Topps out---Fanatics in - Page 35

Cam Brady · 08-19-2021, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfw13

Pros: none

Cons: have zero experience producing sports cards, have zero access to Topps' intellectual property

However, as others have noted, Fanatics could easily buy Topps, lock, stock, and barrel.

MUDS is currently valued at around $500 million.

Fanatics is currently valued at around $18 billion.

Topps was originally valued at $1 billion.

With confections roughly 30% of Topps an no material change to its operations one would think they are worth $300 million to somebody.

That leaves Topps intellectual property and physical property (corporate offices used to be prime downtown NY real estate pre covid) at $200 million based on a $500 million MUDS valuation.

If they go forward with going public 1 of 2 things most likely happen:

1. A candy company buys them and they sell rights to Fanatics. Its a market of 1 who can actually use the intellectual property.

2. Fanatics buys them and sells the confections division.

A 3rd possible but improbable:

A third party buys the rights and is willing to just sit on them hoping to sell them for more later. Big risk since there is just 1 bidder who the rights are actually meaningful

tmoore_25 · 08-19-2021, 08:22 PM

Just my two cents. It seems more plausible that Fanatics, by getting the licenses, is forcing Topps to sell. They purchase Topps and continue making the same Topps cards but under the Fanatics brand. I just think it would be easier for them to buy Topps then to start from scratch and build a card brand. I would expect some changes to Topps brands though. Maybe some new stuff and maybe discontinuing some brands.

There is just too much history with Topps for Fanatics to let that go to waste.

I guess we will see though.....

slambam · 08-19-2021, 08:22 PM

Sorry if this has been asked, I didn't see it, but can Topps even make logoless cards if they don't get a deal with the MLBPA? Is the MLBPA as stingy at this as MLB?

whitmm · 08-19-2021, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pewe

You understand it the same way that I do

In addition, I believe a player can choose to not be part of the MLBPA deal, and just not receive whatever share of compensation comes from it… doesn’t mean they stop being part of the MLBPA

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it would be no different than Ben Simmons signing the autograph and memorabilia contract with UD. Panini could include him on cards, but couldn't have autos.

MiamiMarlinsFan · 08-19-2021, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzydolse

7 pages in but I love these threads because we get to find out who the geniuses are among us that just know everything

Aww… you’re too kind!

But the real geniuses are the ones who know that other people’s statements are wrong without any extra knowledge. So it’s all you, buddy. Cheers!

Silent George · 08-19-2021, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pewe

You understand it the same way that I do

In addition, I believe a player can choose to not be part of the MLBPA deal, and just not receive whatever share of compensation comes from it… doesn’t mean they stop being part of the MLBPA

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pewe, as we agree again, I’ll quote Quint from Jaws about you. “I don’t know chief, if he’s very smart or very dumb.”

Tallguy1991 · 08-19-2021, 08:29 PM

Topps has been successfully sued for being the monolithic anticompetitive license holder before, now they’ll probably get to experience a role reversal. No way they don’t sue, and they’d have an excellent chance at relief if they did. Today’s news is textbook coordinated, anticompetitive, monopolistic behavior

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jubei777 · 08-19-2021, 08:30 PM

Let’s see if Fanatics will decide to keep around distributors and large resellers (Blowout, etc). I’m sure with their existing distribution system, it would effectively eliminate their need to exist.

pewe · 08-19-2021, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent George

Pewe, as we agree again, I’ll quote Quint from Jaws about you. “I don’t know chief, if he’s very smart or very dumb.”

“You’re mad, bonkers, completely off your head,” said Alice. “But I’ll tell you a secret. All the best people are.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...s-and-insanity

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Skybox · 08-19-2021, 08:30 PM

sad day for the collecting world ... Topps customer service is terrible BUT the company is synonymous with baseball

Cavaliercards · 08-19-2021, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slambam

Sorry if this has been asked, I didn't see it, but can Topps even make logoless cards if they don't get a deal with the MLBPA? Is the MLBPA as stingy at this as MLB?

