Panini vs Fanatics suit

[MyckKabongo]

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

[slyguy]

Originally Posted by MyckKabongo

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

That'd be the dream, yeah.

Won't happen. (and if it did, prepare for a race to the bottom... overprints central)

Sports is getting to be such a big $$$ thing that the logistics are rough.
The companies would have to share photo shoots (caches?), auto sessions, etc.
That just won't happen.
Teams and leagues want exclusive contracts for TV nights, merch, cards, shoes, whatever. It saves time.

But hey, Fanatics has an endless supply of "not from any specific game or event" jerseys/hats/etc

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by slyguy

That'd be the dream, yeah.

Won't happen. (and if it did, prepare for a race to the bottom... overprints central)

Sports is getting to be such a big $$$ thing that the logistics are rough.
The companies would have to share photo shoots (caches?), auto sessions, etc.
That just won't happen.
Teams and leagues want exclusive contracts for TV nights, merch, cards, shoes, whatever. It saves time.

But hey, Fanatics has an endless supply of "not from any specific game or event" jerseys/hats/etc

There is no reason we can't return to the situation we had 15 years ago. There are no "logistics" in play today that didn't exist back then.

Each brand could have their overprinted base set, a nicer "chrome" set, an "SP" or "Ultimate Collection", etc....

[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."

[boxbuster7]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

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."

I guess

[DaveTaplin]

Originally Posted by boxbuster7

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

If you use the gambling argument then people are being forced to by their addiction.

[boxbuster7]

Originally Posted by DaveTaplin

If you use the gambling argument then people are being forced to by their addiction.

you can't sue an alcohol company because you're an addict

that argument makes zero sense

[rmw10]

I would be shocked if anything other than Fanatics taking over officially happens, regardless of the lawsuits. There are far larger "monopolies" out there that the courts turn a blind eye to already. Sports cards isn't going to be the one that rocks the boat. The league wants Fanatics - they're going to get Fanatics.

[slyguy]

Originally Posted by rmw10

I would be shocked if anything other than Fanatics taking over officially happens, regardless of the lawsuits. There are far larger "monopolies" out there that the courts turn a blind eye to already. Sports cards isn't going to be the one that rocks the boat. The league wants Fanatics - they're going to get Fanatics.

This suit is nothing new... years old. It was filed back when NFLPA went to Fanatics and terminated the Panini deal.

It'll go nowhere.

Yes, league dictates what they do for any $$ deal. Brands need NFL, not the other way around.

[rmw10]

Originally Posted by slyguy

This suit is nothing new... years old. It was filed back when NFLPA went to Fanatics and terminated the Panini deal.

It'll go nowhere.

Yes, league dictates what they do for any $$ deal. Brands need NFL, not the other way around.

I'm aware of that. I'm largely saying that by the end of this almost no matter the rulings, it will result in Fanatics being the sole manufacturer. There are still likely years before any decision would be made. By that point, Fanatics is already in and Panini is probably willing to settle because their money making ability is gone.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by slyguy

This suit is nothing new... years old. It was filed back when NFLPA went to Fanatics and terminated the Panini deal.

It'll go nowhere.

For a lawsuit that'll "go nowhere," Panini is doing pretty well in pre-trial motions.

[rmw10]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

For a lawsuit that'll "go nowhere," Panini is doing pretty well in pre-trial motions.

And even if Panini wins, Fanatics files an appeal and keeps producing. Panini is then continuing on a legal battle while not producing. The money dries up or doesn't make sense to spend at some point.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by rmw10

And even if Panini wins, Fanatics files an appeal and keeps producing. Panini is then continuing on a legal battle while not producing. The money dries up or doesn't make sense to spend at some point.

1) Panini isn't some mom and pop organization. They are an international corporation with about $750 million in annual revenue. If they win, they ain't going to go bankrupt during the appeals process.

2) Of course they can continue producing. Even if it is only unlicensed stuff, they can keep producing cards if they want.

3) If they win, then usually (key word: usually not always) the winner gets to have their way while the appeal is pending. Fanatics would have to request a stay on the ruling which IMHO would be a very, very long shot. IOW, Panini would be allowed to negotiate a new deal with the Leagues and Unions and continue business operations.

[rms13]

Apparently Panini is the largest publisher of children magazines, books, comics, manga and graphic novels in Europe and Latin America. So they still have that and soccer which is what they did before they had the NFL and NBA

[auctionjmm]

Be careful what you wish for. Even if Panini actually won and licensing was re-opened to Panini, UD, and Leaf, that doesn't necessarily stop exclusive player and NIL deals.

Imagine we had 4 companies producing cards today, but it was:

Jayden Daniels = Panini Exclusive
Caleb Williams = Topps Exclusive
Drake Maye = Leaf Exclusive
JJ McCarthy = UD Exclusive

It could get to a point where no products are desirable because everyone is now competing to sign players. Then years more of lawsuits to prove that player deals are monopolistic.

This is why I want this monopoly. I'm tired of the exclusive autograph deals and entire colleges signing with one company or the other, hurting the college products. I want Fanatics to have it ALL so that we get every player from every draft and every college in every pro and college product.

