Panini vs Fanatics suit

[Grizzly]

This should be interesting...

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.co...titrust-claim/

[rms13]

Doubtful. Panini is just trying to drag things out to spite Fanatics. I would personally love to go back to a world where multiple companies have licenses for cards but I don't see that happening.

[Ninotores]

Originally Posted by rms13

Doubtful. Panini is just trying to drag things out to spite Fanatics. I would personally love to go back to a world where multiple companies have licenses for cards but I don't see that happening.

Would be nice if they could both do football. I don't see it happening either though.

[Fenway55]

I think multiple companies with licenses is very much a possibility. Panini is basically suing Fanatics to prevent them from what they themselves have been doing for years now with the exclusivity.

But yeah, exclusivity is IMHO kinda an antitrust violation. So they have a good case.

[hche]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

Panini is basically suing Fanatics to prevent them from what they themselves have been doing for years now with the exclusivity.

So true. We had multiple companies in different sports until Panini got into the market.

[rms13]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

I think multiple companies with licenses is very much a possibility. Panini is basically suing Fanatics to prevent them from what they themselves have been doing for years now with the exclusivity.

But yeah, exclusivity is IMHO kinda an antitrust violation. So they have a good case.

Except for the fact that exclusive agreements are not covered under anti trust laws. And as you pointed out this is exactly what Panini is doing. I can't see how Panini can win when they were fine with the laws when they had exclusive licenses.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by rms13

Except for the fact that exclusive agreements are not covered under anti trust laws.

Of course they are.

Originally Posted by rms13

And as you pointed out this is exactly what Panini is doing. I can't see how Panini can win when they were fine with the laws when they had exclusive licenses.

Exclusive agreements are not automatically illegal but man, it sure looks like Fanatics is overplaying their hand here. They've gone above and beyond anything Panini ever did. They've grabbed exclusivity to all 3 U.S. team sports licenses, both the League and Players. They bought the printing company that makes Panini's product. They used unethical means to entice Panini employees to join them. They are mandating all sorts of rules for retailers (i.e. retailers may only stock Fanatics products if they want access). The Leagues, and the NFLPA, all have an equity stake in Fanatics.

I just finished reading the Judge's ruling on the MTD. While it is obviously not a final ruling, she is not sympathetic to Fanatics here, trust me.

[jacksonjj]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

Of course they are.

Exclusive agreements are not automatically illegal but man, it sure looks like Fanatics is overplaying their hand here. They've gone above and beyond anything Panini ever did. They've grabbed exclusivity to all 3 U.S. team sports licenses, both the League and Players. They bought the printing company that makes Panini's product. They used unethical means to entice Panini employees to join them. They are mandating all sorts of rules for retailers (i.e. retailers may only stock Fanatics products if they want access). The Leagues, and the NFLPA, all have an equity stake in Fanatics.

I just finished reading the Judge's ruling on the MTD. While it is obviously not a final ruling, she is not sympathetic to Fanatics here, trust me.

Sometimes judges just want to telegraph an unbiased or reverse-bias viewpoint because they know certain cases are more public than others. Then they'll change their initial opinion and rule the opposite way and no one can charge them of unfairness.

[Ninotores]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

Of course they are.

Exclusive agreements are not automatically illegal but man, it sure looks like Fanatics is overplaying their hand here. They've gone above and beyond anything Panini ever did. They've grabbed exclusivity to all 3 U.S. team sports licenses, both the League and Players. They bought the printing company that makes Panini's product. They used unethical means to entice Panini employees to join them. They are mandating all sorts of rules for retailers (i.e. retailers may only stock Fanatics products if they want access). The Leagues, and the NFLPA, all have an equity stake in Fanatics.

I just finished reading the Judge's ruling on the MTD. While it is obviously not a final ruling, she is not sympathetic to Fanatics here, trust me.

Sounds extremely monopolistic and unethical from Fanatics part. But I honestly am not well versed in this situation enough to comment with certainty on either side. But based on your post, wow.

[Fenway55]

You probably don't realize it, but you filed suit against Fanatics (and friends) this morning. Now that one court is heavily leaning towards calling Fanatics a monopoly, the argument is that we, as consumers, are also hurt by their monopolistic practices (which, of course, we are) and thus entitled to compensation (that part is more debatable).

I am not exactly holding my breath to get any money as part of a class action, but I sure would love to see a federal court rule the whole system illegal (which it kinda really is) and open up back to the way things used to be.

[boxbuster7]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

You probably don't realize it, but you filed suit against Fanatics (and friends) this morning. Now that one court is heavily leaning towards calling Fanatics a monopoly, the argument is that we, as consumers, are also hurt by their monopolistic practices (which, of course, we are) and thus entitled to compensation (that part is more debatable).

I am not exactly holding my breath to get any money as part of a class action, but I sure would love to see a federal court rule the whole system illegal (which it kinda really is) and open up back to the way things used to be.

What is the case?

People spent money on products?

you guys won't get anything

[nabzy28]

Can't Fanatics just turn around and point at every major sport and its players association as the ones who have deemed it so to only allow one trading card manufacturer? They caused this well over a decade ago.

