same, they just change the graphics. And people keep coming back. People gamble because they like to gamble, just like people like to collect sports cards because they like to collect sports cards. I can also show you people that go to the casino to play the same machines and get upset when the casino removes that machine. And you know what happens? They find a new machine to play and they get stuck on that one. But they don't stop going to the casino, they find a new thing there. And those are the Topps loyalists right now. You might lose some, turnover happens, but there will also be some that just find a new thing.

I know, I know better than to take the bait, slow day at work on Friday.

You want to think that marketing your website, that sells other peoples brands, is the same as creating dozens of brands, and creating marketing awareness for them is the same. It is just not true.

Fanatics would not be around, if not for them offering the portal to sell other established brands that other companies developed.

100% Fanatics has done a great job, through marketing, deals and acquisitions to sell and promote Fanatics itself. That is not to say they are great at creating the "brands" you quoted. Which were just the names of their collections given to apparel. I would have hoped you understood that, from my last post in this regard.

Like I pointed out, if they want to sell 10 different kinds of Atlanta Braves shirts, they do so by naming each style in its collection something different. Calling a series of shirts with stripes, the Stripe Collection. A series of shirts with mascots the Mascot Collection. Or their series of weathered looking shirts the Weathered Collection is simply not the same as Topps, who markets and sells their Stadium Club brand as its own stand alone product.

For the same reason you bought a striped Braves shirt from fanatics, because you like the Braves and you liked that design. You did not buy it, because you liked the Stripe Collection as a "brand".

You have people that ONLY collect Stadium Club cards, because that is the brand that interests them. When I collected football cards, my main PC was Certified Football. I didn't care for other things that Panini was putting out, I just collected the Certified brand each year, as that was my main interest. Even if I didn't like the design that year, I bought it, because I still collected Certified, and I didn't want a hole in my collection.

I'm more of a football guy, I just came over here because this was the liveliest of the Fanatics threads around. But in my world, a LOT of people collect certain set brands, almost exclusively. Be that Prizm, Contenders, National Treasures or what have you. Those sets, are what brings those collects back each year. They are not buying them, just because Panini put them out. They are buying them, because they like the content of those sets. They are loyal to those brands each year.

I really cannot make sense of the rest of your post. Literally, everything I have posted is to say that Fanatics would be buying someone else, or otherwise gaining someone else's IP's to make cards under. And not developing all new brands on their own, and starting a company from scratch.

None of that ties in to me stating, that a casino still needs to add new machines, and run promotions, in order to retain customers. Even if they are the only casino around, they still need to offer reasons for you to come back.

That was said, yes by me, in regards to why they would not just do their own thing and people will buy, because they are the only ones making licensed cards.

And if you think all slot machines are the same, with different graphics, I am going to assume you don't play slot machines at all.

What I have laid out, for what I know of the players and the industry, makes the most sense. At the very least, it makes the most sense to me. As literally everything I, or anyone else in here is posting, are just thoughts, assumptions and speculation. Looking at Fanatics track record, of how they have handled these things in the past, I'd like to think I am making a very educated guess here.

Enjoy the weekend Whit...

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by Grid

I know, I know better than to take the bait, slow day at work on Friday.

You want to think that marketing your website, that sells other peoples brands, is the same as creating dozens of brands, and creating marketing awareness for them is the same. It is just not true.

Fanatics would not be around, if not for them offering the portal to sell other established brands that other companies developed.

100% Fanatics has done a great job, through marketing, deals and acquisitions to sell and promote Fanatics itself. That is not to say they are great at creating the "brands" you quoted. Which were just the names of their collections given to apparel. I would have hoped you understood that, from my last post in this regard.

Like I pointed out, if they want to sell 10 different kinds of Atlanta Braves shirts, they do so by naming each style in its collection something different. Calling a series of shirts with stripes, the Stripe Collection. A series of shirts with mascots the Mascot Collection. Or their series of weathered looking shirts the Weathered Collection is simply not the same as Topps, who markets and sells their Stadium Club brand as its own stand alone product.

