Topps Sues Leaf Over "Best Of" Product!

[Weimer]

At least you're making money.

 

[Card Magnet]

Second and last post in this thread.

If a product sells out, it's a success.

Leaf Metal Draft sold out

Therefore, a success

Nope. Pro stuff is where it's at, bitch. And this isn't pro stuff. No one wants college stuff. Not even the college collectors who collect college stuff. Guys like Brennan who collect Miami players don't want stuff like Leaf Metal Draft because it's too college-y for them. It's not enough pro. You get what I'm saying? College stuff sucks. Even college collectors don't like college stuff.

:lol:

 

[PujolsCollector]

I think Topps is really just being stupid on this one. I mean if they are going to sue Leaf for using their images to make money then every eBay auction with one of there cards should be pulled. Thats basically what they are doing. Leaf simply made a sheet with pictures of cards that they were trying to sell they choose a different methond instead of auctions they put them in a box and they are selling you the box and the cards are free.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Which goes back to my original posts re: rookie retro, 2 years ago.

This is a grab bag product. Now, Brian has modified the grab bag under my recommendations (yeah, I'm never gonna let that one go) by creating his own cards to put into it, but ultimately, it's a grab bag. Perhaps not under the grab bag law, but in principle. And, to advertise what you're potentially going to get in the grab bag IS NOT ILLEGAL! If those cards were not ever inserted in the product, THEN Topps has a claim. . . but they are, and they don't.

I look forward to watching this play out. For those of you who may dislike me for the arguments I made in the past (I'm Jeff N., if you haven't already gathered), I've never EVER disliked Brian or his product. In fact, I like Brian. I just like a good legal argument, and that's what I enjoyed back with the ROokie Retro product.

THere aren't many logical arguments here on Topps' behalf, and I don't see one. . . unfortunately, there's no one here who can logically argue on Topps' behalf. I've gotten halfway through the complaint and it looks like it was written by a law student. It's really poorly worded and thought through.

Brian/Leaf will win.

I DON'T think this is frivilous enough to win attorney's fees, so... ultimately, those who win are the attorneys. . . which, on a personal basis, I don't have a problem with, but most of the populace does.....

 

[AMAZIN HOF COLLECTOR]

Which goes back to my original posts re: rookie retro, 2 years ago.

This is a grab bag product. Now, Brian has modified the grab bag under my recommendations (yeah, I'm never gonna let that one go) by creating his own cards to put into it, but ultimately, it's a grab bag. Perhaps not under the grab bag law, but in principle. And, to advertise what you're potentially going to get in the grab bag IS NOT ILLEGAL! If those cards were not ever inserted in the product, THEN Topps has a claim. . . but they are, and they don't.

I look forward to watching this play out. For those of you who may dislike me for the arguments I made in the past (I'm Jeff N., if you haven't already gathered), I've never EVER disliked Brian or his product. In fact, I like Brian. I just like a good legal argument, and that's what I enjoyed back with the ROokie Retro product.

THere aren't many logical arguments here on Topps' behalf, and I don't see one. . . unfortunately, there's no one here who can logically argue on Topps' behalf. I've gotten halfway through the complaint and it looks like it was written by a law student. It's really poorly worded and thought through.

Brian/Leaf will win.

I DON'T think this is frivilous enough to win attorney's fees, so... ultimately, those who win are the attorneys. . . which, on a personal basis, I don't have a problem with, but most of the populace does.....

On a side note......what is a name worth????
Like "Mr.Met" or any other mascot?

Reason I ask, Jeff N by any other name is still Jeff N and should stay that way. Alot of time and effort went in to building the name, franchise (and character). I think the new name shoud go the way of "new Coke"...
Welcome back Jeff N (that's if the general allows an exception to the one name change rule).

 

[WoundedDuck]

I think Bob Loblaw is perfect! Don't change it back.



I don't consider myself a football collector and I don't know much about the football collecting scene. However, I went to Ohio State, so I've made it a point to pick up a RC year auto of each guy that graduates from OSU. I try to avoid Sage and Press Pass (unless that's my only route) and pick up a card from a licensed product of my OSU guys wearing their new NFL jerseys. I was pretty impressed with Leaf football though and picked up a Heyward auto from Leaf to fill that spot in my collection. Even though it's unlicensed and he's in an OSU jersey, I loved the look of the cards so I broke my own rule. (earlier I mentioned I haven't bought anything Razor/Leaf since Sig. Series, but I forgot about this one )

I realize I can't extrapolate my own experience with this year's Leaf product to how it was received nationally. However, I don't think my example was an isolated incident, as others have shown with more than my anecdotal evidence. The product looked nice and I'm not disappointed in my purchase at all and I have a hard time believing it was laughed off the shelves nationally.

I hope they can get an MLB license and produce some nice baseball products I'd be more interested in as well.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

[quote="Bob Loblaw":19u368si]Which goes back to my original posts re: rookie retro, 2 years ago.