[Ninotores]

Originally Posted by auctionjmm

This is why I want this monopoly. I'm tired of the exclusive autograph deals and entire colleges signing with one company or the other, hurting the college products. I want Fanatics to have it ALL so that we get every player from every draft and every college in every pro and college product.

This is counter-productive and gives one company far too much power in what they can charge, what they can do, and how they dictate a hobby.

Anyone saying this case doesn't have legs doesn't understand the legal system. May I suggest looking into the Epic games vs. Apple/Google lawsuit.

[rms13]

Originally Posted by Ninotores

This is counter-productive and gives one company far too much power in what they can charge, what they can do, and how they dictate a hobby.

Anyone saying this case doesn't have legs doesn't understand the legal system. May I suggest looking into the Epic games vs. Apple/Google lawsuit.

What is the parallel? Wasn't the Epic suit about being on the app store? And then they just made their own app store?

[LondonGames]

Originally Posted by Ninotores

This is counter-productive and gives one company far too much power in what they can charge, what they can do, and how they dictate a hobby.

Anyone saying this case doesn't have legs doesn't understand the legal system. May I suggest looking into the Epic games vs. Apple/Google lawsuit.

This is so funny. You literally just asked what happened to Fleer as you jumped back into the Hobby 3 months ago and missed any possibility to have any context Hobby related.

Then you have the audacity to state that people who have an opinion that the case doesn't have legs doesn't understand the legal system, by just stating a random case that has zero to do with anything.

Best post so far. You're good at spreading wisdom. Thanks.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by LondonGames

This is so funny. You literally just asked what happened to Fleer as you jumped back into the Hobby 3 months ago and missed any possibility to have any context Hobby related.

Then you have the audacity to state that people who have an opinion that the case doesn't have legs doesn't understand the legal system, by just stating a random case that has zero to do with anything.

Best post so far. You're good at spreading wisdom. Thanks.

You've literally added nothing to this thread other than to say "no you're wrong!! and he's wrong!!!! and they're wrong!!!"

Funniest post so far indeed.

[LondonGames]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

You've literally added nothing to this thread other than to say "no you're wrong!! and he's wrong!!!! and they're wrong!!!"

Funniest post so far indeed.

You're quite literally just repeating the same thing over and over about the judge, and how you read the case and that others haven't. There is actually zero substance to anything you've written after the original post you made with your opinion.

What you're saying I'm doing is factually what you're doing.

Your opinion is dully noted. You don't need to post the same thing over and over and over and tell people they are wrong and need to read the case. It would be however nice if when people point out things to you that you clearly don't get, if you would accept it with some sort of grace instead of grandstanding. But as you continually act in bad faith, I'm not holding my breath.

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by Ninotores

Anyone saying this case doesn't have legs doesn't understand the legal system.

+1 +1 +1

In fact, after reading the full MTD ruling, my current fear is that Fanatics will settle and/or buy Panini out. If that happens, and it is a very plausible scenario, then we all lose.

[rms13]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

+1 +1 +1

In fact, after reading the full MTD ruling, my current fear is that Fanatics will settle and/or buy Panini out. If that happens, and it is a very plausible scenario, then we all lose.

Panini has been been pretty firm that they aren't going to sell the business to Fanatics. I also doubt Fanatics would have any interest at this point. They already have the printers and their employees. The IP of the Panini brands don't have any value in my opinion. Topps has dozens of sets and a lot of them already overlap with what Panini makes. Panini and Donruss brands didn't mean much in football or basketball before they got the license and I think they will all be forgotten pretty quickly when they go away.

[marinocollector]

Originally Posted by rms13

Panini has been been pretty firm that they aren't going to sell the business to Fanatics. I also doubt Fanatics would have any interest at this point. They already have the printers and their employees. The IP of the Panini brands don't have any value in my opinion. Topps has dozens of sets and a lot of them already overlap with what Panini makes. Panini and Donruss brands didn't mean much in football or basketball before they got the license and I think they will all be forgotten pretty quickly when they go away.

That’s rather bold. Topps was so hated in basketball they had to combine it with Chrome to sell it. Prizm is the most popular brand ever and Panini has done more to create brands than any manufacturer before it. Fanatics absolutely wants paninis IP.

[jlzinck]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

+1 +1 +1

In fact, after reading the full MTD ruling, my current fear is that Fanatics will settle and/or buy Panini out. If that happens, and it is a very plausible scenario, then we all lose.

We've already lost

[Fenway55]

Originally Posted by auctionjmm

Be careful what you wish for. Even if Panini actually won and licensing was re-opened to Panini, UD, and Leaf, that doesn't necessarily stop exclusive player and NIL deals.

Of course it does. This isn't college. See below....

Originally Posted by auctionjmm

Imagine we had 4 companies producing cards today, but it was:

Jayden Daniels = Panini Exclusive
Caleb Williams = Topps Exclusive
Drake Maye = Leaf Exclusive
JJ McCarthy = UD Exclusive

Unlike college, the NFL players are unionized. Each manufacturer would be able to make a deal with the Union, so we wouldn't see Jayden Daniels only in Panini or Caleb Williams only in Topps. Every player's NIL would be open to all companies via the Union contract.

The above could potentially happen as far as autographs were concerned but it didn't 20 years ago, so I don't know why you're so certain it would dominate the industry in our hypothetical future.