For the same reason you bought a striped Braves shirt from fanatics, because you like the Braves and you liked that design. You did not buy it, because you liked the Stripe Collection as a "brand".

You have people that ONLY collect Stadium Club cards, because that is the brand that interests them. When I collected football cards, my main PC was Certified Football. I didn't care for other things that Panini was putting out, I just collected the Certified brand each year, as that was my main interest. Even if I didn't like the design that year, I bought it, because I still collected Certified, and I didn't want a hole in my collection.

I'm more of a football guy, I just came over here because this was the liveliest of the Fanatics threads around. But in my world, a LOT of people collect certain set brands, almost exclusively. Be that Prizm, Contenders, National Treasures or what have you. Those sets, are what brings those collects back each year. They are not buying them, just because Panini put them out. They are buying them, because they like the content of those sets. They are loyal to those brands each year.

I really cannot make sense of the rest of your post. Literally, everything I have posted is to say that Fanatics would be buying someone else, or otherwise gaining someone else's IP's to make cards under. And not developing all new brands on their own, and starting a company from scratch.

None of that ties in to me stating, that a casino still needs to add new machines, and run promotions, in order to retain customers. Even if they are the only casino around, they still need to offer reasons for you to come back.

That was said, yes by me, in regards to why they would not just do their own thing and people will buy, because they are the only ones making licensed cards.

And if you think all slot machines are the same, with different graphics, I am going to assume you don't play slot machines at all.

What I have laid out, for what I know of the players and the industry, makes the most sense. At the very least, it makes the most sense to me. As literally everything I, or anyone else in here is posting, are just thoughts, assumptions and speculation. Looking at Fanatics track record, of how they have handled these things in the past, I'd like to think I am making a very educated guess here.

Enjoy the weekend Whit...

You didn't start buying Certified because it was called Certified. You started buying it because of something about that card. I'm assuming you liked the way they looked, aka the design of the card. And I'll ask again, how is only buying Certified because that's the only style you like any different than only buying one t-shirt design because it's the only one you like, or only buying nacho cheese Doritos because that's the only flavor you like? And you buying sets the years you didn't like the design is all on you. That's your addiction. I personally don't buy items I don't like.

I'm not sure how this brand idea is so hard for you to understand, but I'll try again, because you're saying I'm wrong and basically describing the exact same thing I did. Topps wants to create 10 Mike Trout cards. So, they produce a card in the style of their base design. Then they create one in the style of a former design. Then they produce a version where it's a sketch style picture of him. Then they create a version where they create a colorful background behind his picture. And so on. Obviously clothing and cards are not perfect parallels, but at the most basic level, what Topps is doing and what a T-shirt company does is the exact same thing. At the end of the day, both are creating different versions of the same thing. Topps with cards, Fanatics with t-shirts.

Topps does not treat each set as a stand alone company. That's just not true. Because Stadium Club is not in competition with Topps Chrome. They are different options still under the same Topps umbrella. Topps is not a parent company to a bunch of subsidiary card companies.

You seem to have this mindset of because the end product is not the same, they must be completely separate and different from each other. You have to go back to the start to see they are the same. As with slot machines, yes, at the heart of things, all slot machines are the same. It's a program behind the scenes that's running calculations that decides if you win. The display on the screen is just to keep you entertained. The number of wheels might vary, the number of line combinations that pay might vary, the style of the bonus game might vary, but they all operate the same way. Bonus games with a different presentation are, at their base, pick some boxes, win some money. Whether it's matching 3 jewels or picking random cards. I've been to casinos, I see the same old guys playing the same 3 wheel basic slot machines every time. That's what they want, they don't need new things to bring them back.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by Grid

Not trying to be adversarial. But I was defending my statements to a handful of trolls. I know better, and that is why I gave up even trying to make sense with certain people.

I'd suggest you work on your communication skills then. Because you resort to insults and name calling pretty quick when someone doesn't agree with you. Not just on this thread, I've seen you do the same thing in multiple threads.

