This Leaf Pujols Jersey sold WAY too cheap.

[Mario1975]

I don't know. The impression I got from allstars is that he refuses to carry any unlicensed product on principal, regardless if customers want it. I think he's admitted there have been atleast a few customers over the years who might have inquired about unlicensed products. I also agree with you that most people prefer licensed products but I don't think that means people wouldn't buy unlicensed as well, especially if they are looking to bust some wax and have already opened whatever licensed product is out. Also I would think it might be good to give customers who maybe can't afford to buy a particular licensed product a cheaper alternative. I mean I don't think Topps is offering any cut auto products or Pete Rose cards, or any product for that matter, for $30.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Sports Cards by Freedom Card Board.com

 

[Leaf]

I think the prices on the Pujols autographs are about on point for the /99 and /5 versions. As others have said, Pujols has more issues than Ichiro, Pujols moved teams, the patch pieces are from his old team, the fans of his old team are somewhat soured on him, and his new team doesn't have a huge collector's base. It's a nice card, is valuable, and a very good hit out of a box. Anyone expecting it to be a "rainmaker" card (pay for a case) is engaging in wishful thinking. It's not a hot card because Pujols isn't hot and, unlike with Ichiro, there isn't a pent up demand for high end autos of Pujols.

Now on to the Warren v. BG/FCB battle. I find it rather humorous the number of people who are ripping Warren (AllStars) for not carrying unlicensed products. He's flat out right that licensed cards sell better than unlicensed cards and that more collectors want them. If it weren't true, BG wouldn't want a license and complain about how Topps' monopoly is bad for the hobby. Heck, not having a license would be a competitive advantage. Does anyone really believe that if Leaf got an MLB license, BG would write the following: "having an MLB license is nice, but not that meaningful. The hobby has shown that collectors do not have much of a preference for licensed over unlicensed products these days." :lol:

I'm guessing that if Allstars had a bunch of customers constantly asking him for Leaf or Panini baseball, he'd order their stuff. If he didn't, I'm guessing it is because he (and perhaps his customers) took a bath on past unlicensed products and he has decided not to carry them. You can disagree with his decision, but I'm betting it isn't some irrational choice where he decided to bypass nice profits and happy customers for no good reason. Furthermore, Leaf will collect dust on your shelf unless you have some major prospectors in your customer base. Perhaps Allstars doesn't have (1) large numbers of prospectors who are (2) asking him to carry these cards. Since he's been around 22 years, I'm going to guess he knows his own customer base more than folks who have no idea about his business.

We were offered the mLBPA license panini took.. It was a bad deal.. I passed.. I only want a license if it makes fiscal sense..

On warrens front, the fact is I would bet dollars to donuts some of his customers buy my product and other similar products elsewhere..

If he would rather not make money, it his call. BG

 

[A_Pharis]

My thing is, how is Warren so sure his clients really don't like unlicensed products?

If I only go to his LCS and all he preaches is anti-unlicensed, then of course - if he asks - I am going to say I don't want them. And, for the sake of maintaining a good relationship, I'd NEVER tell him I would purchase or have purchased it elsewhere.
I honestly don't understand the logic behind limiting your business. I can understand not wanting to sell your customers something you wouldn't buy yourself, but that's like telling your customers what's good for them.

I'd be willing to guess that a good portion of those customers get them somewhere else.

 

[James52411]

We were offered the mLBPA license panini took.. It was a bad deal.. I passed.. I only want a license if it makes fiscal sense..

On warrens front, the fact is I would bet dollars to donuts some of his customers buy my product and other similar products elsewhere..

If he would rather not make money, it his call. BG

I agree that you were smart to pass on an MLBPA license without the MLB license, particularly since you focus on prospects with your company. The MLB license is the one that creates legitimate added value, particularly since you can license individual players at your discretion. I bet you would have hurt your company trying to enter the full MLB trading card market as a small company without being able to display logos and real uniforms. I'm guessing Panini is willing to lose money for a couple of years on the MLBPA license in the hopes of proving it is worthy of an MLB license. Panini can afford to take a risk like that and survive, and I'm guessing that you cannot (and thus I'm agreeing you made a wise choice passing on it).

As for Warren, he may be passing on some profit by not carrying Leaf, or he may not. I do think the prospect market is the one place where an unlicensed makes a bit of sense. The history of unlicensed cards in the modern hobby, however, hasn't been sterling. The ScoreBoard fiasco lost a lot of people a lot of money, and I'm guessing that Warren decided "never again" after it happened. If Warren is willing to share, I'd like to know if my guess is correct. I'll also say that if Leaf singles prove to hold their value (compared to the "buy in" of packs/boxes) over a long period of time, Warren should feel comfortable selling your product.