Nope not of current

Bruisbe · 08-19-2021, 08:37 PM

So sell a my stuff and get out in 2025...gotcha

Sent from my SM-G996U1 using Tapatalk

Silent George · 08-19-2021, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallguy1991

Topps has been successfully sued for being the monolithic anticompetitive license holder before, now they’ll probably get to experience a role reversal. No way they don’t sue, and they’d have an excellent chance at relief if they did. Today’s news is textbook coordinated, anticompetitive, monopolistic behavior

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ve wondered this myself. You can see topps alone having mlb logo rights as not a monopoly but a niche. Other sports cards companies had Union rights and rights to other sports. With fanatics pushing it much farther, I could see a far stronger argument that this is choking the industry. I’m no lawyer. But I once dated a girl who was trying to go to law school, and i did watch a lot of Law and Order growing up, so I feel my opinion is untouchable on the subject.

Cam Brady · 08-19-2021, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallguy1991

Topps has been successfully sued for being the monolithic anticompetitive license holder before, now they’ll probably get to experience a role reversal. No way they don’t sue, and they’d have an excellent chance at relief if they did. Today’s news is textbook coordinated, anticompetitive, monopolistic behavior

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They were given the opportunity to match Fanatics bid. They couldn't.

If being outbid with a crazy price is grounds to sue somebody wait until you find out about eBay.

pewe · 08-19-2021, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent George

I’m no lawyer. But I once dated a girl who was trying to go to law school, and i did watch a lot of Law and Order growing up, so I feel my opinion is untouchable on the subject.

But did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night???

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tallguy1991 · 08-19-2021, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent George

I’ve wondered this myself. You can see topps alone having mlb logo rights as not a monopoly but a niche. Other sports cards companies had Union rights and rights to other sports. With fanatics pushing it much farther, I could see a far stronger argument that this is choking the industry. I’m no lawyer. But I once dated a girl who was trying to go to law school, and i did watch a lot of Law and Order growing up, so I feel my opinion is untouchable on the subject.

Exactly. It looks like fanatics in collaboration with the leagues and unions worked to make a deal specifically to establish sole control of licensed cards from top to bottom, and when you consider they basically already controlled the team gear and game used businesses as well you get a situation unparalleled thus far in the history of the hobby. They literally acted with the intention of kneecapping all competition in multi billion dollar industry and that is a violation of antitrust laws. Plus, judges, federal legislators and the public have a track record of siding with beloved historical brands like topps. There’s inevitably going to be members of the senate or congress that don’t like this, and if they got involved with steroids they’ll happily step in here too. Having Josh luber controlling the sole licensed trading card entity would be the end of the hobby going forward for the vast majority of us

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

y2jdmbfan · 08-19-2021, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slambam

Sorry if this has been asked, I didn't see it, but can Topps even make logoless cards if they don't get a deal with the MLBPA? Is the MLBPA as stingy at this as MLB?

MLBPA owns a portion of Fanatics...

Tallguy1991 · 08-19-2021, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cam Brady

They were given the opportunity to match Fanatics bid. They couldn't.

If being outbid with a crazy price is grounds to sue somebody wait until you find out about eBay.

See my post above this. Outbidding isn’t the issue, intentionally acting to kneecap all competition and establish monolithic control, in effect monopolizing a huge industry, is the issue though and it’s in violation of antitrust laws

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

badkarma318 · 08-19-2021, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smanzari

MLBPA also signed with Fanatics meaning no more Panini or Non-Logo'ed cards of current players unless they're not in MLBPA

Another bit of good news.

kyle121592 · 08-19-2021, 08:49 PM

So the NBA deal is up end of 2022? So panini has control for 21-22 and 22-23 seasons? NFL is up after the 2025 season? And MLB is up after 2022 season?

tier1dc · 08-19-2021, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallguy1991

See my post above this. Outbidding isn’t the issue, intentionally acting to kneecap all competition and establish monolithic control, in effect monopolizing a huge industry, is the issue though and it’s in violation of antitrust laws