It also helps when you enter a dialog with a new person to not get defensive and not pull the old "I said that already" when a thread is 80+ pages long. I don't care what you said in a different conversation to someone else, I wasn't there.

[notoriousrmb]

Originally Posted by whitmm

You aren't buying Allen & Ginter just because of the name, you aren't buying Heritage just because of the name. You're buying it because of the logo on it and the player on it and because you like the design. Just like you aren't buying the "Win Stripe" collection just because it's the "Win Stripe" collection. You're buying that shirt because you like the team that's on it and because you like that style. You're not buying either one of them because of the intellectual property

Although I get what you are trying to say in general, I actually did start buying Allen & Ginter on name recognition from the original tobaccos card so I'd leave that one out of your examples.

Originally, it was successful strictly because of its name and direct link to the original cards. The other Topps releases - not as much.

EDIT: I'd put Gypsy Queen and T206 in the same boat.

[Saraste]

I read the first 20 pages or so of this thread and have randomly read some of it since. If this has been asked, then bear with me here: assuming nothing changes (BIG assumption), what will happen with cards of active players from 2023-25? Topps could make all retired players sets and Fanatics could makes cards like Panini does now. There would be no fully licensed cards of active players. How would the market respond to that?

Do I think this will happen? I think there is only a remote chance of this happening. However, the possibility of it is not zero. Thoughts on this scenario, unlikely as it is?

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by notoriousrmb

Although I get what you are trying to say in general, I actually did start buying Allen & Ginter on name recognition from the original tobaccos card so I'd leave that one out of your examples.

Originally, it was successful strictly because of its name and direct link to the original cards. The other Topps releases - not as much.

EDIT: I'd put Gypsy Queen and T206 in the same boat.

Yes, there are a few that are buying products because of that name. There are exceptions in most examples. Personally, A&G isn't a true baseball brand or set. It's a trading card set that includes baseball, so maybe that was a poor example.

Was the Allen & Ginter name the only reason you started buying it? And do you consider it the same as the original A&G cards?

[notoriousrmb]

Originally Posted by whitmm

Yes, there are a few that are buying products because of that name. There are exceptions in most examples. Personally, A&G isn't a true baseball brand or set. It's a trading card set that includes baseball, so maybe that was a poor example.

Was the Allen & Ginter name the only reason you started buying it? And do you consider it the same as the original A&G cards?

Yes, when it first came out in what, 2006 I believe? It was the name alone that pulled me in as I had been collecting vintage cards from that era for quite some time. Absolutely the name is what caught my eye on that particular set.

The original iterations of Topps A&G were a lot more like the original set than what we see today. The tobacco sized cards, the non-baseball subjects, the flowery artsy design of the cards...it was all a close tribute to the original.

These days they haven't followed that original design as closely, but I can say without a doubt it was the name of that set, as well as the T206, Mayo and Gypsy Queen that pulled me in.

Now if I see a Fanatics Old Judge or YumYum set, I'll be similarly drawn in there as well.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by notoriousrmb

Yes, when it first came out in what, 2006 I believe? It was the name alone that pulled me in as I had been collecting vintage cards from that era for quite some time. Absolutely the name is what caught my eye on that particular set.

The original iterations of Topps A&G were a lot more like the original set than what we see today. The tobacco sized cards, the non-baseball subjects, the flowery artsy design of the cards...it was all a close tribute to the original.

These days they haven't followed that original design as closely, but I can say without a doubt it was the name of that set, as well as the T206, Mayo and Gypsy Queen that pulled me in.

Now if I see a Fanatics Old Judge or YumYum set, I'll be similarly drawn in there as well.

I guess my point was that it wasn't just the name, but also that they fit the same style, that it was a combination of things. If it was A&G but it had the Topps Fire design, I'm guessing you wouldn't have been as sold on buying it? The whole point that was it's not just the name alone that is getting people to buy it, but that the name is only one factor that went into making the decision.

And we all know that vintage collectors and modern collectors are two different groups, speaking in general terms (I'll put that in there before anyone pulls the "well I collect both, so you're wrong" bs).