This is a grab bag product. Now, Brian has modified the grab bag under my recommendations (yeah, I'm never gonna let that one go) by creating his own cards to put into it, but ultimately, it's a grab bag. Perhaps not under the grab bag law, but in principle. And, to advertise what you're potentially going to get in the grab bag IS NOT ILLEGAL! If those cards were not ever inserted in the product, THEN Topps has a claim. . . but they are, and they don't.

I look forward to watching this play out. For those of you who may dislike me for the arguments I made in the past (I'm Jeff N., if you haven't already gathered), I've never EVER disliked Brian or his product. In fact, I like Brian. I just like a good legal argument, and that's what I enjoyed back with the ROokie Retro product.

THere aren't many logical arguments here on Topps' behalf, and I don't see one. . . unfortunately, there's no one here who can logically argue on Topps' behalf. I've gotten halfway through the complaint and it looks like it was written by a law student. It's really poorly worded and thought through.

Brian/Leaf will win.

I DON'T think this is frivilous enough to win attorney's fees, so... ultimately, those who win are the attorneys. . . which, on a personal basis, I don't have a problem with, but most of the populace does.....

On a side note......what is a name worth????
Like "Mr.Met" or any other mascot?

Reason I ask, Jeff N by any other name is still Jeff N and should stay that way. Alot of time and effort went in to building the name, franchise (and character). I think the new name shoud go the way of "new Coke"...
Welcome back Jeff N (that's if the general allows an exception to the one name change rule). [/quote:19u368si]


I fell in love with Loblaw when the series was running, and I use him for the other couple of message boards I'm on. Thought about just starting new here, but I know how "newbies" are treated, so I figured I'd just wait it out until they allowed name changes. Since everything that was previously my old name was switched over to Bob Loblaw, I figured it wouldn't be too difficult to figure out who I was.

[youtube:19u368si]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwWAsNZTnug&playnext=1&list=PL45719B646983A3CB[/youtube:19u368si]

 

[WoundedDuck]

[quote="AMAZIN HOF COLLECTOR":v591fm67][quote="Bob Loblaw":v591fm67]Which goes back to my original posts re: rookie retro, 2 years ago.

This is a grab bag product. Now, Brian has modified the grab bag under my recommendations (yeah, I'm never gonna let that one go) by creating his own cards to put into it, but ultimately, it's a grab bag. Perhaps not under the grab bag law, but in principle. And, to advertise what you're potentially going to get in the grab bag IS NOT ILLEGAL! If those cards were not ever inserted in the product, THEN Topps has a claim. . . but they are, and they don't.

I look forward to watching this play out. For those of you who may dislike me for the arguments I made in the past (I'm Jeff N., if you haven't already gathered), I've never EVER disliked Brian or his product. In fact, I like Brian. I just like a good legal argument, and that's what I enjoyed back with the ROokie Retro product.

THere aren't many logical arguments here on Topps' behalf, and I don't see one. . . unfortunately, there's no one here who can logically argue on Topps' behalf. I've gotten halfway through the complaint and it looks like it was written by a law student. It's really poorly worded and thought through.

Brian/Leaf will win.

I DON'T think this is frivilous enough to win attorney's fees, so... ultimately, those who win are the attorneys. . . which, on a personal basis, I don't have a problem with, but most of the populace does.....

On a side note......what is a name worth????
Like "Mr.Met" or any other mascot?

Reason I ask, Jeff N by any other name is still Jeff N and should stay that way. Alot of time and effort went in to building the name, franchise (and character). I think the new name shoud go the way of "new Coke"...
Welcome back Jeff N (that's if the general allows an exception to the one name change rule). [/quote:v591fm67]


I fell in love with Loblaw when the series was running, and I use him for the other couple of message boards I'm on. Thought about just starting new here, but I know how "newbies" are treated, so I figured I'd just wait it out until they allowed name changes. Since everything that was previously my old name was switched over to Bob Loblaw, I figured it wouldn't be too difficult to figure out who I was.

[youtube:v591fm67]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwWAsNZTnug&playnext=1&list=PL45719B646983A3CB[/youtube:v591fm67][/quote:v591fm67]


I need to pull those DVDs out and watch the series again. Best show to ever be canceld prematurely.

 

[predatorkj]

Upper Deck Exquisite would like to butt in and let you know serious money is not just in pro product. The resale value is in high end products, regardless of pro or college theme. So yes, I will argue with you that serious collectors drop dough on non-pro products.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, STOP COMPARING LEAF TO NATIONAL TREASURES ::facepalm:: . You claim I was acting like Leaf was a main competitor. It's not, yet you keep yammering on that it is. You don't compare a Comfort Inn to a Trump. Compare it to a Super 8 or Motel 6. National Treasures is a high end product, Leaf Metal and Ultimate are not. Forget apples to oranges, you're doing apples to a grove of orange trees. Stack Leaf up against some products in the same tier, and they do pretty damn well, especially for an unlicensed product.

The fact that your lcs can't move whatever they have means nothing on the large scale. It's a small sample on a large scale operation.

On a national level, people were all over Draft from what I saw online. I couldn't get my hands on a box locally. It sold like hotcakes. People who never touched college were buying boxes right here on this board. I'm sure that was the case with people not here as well. A couple of guys at the local card show had singles and boxes, and raved about it while trashing some comparably priced licensed products. They were similar to many reviews/postings online.

