Topps has MLB Exclusive for 2010?

[CharlieBrown]

I think you are going to see some good products out of this. There will be low end things for the kids, just like UD did with 1st edition and there will continue to be higher end like Sterling and Triple Threads. As a set collector, I love this. Trying to keep up with so many different sets from multiple companies got nuts. At least now it's just 1 company and a bunch of sets.

 

[lprimus]

Interesting. Time will tell whether this is good or bad for the hobby....

Jason

 

[ckinney]

chalk up another "great" idea under the Selig era...

 

[HoosierBuddy]

"The league also believes that one cardmaker can end the confusion of competitors selling multiple card series in hobby shops and big-box stores."

Yeah, there may only be one company making baseball cards, but how many different lines is Topps going to produce? My guess is around 20.

They're still going to have to follow the rules set down previously concerning the number of sets they're allowed to make.

 

[Soxfan33]

The one bright spot in the article was the fact that UD signed an extention with the Player's Union, so they'll be able to make cards of the current players, just not use their team names or logos.

Unlike Donruss, who can only use retired players, dead players or prospects.

Good point. However, I hate Donruss' new stuff because it doesn't have the logos and team names. I guess it's all UD may be able to do, but I just hate the thought of a card coming out with no team name or logo. It just looks cheap, kind of like seeing the ball players in corny commercials with blank uniforms. I guess we'll see.

John

 

[metsman1986]

This will change things for sure.........Hopefully for the better, but competition is suppose to be a good thing................Topps needs to get rid of the political subset garbage, IMO.................Make pack busting more affordable for the kids and keep a couple of the high end products for the parents...............Plus, make the retail packs with more "hits", if that's where the sales are................Get rid of the silver sticker autos and find a way to foil the dreaded pack searcher.....................I could go on and on................Sorry for the rant..................Mike

 

[Mark Wing]

Ooh, maybe they'll bring back Fan Favorites.

That would be nice!

I have to agree that monopolies = higher prices and lesser quality.

It may be a monopoly from a baseball card point of view, but they are still competing with other hobbies for consumer dollars.

They're still going to have to follow the rules set down previously concerning the number of sets they're allowed to make.

I was wondering about that. Is that negotiable? My feeling was the current rules encourage companies to print more of the same product, which has killed the challenge of building many sets.

My biggest concern is this sets a precedent for a single company. As someone who is primarily a set collector, this isn't a big concern right now. My concern is what happens down the road if MLB decides to give this to another company?

Mark

 

[JJLevitsky]

My biggest concern is this sets a precedent for a single company. As someone who is primarily a set collector, this isn't a big concern right now. My concern is what happens down the road if MLB decides to give this to another company?

Mark

Mine too. As you and most know, I am a LONG time Topps set builder and I am not sure I could switch to another company if MLB changes its mind at some point. Time will tell.

Thanks,

Jeff

 

[mort]

It may be a monopoly from a baseball card point of view, but they are still competing with other hobbies for consumer dollars.

Mark, you have a better grasp on the sports hobby than me ... what percentage of card collectors collect multiple sports? Perhaps I'm a minority, but I just collect one sport. I am disappointed in MLB because in my case this is a monopoly. Sure Topps will produce it's hundreds of subsets, but all the eggs are in one basket. Quality will suffer.

I believe this is bad for baseball, the hobby, the collector, and very bad for the future of the industry.

 

[daktion]

Cool. Bring back topps total!

 

[mort]

“Topps has been making cards for 60 years, the last 30 in a nonexclusive world that has caused confusion to the kid who walks into a Wal-Mart or a hobby store."

Ha. Good humor, Eisner! Most of the confusion comes from your company, sir.

 

[HoosierBuddy]

Why is it confusing to have a wider selection of product from which to make your decision? Is it confusing for the kid to go to the action figure aisle, and have Batman, Spider-Man and Star Wars toys to choose from?

Is it confusing to go to the grocery aisle, and have to choose between the 31 flavours of ice cream?

Eisner's an idiot. He was an idiot at Disney, and now he's an idiot at Topps, and his idiocy has infected the people at MLB.

 

[DaClyde]

I hope somehow in there they ditch the concept of a special "low end" product and just revert to the plain Topps brand being the entry level. Drop the price per pack down to $1 or less and get them back on the impulse racks by the checkouts with the candy bars!