[RiceBondsMT2Yng]

Originally Posted by Saraste

I read the first 20 pages or so of this thread and have randomly read some of it since. If this has been asked, then bear with me here: assuming nothing changes (BIG assumption), what will happen with cards of active players from 2023-25? Topps could make all retired players sets and Fanatics could makes cards like Panini does now. There would be no fully licensed cards of active players. How would the market respond to that?

Do I think this will happen? I think there is only a remote chance of this happening. However, the possibility of it is not zero. Thoughts on this scenario, unlikely as it is?

That’s an interesting question that was a flicker of a thought in my mind that you flushed out fully. I can imagine a scenario where Fanatics waits out that dark period and lets the new-product market founder for two years with a whole bunch of unlicensed garbage, only to rescue baseball cards in full in 2026. And then have four years of rookie cards to chase in one set, a la 1986 Fleer Basketball. Just one possible parallel universe scenario. I think more likely, they will buy out whomever they have to to get a clean product out when they launch with a healthy runway from a healthy hobby.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by RiceBondsMT2Yng

That’s an interesting question that was a flicker of a thought in my mind that you flushed out fully. I can imagine a scenario where Fanatics waits out that dark period and lets the new-product market founder for two years with a whole bunch of unlicensed garbage, only to rescue baseball cards in full in 2026. And then have four years of rookie cards to chase in one set, a la 1986 Fleer Basketball. Just one possible parallel universe scenario. I think more likely, they will buy out whomever they have to get a clean product out when they launch with a healthy runway from a healthy hobby.

Not sure there would be a bunch of unlicensed garbage, remember the exclusive MLBPA license stats in 2023, then they get the MLB license. Panini wouldn't have the ability to produce anything in the baseball card realm.

I could see Fanatics, if they choose to go own their own, using those years to start testing out some set designs. Throw some ideas out there, see what sticks, and then hit the ground running once they have both licenses.

[JRX]

Originally Posted by RiceBondsMT2Yng

That’s an interesting question that was a flicker of a thought in my mind that you flushed out fully. I can imagine a scenario where Fanatics waits out that dark period and lets the new-product market founder for two years with a whole bunch of unlicensed garbage, only to rescue baseball cards in full in 2026. And then have four years of rookie cards to chase in one set, a la 1986 Fleer Basketball. Just one possible parallel universe scenario. I think more likely, they will buy out whomever they have to to get a clean product out when they launch with a healthy runway from a healthy hobby.

Topps is the only company they could buy to get the mlb license. Which is why I think topps won't necessarily just give it to Fanatics for cheap. Being able to produce licensed cards for 3 years is worth a lot.

[Kracer52]

Originally Posted by Grid

I'll reply in sections, as you have a lot going on here.

I used Disney to show, that even the biggest players in that space, still need to give people reasons to come back. The 2 Disneyland Parks bring in 30MIL people a year. Knottsberry Farm near by, 4MIL. In Orlando, the Disney Parks see 60MIL people a year. Triple that of the 2 Universal parks do.

By your own admission, you agree that Disney reinvesting in its parks helps with customer retainment, which was exactly why I said Fanatics cant just sell cards, because they make cards. They still need to give us a reason to buy. Think of it as Disney being Fanatics and Just Minors being the petting zoo down the street. There will still be competition for cards, but the biggest players still need to make sure they can get your money.

If the Topps merger and public sale were to happen, Fanatics would then have to buy stock on the open market. And that includes Topps, as a business, and not just their sports card division. I made that clear in my statement. Half of all Topps earnings comes from candy, gift cards and things outside of physical sports cards.

I just think its too different of a scenario to be an apt comparison. Disney isn't just competing with other theme parks, they're competing with any destination vacation. Thats why they can't rest on their laurels and have a stagnant product. There are so many other options within the family vacation space that they have to be extremely competitive. Thats really not the case here. If you want MLB cards, you will be going to one place, thats it.