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

antitrust laws do not apply to collectibles.

and it's clearly not an violation if the three major sports leagues all agreed to work with Fanatics.

pewe · 08-19-2021, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallguy1991

See my post above this. Outbidding isn’t the issue, intentionally acting to kneecap all competition and establish monolithic control, in effect monopolizing a huge industry, is the issue though and it’s in violation of antitrust laws

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

US antitrust laws don’t focus on “kneecapping competition” (competitive harm)… it instead emphasizes harm to the end consumer

European antitrust on the other hand…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

armyatc22 · 08-19-2021, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyle121592

So the NBA deal is up end of 2022? So panini has control for 21-22 and 22-23 seasons? NFL is up after the 2025 season? And MLB is up after 2022 season?

MLBPA and MLB are 2 different things

MLBPA is up in 2022
MLB is up in 2025

So from 2023-2025 Topps can’t use any players names or likeliness but they can use the MLB logos and names. This is the complete opposite of what Panini has today.

BabaORiley · 08-19-2021, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UCCF

2026: Fanatics Flagship
2027: Fanatics Heritage, featuring the legendary 2026 design!

Also 2027, Fanatics introduces... Fanatics Project 1.

hermanotarjeta · 08-19-2021, 08:55 PM

I guess a lot of brick and mortar shops that had topps direct accounts are worth a bit less now.

08-19-2021, 08:22 PM	#852
tmoore_25 Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: North Carolina Posts: 1,733 tmoore_25	Just my two cents. It seems more plausible that Fanatics, by getting the licenses, is forcing Topps to sell. They purchase Topps and continue making the same Topps cards but under the Fanatics brand. I just think it would be easier for them to buy Topps then to start from scratch and build a card brand. I would expect some changes to Topps brands though. Maybe some new stuff and maybe discontinuing some brands. There is just too much history with Topps for Fanatics to let that go to waste. I guess we will see though..... __________________ PC: Nolan Ryan, Dustin May, Yadier Molina, Ronald Acuna, Ozzie Albies, Ichiro Atlanta Braves Topps Flagship and Topps Chrome Photo Variations

08-19-2021, 08:22 PM	#853
slambam Member Join Date: Sep 2018 Posts: 281	Sorry if this has been asked, I didn't see it, but can Topps even make logoless cards if they don't get a deal with the MLBPA? Is the MLBPA as stingy at this as MLB?

08-19-2021, 08:29 PM	#857
Tallguy1991 Member Join Date: Jul 2020 Location: Boston Posts: 635	Topps has been successfully sued for being the monolithic anticompetitive license holder before, now they’ll probably get to experience a role reversal. No way they don’t sue, and they’d have an excellent chance at relief if they did. Today’s news is textbook coordinated, anticompetitive, monopolistic behavior Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

08-19-2021, 08:30 PM	#858
jubei777 Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 4,431 jubei777	Let’s see if Fanatics will decide to keep around distributors and large resellers (Blowout, etc). I’m sure with their existing distribution system, it would effectively eliminate their need to exist.

08-19-2021, 08:30 PM	#860
Skybox Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Alabama Posts: 908 captainshank	sad day for the collecting world ... Topps customer service is terrible BUT the company is synonymous with baseball

08-19-2021, 08:37 PM	#862
Bruisbe Member Join Date: Dec 2019 Location: Illinois Posts: 807 modern_day_baseball Bruisbe	So sell a my stuff and get out in 2025...gotcha Sent from my SM-G996U1 using Tapatalk

08-19-2021, 08:49 PM	#870
kyle121592 Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: United States Posts: 3,407	So the NBA deal is up end of 2022? So panini has control for 21-22 and 22-23 seasons? NFL is up after the 2025 season? And MLB is up after 2022 season?

08-19-2021, 08:55 PM	#875
hermanotarjeta Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 21,961	I guess a lot of brick and mortar shops that had topps direct accounts are worth a bit less now.