 

[cgilmo]

It's also none of anyone's business what warren carries in his store

 

[James52411]

It's also none of anyone's business what warren carries in his store

I agree. Just trying to create a dialogue here.

 

[A_Pharis]

It's also none of anyone's business what warren carries in his store

To be fair, Chris, if Warren can speculate on BG's motives with every release (as a business owner) then shouldn't he expect to be open to non-defamatory speculation (as a business owner)?

 

[cgilmo]

To be fair, Chris, if Warren can speculate on BG's motives with every release (as a business owner) then shouldn't he expect to be open to non-defamatory speculation (as a business owner)?

Leafs motives are none of warrens business as well.

 

[cgilmo]

One rule I like. If you didn't buy it, shut it.

 

[A_Pharis]

Though I haven't been Warren's biggest fan, I'd never want anything bad for an LCS. I can separate the two when it comes to my opinion. I said before, and I maintain, that I understand why he carries what he carries. He's still open, right?

 

[BBCgalaxee]

But nothing today is truely unlicensed. Every card set is "legal" in that the player pictured is compensated.

Leaf, itg, onyx aren't breaking the law by producing cards sans a logo.

Twenty plus yrs ago, "unlicensed" meant "broder" cards which broke every legal rule/law on the books.
The players got no compensation, nor did the leagues or teams despite their logos being used.

 

[notjomommasclint]

I don't know. The impression I got from allstars is that he refuses to carry any unlicensed product on principal, regardless if customers want it. I think he's admitted there have been atleast a few customers over the years who might have inquired about unlicensed products. I also agree with you that most people prefer licensed products but I don't think that means people wouldn't buy unlicensed as well, especially if they are looking to bust some wax and have already opened whatever licensed product is out. Also I would think it might be good to give customers who maybe can't afford to buy a particular licensed product a cheaper alternative. I mean I don't think Topps is offering any cut auto products or Pete Rose cards, or any product for that matter, for $30.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Sports Cards by Freedom Card Board.com

Aside from the rose what product is $30? On release? Also that rose is a retail blaster. Topps / Bowman baseball has retail blasters and value packs that have been absolute treasure troves lately. plus the chrome football blasters from the last 2 years have been loaded (with colored refractors and beating the auto odds) for $19.99.

I can't speak for anyone's business.. i can knly speak to how i feel. but Im taking a guess that if (in all honesty) not carrying a product or line of products for 20+ years hasn't hurt yet it won't moving forward if the hobbys landscape remains static.

As far as the motto if you don't buy it shut it.. Our hobby is nice because we can see what attributes we like or don't like. It's not like a car where you drive it for 3 days to realize the pros and cons. There are products I don't like. I reserve the right to voice the reasons behind my decision. It doesn't mean someone else shouldn't buy it.. It just means I won't.

 

[cgilmo]

If you dont buy it, shut it is more of a personal rule.

 

[notjomommasclint]

If you dont buy it, shut it is more of a personal rule.

Rule #2?

 

[cgilmo]

Rule #2?

I'm not Gibbs

 

[RiceLynnEvans75]

Much like everything else in this hobby, it's all dependent on the people selling and buying. To me, I wouldn't shell out anywhere near that for a Pujols, much less a modern card. To someone else, they'll love it and, as is the case in the OP, are more than willing to pay that much. Personally, I think it's a great looking card just like many of the Leaf cards I have seen on these boards. Unfortunately for me, it's not my niche that I like. We all have our likes, dislikes, and way that we go about doing things. As long as it's not illegal or shady, I don't see anything wrong with whatever way we go in this hobby, or as is the case for a few in this thread, in this business.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

I agree that you were smart to pass on an MLBPA license without the MLB license, particularly since you focus on prospects with your company. The MLB license is the one that creates legitimate added value, particularly since you can license individual players at your discretion. ...

The MLB license allows this:

and

which allows the licensee to plaster/photoshop logos anywhere, everywhere and on anyone and is pretty useless by itself with regard to cards. Its only effective for most collectors when combined with other licenses.

But frankly if you live by the license you'll die by the license... and wind up buying licenses instead of good cards.

 

[James52411]

The MLB license allows this:

and

which allows the licensee to plaster/photoshop logos anywhere, everywhere and on anyone and is pretty useless by itself with regard to cards. Its only effective for most collectors when combined with other licenses.

But frankly if you live by the license you'll die by the license... and wind up buying licenses instead of good cards.

My comment assumes the ability to pair an MLB logo with a player's name and image.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

My comment assumes the ability to pair an MLB logo with a player's name and image.

Yes, I thought you were definitely spot on. I just tried to say licenses are sometimes ridiculous and are overemphasized.

 

[cgilmo]

keep in mind that licensing is divided into categories. A company with a mlbp license to make trading cards couldn't make t shirts.