Fanatics would have to buy shares on the market or broker a deal with several shareholders to take control of Topps. However, that asking price for those shares would have been cratered if this news had waited until post-merger. With Topps remaining private, there is always the risk that they say no, and there are no real ways to complete a hostile takeover of a private company if they don't want to sell. Yes, as of last year, confectionary was 30% of Topps' business, and closer to 505 prior to that. I don't think thats a big hurdle though if Fanatics really wanted the brands and product lines. I don't think they do though. They didn't pay as much as they did and offer equity to turn around and use names that don't help build Fanatics as a brand.

[csmtampa]

At the end of the day nobody knows what Fanatics is going to do. They will most likely bring on a team of industry folks to help build and promote the trading card segment. These guys have literally cornered the market on licensed goods. They are an ecommerce powerhouse working with leagues and handling their merchandise sales. They are not stupid and they have all the money they need to make this happen. Hopefully they can work something out with Topps as I would hate to see Bowman go away. But I guess we'll see what happens.

[Stech36]

Originally Posted by JRX

Topps is the only company they could buy to get the mlb license. Which is why I think topps won't necessarily just give it to Fanatics for cheap. Being able to produce licensed cards for 3 years is worth a lot.

I’m still reading conflicting reports. Many are saying that the Topps deal includes a deal with the MLBPA.

At the very least we have logo’d bowman through 2025.

[jjcan]

Originally Posted by whitmm

I'd suggest you work on your communication skills then. Because you resort to insults and name calling pretty quick when someone doesn't agree with you. Not just on this thread, I've seen you do the same thing in multiple threads.

It also helps when you enter a dialog with a new person to not get defensive and not pull the old "I said that already" when a thread is 80+ pages long. I don't care what you said in a different conversation to someone else, I wasn't there.

I agree, his (Grid) Business comments and "history lessons" are fine. But when the tone and arrogance comes off in the post as someone being so obsessive on wanting to be so right makes it hard to intake.

You can say all you want of Fanatics history and future predicting, that is all what we are doing is speculating on what will happen with what Billion dollar companies will do in the next 5 years for trading cards.

I mean is it that hard for people to post and not want to come off as an "I am right mountian top, a*** from the "gecko".

[Stech36]

Originally Posted by whitmm

I guess my point was that it wasn't just the name, but also that they fit the same style, that it was a combination of things. If it was A&G but it had the Topps Fire design, I'm guessing you wouldn't have been as sold on buying it? The whole point that was it's not just the name alone that is getting people to buy it, but that the name is only one factor that went into making the decision.

And we all know that vintage collectors and modern collectors are two different groups, speaking in general terms (I'll put that in there before anyone pulls the "well I collect both, so you're wrong" bs).

I’d buy Bowman’s best regardless of the design… assuming it didn’t look completely insane.

I will say Heritage is 100% a brand that can not be replicated by anybody but Topps. And that’s Topps 3rd biggest release, behind flagship and standard bowman releases .

[OscarOne]

Originally Posted by Stech36

I’d buy Bowman’s best regardless of the design… assuming it didn’t look completely insane.

I will say Heritage is 100% a brand that can not be replicated by anybody but Topps. And that’s Topps 3rd biggest release, behind flagship and standard bowman releases .

I agree. But! Man...Upper Deck Retro is one of my favorire sets ever. The base cards...on card autographs...it was, to me, a near perfect blend of modern and vintage aesthetics. If someone wanted to, they could replace Heritage. It would be tough, but possible. I think.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by Stech36

I’d buy Bowman’s best regardless of the design… assuming it didn’t look completely insane.I will say Heritage is 100% a brand that can not be replicated by anybody but Topps. And that’s Topps 3rd biggest release, behind flagship and standard bowman releases .

This is the part I was getting at. Generally speaking, people aren't buying it solely for the name only. That's one factor of a few. It's the idea that you still have to design something the people like.

[FT35]

Originally Posted by whitmm

The whole point that was it's not just the name alone that is getting people to buy it, but that the name is only one factor that went into making the decision.

