Panini Redemption Lawsuit Update

[Squareburgers]

This is Panini's argument regarding unfulfilled redemptions, and why are people still buying their crap?

https://twitter.com/Paul_Lesko/statu...59305656811538

[rogueriver]

I hate redemption I understand why they are necessary but it is ridiculous especially when you think about boxes that dont get opened for 20 years.

[clocsta2323]

I've pretty much written off the 2020 Prizm Draft Wander redemptions I have, they were my best pulls from the cases I opened.

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by rogueriver

I hate redemption I understand why they are necessary but it is ridiculous especially when you think about boxes that dont get opened for 20 years.

Why are redemptions necessary? If you can’t pack them out when the product is ready to ship then skip them and don’t put them on the checklist. Checklists should be out a week early before release so people can see if they want to buy the product or not. But it’s Panini and they like being shady and scamming and what not.

[mfisher27]

It wasn’t covered in the tweets and probably isn’t mentioned in the lawsuit but I’d imagine the same logic would apply to their Rewards Points, right? They can’t have a different stance on that since it’s essentially the same thing and the whole “it wasn’t purchased directly from Panini” would be the same thing.

[Cavaliercards]

Originally Posted by rogueriver

I hate redemption I understand why they are necessary but it is ridiculous especially when you think about boxes that dont get opened for 20 years.

Why it should be all points no redemptions.

Fanatics can do Fanatics Gift Cards, no redemptions.

Remember when BG/Leaf said no redemptions, even he has had to take them due to issues with athletes.

[mfisher27]

Originally Posted by Cavaliercards

Why it should be all points no redemptions.

Fanatics can do Fanatics Gift Cards, no redemptions.

Remember when BG/Leaf said no redemptions, even he has had to take them due to issues with athletes.

Wouldn’t they apply the same logic though? One of their main points was that since it wasn’t purchased direct from Panini, they don’t have an obligation. That’s the same thing with points. Redemptions and points can’t be treated differently when that’s the stance they’re taking.

[Fenway55]

Panini argues "the contracts alleged by the Plaintiffs are not supported by any consideration." That statement completely boggled my mind. Please allow me to explain as best as I understand it:

Consideration is when you give up something of value in exchange for something else. There has to be consideration for a contract to be valid. Suppose I send you a PM and say "If I pull 2 Brady silvers, I will give you one." Then I pull 2 Brady silvers and change my mind and keep them both. If you sued me, you would lose. My promise does not constitute a contract since you have provided no consideration. You haven't spent/lost anything, so you're not entitled to anything.

In this case, it sure seems to me that the consideration is whatever the person paid Panini for the card, or paid for the pack/box/case. The key issue is that they bought the card from a 3rd party. IMHO there is still consideration involved since someone gave up something to get it, and the person with the redemption card simply paid the 3rd party to acquire the deliverable. Buying or selling a contractual obligation is hardly a rare occurrence.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by rogueriver

I hate redemption I understand why they are necessary but it is ridiculous especially when you think about boxes that dont get opened for 20 years.

Why are they necessary? Before you solicit the product, get signed contracts with players. Then give the cards to an employee and have them signed by the player. Redemptions are card companies being lazy.

[sportsfanatic]

Originally Posted by Squareburgers

This is Panini's argument regarding unfulfilled redemptions, and why are people still buying their crap?

https://twitter.com/Paul_Lesko/statu...59305656811538

Its all about that money train baby! They're hell bent on continuing to rip people off all the way up until the day their licenses expire

[Cavaliercards]

Originally Posted by mfisher27

Wouldn’t they apply the same logic though? One of their main points was that since it wasn’t purchased direct from Panini, they don’t have an obligation. That’s the same thing with points. Redemptions and points can’t be treated differently when that’s the stance they’re taking.

I am just saying no redemptions period, not arguing the legal validity of their argument.

Fanatics just needs to go to a gift card that looks like a card model.

Didnt get your $2 autograph here is a $2 gift card or coupon to Fanatics.

[Cavaliercards]

Originally Posted by rats60

Why are they necessary? Before you solicit the product, get signed contracts with players. Then give the cards to an employee and have them signed by the player. Redemptions are card companies being lazy.

Actually they are not being lazy.

No card company has the infrastructure to meet the ability to fly around the country getting the athletes signatures. With the Players Association and Licensing wanting more products (originally supposed to be 50+ per sport in next couple years before Fanatics) it is not possible without raising the prices which the leagues will not allow and then you have players stiffing you. It is why every company has gone to representatives such as brothers, sisters, wives, husbands, marketing people, secretaries, etc.

The players do have signed contracts but at times they want more money. Leaf/BG had an athlete in past couple years they had a deal with and nope the player declined to sign. Topps had a name guy in 2019 that they had to pay double as he refused to honor the deal. Now your retort will be go after them legally, the PA and the Leagues have warned the companies not to do this or there will be consequences.