And I'd be all for eliminating differences between a box of the same brand of cards at WalMart, KMart, Target and a hobby store. Meaningless parallels suck.

 

[Mark Wing]

Mark, you have a better grasp on the sports hobby than me ... what percentage of card collectors collect multiple sports? Perhaps I'm a minority, but I just collect one sport. I am disappointed in MLB because in my case this is a monopoly. Sure Topps will produce it's hundreds of subsets, but all the eggs are in one basket. Quality will suffer.

I believe this is bad for baseball, the hobby, the collector, and very bad for the future of the industry.

I don't know the percentages. I also only collect baseball cards. My point was that while Topps may have a monopoly on baseball cards, I as a consumer have other interests and Topps is competing with those interests for my dollar. As a result, there will still be market pressure on them. This isn't like the old phone company before they were broken up.

Mark

 

[saferseas]

"The league also believes that one cardmaker can end the confusion of competitors selling multiple card series in hobby shops and big-box stores."

-Spoken honestly from the mouths of people who know nothing about this hobby in the first place. How is variety confusing? Since when is competition bad?

 

[soxfan445]

I remember people complaining back in 2005 that there was too much variety. Since then, we've seen a melange of poorly constructed, poorly designed products, along with a few real winners.

I appreciate variety when I get to choose between really well designed, value-packed products. When the choices on the shelf are Piece of History, Co-Signers, and UD X, I could care less. I'd give up all of the products of that caliber for even one or two more well designed sets per year.

I can only hope that Topps sees this gift of exclusivity as a business expansion opportunity, and uses UD's captured market share to produce well designed products positioned throughout the entire spectrum of the market. Something tells me, looking at the last four years, that this may not be the case.

Regards,
Mike

 

[AUTaxMan]

Less competition is always bad. Not a good development for the hobby (and I am a Topps guy).

 

[HoosierBuddy]

I just had a thought, and I'm not sure if it's a good one or a bad one. With Topps gaining exclusive rights to MLB ... it also means Topps is now the only one under the MLB rules...

As of January 1, UD will have free reign to produce cards of any player ... newly drafter, high-level prospect, MLB player, retired ... without having to follow the MLB-mandated rules.

Stephen Strasburg is un-touchable by Topps until he signs and is called up to the Majors. UD can create a Strasburg rookie as of Jan. 1.

 

[potvin48]

Things I want to see out of Topps next year:

1. 3 or 4 sets specifically targeted to the 5-15 year old kids. The little leaguers. That's when I first started collecting baseball cards. Use TV commercials, freebie card days at little league games, anything to get them back.

2. More sets with 500+ cards, and less sets with only 100 cards. 3 cards per team, hardly makes a "team set" in my opinion. The Topps base set is a staple of the industry, so I don't see anything happening to that, but I am tired of going for sets that feature only Soriano, Zambrano, Lee and Aramis. Don't get me wrong, these guys are some of my favorites, but in the end, I want all of the players in these sets. Maybe not all of them, but at least a little more variety. If you use these 4 guys in one set, pick 4 others for a different set. Imagine a Yankees set with no A-Rod or Jeter cards in it. It hasn't happened in many years, but why not?

3. If Topps wants to continue with the Presidents and hollywood folks, that's fine, but do it outside of a baseball set. I want baseball cards when I buy a pack/box of baseball cards...

4. For game used cards - Use a picture on the card of them actually wearing the jersey/pants/whatever piece that is embedded in the card. On the back, state what day and game that it was used in.

5. Put out a set similar to the 08 UD Documentary, except use 162 different pictures for the 162 different games, and include a shot of their stadium for the 163rd card. The player on the front of the card should have been involved in the game somehow. Maybe that team's "MVP" of that game or something like that. Something that at least relates to the game, and the caption below it.

6. Tell us what we're buying! I liked the Target and Walmart exclusive parallels this year, but I'd like to have known that they were coming that way before I bought them.

 

[wreckingballsc]

Not sure I like this.
Remember companies like Viacom, and others, one company having the stronghold, is limiting to the consumer, so we end up with the take it or leave it.
good thing I've been making the first american church of baseball cards, might just have to go underground.