I think this is where you’re losing some. The other “factors” you’re referring to are a given for all sports cards that most buy. The checklist of other factors includes: trading card, made of cardboard, standard size, printed image on it, stats, available in packs/sets, sports image, fully licensed—yes, all this stuff “factors” into the purchase but everything here is a given and is present in most brands. We’re assuming all that to be true. But stack all the brands of all cards up next to each other and see why people buy what they do—it’s essentially “THE” name brand they connect with that causes them to buy or not to buy.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by FT35

I think this is where you’re losing some. The other “factors” you’re referring to are a given for all sports cards that most buy. The checklist of other factors includes: trading card, made of cardboard, standard size, printed image on it, stats, available in packs/sets, sports image, fully licensed—yes, all this stuff “factors” into the purchase but everything here is a given and is present in most brands. We’re assuming all that to be true. But stack all the brands of all cards up next to each other and see why people buy what they do—it’s essentially “THE” name brand they connect with that causes them to buy or not to buy.

If you go back and look, I originally said it in response to a comment about Fanatics needing to try and buy the Topps name and the Topps' brands because they need to keep the familiarity to be successful. The point I'm making is they still have to like the style of the card. It was a counterpoint to people just buying the name. The number of people that are saying "Man, I sure hate the way this card looks, but it's the name I recognize, so I'm buying it to add to my collection" is a very small number. When you look at why people originally start buying the brand they do, you find it's personal reasons of what they like about that brand is why they buy it, not the name. You make a checklist of the things you're looking for, and you buy the brand that checks the most boxes.

Should also point out the person that said Fanatics needs to buy one of the existing brands because they need to keep the history and familiarity also said they Fanatics (or any company really) can't just sit on the same old thing and they have to constantly be changing things to keep customers engaged. So, which is it? Do you have to keep the familiarity or do you have to constantly evolving?

Multiple people have jumped in and said they only buy one brand, like Allen & Ginter or Certified, or Bowman's Best. I never tried saying people don't do that. I've been saying there are reasons that they came to make that decision.

[imbluestreak23]

Originally Posted by CicadaMound

If they want to buy out another manufacturer

1. Topps can survive on candy sales
2. Panini-Europe can survive on soccer stickers
3. Upper Deck can survive on Michael Jordan's ego, but are vulnerable to an NHL deal

Panini-USA and Upper Deck are more vulnerable to a takeover than Topps from a financial perspective.

Topps will not be done with baseball cards.

I look forward to seeing OG Bowman Chrome MLB licensed rookie cards through 2025. Topps can even say F U and insert these cards into their sets, not needing to create insert sets (prospect inserts for the hobby purists). 2023 Topps Flagship could literally be MLB licensed RC cards of 2022 Draft picks or any prospect that doesn't have an MLB licensed card today, making it their first MLB licensed rookie card (screw you fanatics, your beholden to the MLBPA and their RC rules now).

Once 2026 hits, Topps can continue producing these products airbrushed style. I will continue buying. Bowman is home of the rookie card and that will not change for me.

[Stech36]

Originally Posted by whitmm

If you go back and look, I originally said it in response to a comment about Fanatics needing to try and buy the Topps name and the Topps' brands because they need to keep the familiarity to be successful. The point I'm making is they still have to like the style of the card. It was a counterpoint to people just buying the name. The number of people that are saying "Man, I sure hate the way this card looks, but it's the name I recognize, so I'm buying it to add to my collection" is a very small number. When you look at why people originally start buying the brand they do, you find it's personal reasons of what they like about that brand is why they buy it, not the name. You make a checklist of the things you're looking for, and you buy the brand that checks the most boxes.

Should also point out the person that said Fanatics needs to buy one of the existing brands because they need to keep the history and familiarity also said they Fanatics (or any company really) can't just sit on the same old thing and they have to constantly be changing things to keep customers engaged. So, which is it? Do you have to keep the familiarity or do you have to constantly evolving?

I think they will lose a lot more business than you think without Topps.

A lot of set collectors will leave, and that is a significant portion of baseball buyers.

Not that it will be catastrophic, but even if they lose 10% of collectors, that is not ideal.