Get UD back in everything. Give Leaf a license. Keep Topps and everything else. Early 2000's all over again, with way better products. Let's do it.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by boxbuster7

What is the case?

The case is that, as a monopoly, Fanatics has used their monopoly to illegally inflate prices.

Originally Posted by boxbuster7

People spent money on products?

Well, yes. In order to claim damages, you'd have to show that you spent money on the product in question.

Originally Posted by boxbuster7

you guys won't get anything

Yes, that's essentially what I said as well.

However, as noted above, it would have tremendous ramifications for this hobby if a court ruled that what Fanatics is doing is illegal.

And in order for a court to do that, someone has to bring a case. Well now we have 2 someones bringing cases; one as a competitor and one on behalf of the buying public.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by nabzy28

Can't Fanatics just turn around and point at every major sport and its players association as the ones who have deemed it so to only allow one trading card manufacturer? They caused this well over a decade ago.

Very tricky question because Fanatics has moved beyond being just a licensee of sports products. The Leagues, and their Players' Unions, have ownership stakes in Fanatics. This actually strengthens the case that the whole thing is a monopoly.

The Leagues (and the Unions) are arguably going outside the scope of their business/organization by directly purchasing a stake in a licensee. Obviously that licensee is going to receive favorable treatment, which is kinda blatantly illegal.

I've said it before: They've overplayed their hands. What they are doing is so illegal that the courts may have no choice but to blow the whole thing up - or, at the very least, radically change it.

Originally Posted by nabzy28

Get UD back in everything. Give Leaf a license. Keep Topps and everything else. Early 2000's all over again, with way better products. Let's do it.

That's the dream!

[Ninotores]

What happened to Fleer? See their stuff doing searches of older cards. Never minded Fleer. Wasn't super high end but was always fun.

[Ninotores]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

Very tricky question because Fanatics has moved beyond being just a licensee of sports products. The Leagues, and their Players' Unions, have ownership stakes in Fanatics. This actually strengthens the case that the whole thing is a monopoly.

The Leagues (and the Unions) are arguably going outside the scope of their business/organization by directly purchasing a stake in a licensee. Obviously that licensee is going to receive favorable treatment, which is kinda blatantly illegal.

I've said it before: They've overplayed their hands. What they are doing is so illegal that the courts may have no choice but to blow the whole thing up - or, at the very least, radically change it.

That's the dream!

I'd hope with players unions and ownership taking stake that, that is understood as a huge violation and is broken up. Only one licensed card supplier is just bad for the hobby. Competition creates the best products and better prices too.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by Ninotores

I'd hope with players unions and ownership taking stake that, that is understood as a huge violation and is broken up. Only one licensed card supplier is just bad for the hobby. Competition creates the best products and better prices too.

+1 +1 +1

[bojesphob]

Originally Posted by Ninotores

What happened to Fleer? See their stuff doing searches of older cards. Never minded Fleer. Wasn't super high end but was always fun.

Upper Deck owns the brand now. They're actually releasing some new Marvel themed cards under some of the old brand names like Fleer Metal.

[rms13]

Originally Posted by Ninotores

I'd hope with players unions and ownership taking stake that, that is understood as a huge violation and is broken up. Only one licensed card supplier is just bad for the hobby. Competition creates the best products and better prices too.

Yes, the players union and ownership who essentially have monopolies over the sports and crush any competition.

[boxbuster7]

nobody is forcing people to buy products. That is where this case gets thrown out imo.

[MyckKabongo]

Great news. I would love to see competition in the trading card market.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by boxbuster7

nobody is forcing people to buy products. That is where this case gets thrown out imo.

That's not a valid defense against monopolistic practices. If Fanatics is breaking the law, then they are breaking the law. They don't get to claim "well this is just a hobby and we don't force anyone to buy anything so we can break whatever laws we want."

[LondonGames]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

You probably don't realize it, but you filed suit against Fanatics (and friends) this morning. Now that one court is heavily leaning towards calling Fanatics a monopoly, the argument is that we, as consumers, are also hurt by their monopolistic practices (which, of course, we are) and thus entitled to compensation (that part is more debatable).

I am not exactly holding my breath to get any money as part of a class action, but I sure would love to see a federal court rule the whole system illegal (which it kinda really is) and open up back to the way things used to be.

How is what Fanatics doing any different than what Panini did when it kicked Topps out of making licensed NFL & NBA? Upper Deck also was the only one with NHL.

Now Upper Deck still has NHL.

Panini are absolute slimeballs. This is usually what happens when slimeballs get beaten at their own game.

[LondonGames]

Originally Posted by bojesphob

Upper Deck owns the brand now. They're actually releasing some new Marvel themed cards under some of the old brand names like Fleer Metal.

Welcome to the the past two decades.

[LondonGames]

Originally Posted by rms13

Except for the fact that exclusive agreements are not covered under anti trust laws. And as you pointed out this is exactly what Panini is doing. I can't see how Panini can win when they were fine with the laws when they had exclusive licenses.

They can't. They are just grasping at the final straws that they absolutely have to grasp to as a "company". I put "company" in quotes because they are abject failures and the worst thing the hobby has experienced (includes Upper Deck being super shady and deserving to lose their licenses when they did)