[rogueriver]

Originally Posted by rats60

Why are they necessary? Before you solicit the product, get signed contracts with players. Then give the cards to an employee and have them signed by the player. Redemptions are card companies being lazy.

Oh I agree with you 100% especially when they use STICKER AUTOS why cant they just get those sticker Autos signed by the thousands before product launch....The reason I understand redemptions is because sometimes a player does not sign on time or all of a sudden a player gets hot and they want to include them

[Cavaliercards]

Originally Posted by rogueriver

Oh I agree with you 100% especially when they use STICKER AUTOS why cant they just get those sticker Autos signed by the thousands before product launch....The reason I understand redemptions is because sometimes a player does not sign on time or all of a sudden a player gets hot and they want to include them

Having done signings, you will have players sign 100-1000 stickers and then say I will send the other 4000 stickers later.

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by Cavaliercards

Actually they are not being lazy.

No card company has the infrastructure to meet the ability to fly around the country getting the athletes signatures. With the Players Association and Licensing wanting more products (originally supposed to be 50+ per sport in next couple years before Fanatics) it is not possible without raising the prices which the leagues will not allow and then you have players stiffing you. It is why every company has gone to representatives such as brothers, sisters, wives, husbands, marketing people, secretaries, etc.

The players do have signed contracts but at times they want more money. Leaf/BG had an athlete in past couple years they had a deal with and nope the player declined to sign. Topps had a name guy in 2019 that they had to pay double as he refused to honor the deal. Now your retort will be go after them legally, the PA and the Leagues have warned the companies not to do this or there will be consequences.

Lazy is correct

[Onepocketj]

Originally Posted by Siberian13

Lazy is correct

Agree with lazy

[spuds1961]

Originally Posted by Onepocketj

Agree with lazy

I have seen the prices of Panini’s hobby boxes so put me in for Lazy as well.

[mc1]

Originally Posted by Siberian13

Lazy is correct

Whos lazy? Panini or the players that dont want to sign?

[packman80]

Most of what these players are getting to sign stickers or cards and return is chicken beep compared to what they are making playing the game. They don't care if they don't live up to the contract and have to pay the company back it's pocket change to them.

[Grid]

Originally Posted by rogueriver

Oh I agree with you 100% especially when they use STICKER AUTOS why cant they just get those sticker Autos signed by the thousands before product launch....The reason I understand redemptions is because sometimes a player does not sign on time or all of a sudden a player gets hot and they want to include them

It works both ways. They might want to include a suddenly hot player. But they also don't want to be stuck having to use a suddenly not player.

If they agreed to stockpile signed stickers of a top prospect, so they have on hand for future products. They might very well be sitting on a mountain of stickers for guys like Josh Rosen.

There are also budgetary issues. Like buying 5 years worth of Drew Brees or Tom Brady stickers. It's just not practical to spend that much money. It's a reinvestment to keep the money machine rolling

These companies turn some of the profits from current releases, into acquiring more autos for the next years releases.

That's why they simply don't have a ton of stickers for each and every player on hand.

[hairysasquatch]

Just stopped by to say "Poopnini"!!

[TSonn]

Oof! Glad my Mahomes 1/1 auto redemption was redeemed and sent to me.

[packman80]

Originally Posted by TSonn

Oof! Glad my Mahomes 1/1 auto redemption was redeemed and sent to me.

Later founds out it's actually signed by Jackson Mahomes signing for his brother. LOL

[sportsfanatic]

Originally Posted by Grid

It works both ways. They might want to include a suddenly hot player. But they also don't want to be stuck having to use a suddenly not player.

If they agreed to stockpile signed stickers of a top prospect, so they have on hand for future products. They might very well be sitting on a mountain of stickers for guys like Josh Rosen.

There are also budgetary issues. Like buying 5 years worth of Drew Brees or Tom Brady stickers. It's just not practical to spend that much money. It's a reinvestment to keep the money machine rolling

These companies turn some of the profits from current releases, into acquiring more autos for the next years releases.

That's why they simply don't have a ton of stickers for each and every player on hand.

Last year during the pandemic when most companies lost money, Panini generated over $2 billion in revenue. Believe me, they're not dealing with budgetary issues

[Wildcat55]

I still have no idea why Panini doesn’t offer regular product as a redemption option for points and auto redemptions. At least give your customers the option for a hobby box, couple of Mega’s, etc. They can ask ways print extra product if they know there will be shortness of autos from a certain player. That option will give everyone a shot at more auto’s, numbered parallels, etc for those that don’t want to wait on the super hot Coby White auto redemption that 2 years later is worthless…