Now it's not for everyone, that's for damn sure. But hey, there's not a single product out there that's for everyone. You and your lcs don't seem to like it, and yet Leaf managed to move out box upon box, I'm sure flip a profit, and grow larger as a company. How the hell they did that without the three boxes at your lcs selling is a mystery. Perhaps it's a Festivus miracle.

Your opinion on Leaf Metal football is as valid as financial advice from M.C. Hammer. I can't make out what to think. On one hand, you say you are a college guy. On the other, you say that college is nothing. You say that you like Leaf and want them to succeed, yet you're cutting them down on everything they do. Even when you give credit, you manage to tie in an insult (Ali was good, but that's an oddball product, so it doesn't count, right?).

Exqisite is alwasy going to sell high. Had it been pro licensed, it would sell higher. Let that go.


And yes...yes everyone was saying that Leaf was a competitor. Do not back out of that now. Please do not. Which is why we are even having this argument. All I said was that if Leaf wants to really compete, they need a license. Until then, they can't do anything to make a major dent. If you, or anyone else cannot understand that, I'm sorry. That is why I brought up National Treasures because has Leaf made a dent in people ordering that? No they haven't. Wouldn't a real competitor be able to do that? You guys , as usual, are sidestepping my point. Which is what I expect from people who either don't know how to read or don't have any argument. I said I love collecting college cards. I also collect base cards. Let me guess, that means base cards are the hot thing right now right? Listen to yourselves. Yes people collect college. But if you have a pro product, that is where the money is to be made. Otherwise, even things like press pass and sage would be going for nice chunks well after their release.

Oh...and it wasn't just one hobby shop I was reffering to. It's funny as hell that you all think I just pull stuff out of my ass. If I hadn't heard a damn thing about their products, I wouldn't really have anything to say towards that front now would I? And it's not just one person or two or three or four. I do wish Brian Gray well. I DO NOT LIKE JUST ONE OR TWO COMPANIES MAKING CARDS. I LIKE COMPETITION. But, Brian and Leaf are not quite there yet. This board living in its own microcosm needs to realize that. I don't understand how just because you have a certain opinion about a company, it all of a sudden means you hate that company. I do not hate Leaf. I'm just not giving them credit they have not yet earned. If you all want to, be my guest. I'll be the ignorant *******, and you guys continue living like this board IS the entire hobby. Just like everyone here thinks prospecting is the end all be all of the hobby. Which is odd because I never figured out why I've met maybe 3 people since I've been going to shows and shops who prospect. Yet you guys say it's a hobby mainstream thing. I think in this case, I'd rather be considered the *******. As long as it means I don't grab the koolaide on the way in the door.

 

[cgilmo]

predatorkj


Whatever you gotta tell yourself.

 

[sportscardtheory]

So "everyone" on this bard is a prospector. Fail.

Secondly, your posts aren't saying anything. No one is saying that Leaf is the best company out there, so what exactly is your point?

This is getting ridiculous.

 

[Card Magnet]

That is why I brought up National Treasures because has Leaf made a dent in people ordering that? No they haven't. Wouldn't a real competitor be able to do that?

::facepalm:: No, Leaf would not make a dent in that. National Treasures is of a different tier of product than what is put out, and will always sell well regardless of competition because it has its own niche and established name. So long as NT doesn't change what it's doing, no other product (especially low/mid end) will hinder it. It's incredibly stupid to try to say a low/mid end will steal business from a high end. Would you suggest Score or Topps (flagship product) would steal buyers of NT?

Exqisite is alwasy going to sell high. Had it been pro licensed, it would sell higher. Let that go.

So your argument against me pointing out that Exquisite college sells high because it is a high end product is to agree with me, but then say it would have been better as pro? Let's grab some real facts and figures of Exquisite's pro vs college releases to (dis)prove your statement.

Sanchez and Bradford, the best QBs of their respective class. Does a print run 25 shorter justify a doubling in price?
Mark Sanchez Exquisite RPA /100; $500 [ebay:388nl2ky]220822920111[/ebay:388nl2ky]
$420 [ebay:388nl2ky]370502945510[/ebay:388nl2ky]
Sam Bradford Exquisite RPA /75; $1000 [ebay:388nl2ky]290595580174[/ebay:388nl2ky]
$1150 [ebay:388nl2ky]140546458009[/ebay:388nl2ky]

Now how about Percy Harvin (pro) versus Dez Bryant (college), two of the top receivers in their respective classes, and both with a big market pro team. Again, 2010 does have a print run of 25 less, but is that enough to triple the price?

Percy Harvin /99 $87.76 [ebay:388nl2ky]250870514533[/ebay:388nl2ky]
Dez Bryant /75 $265 [ebay:388nl2ky]170677607425[/ebay:388nl2ky]

And finally, please point me towards a non-auto rookie that touches prices like these Cam Newtons. It can't be done with Cam's rookies this year since it's so early, but feel free to use any player in the past few years. The only ones I have come up with are the "breakout" guys like Tom Brady. Hell, even Andy Dalton's Exquisite sold at $40 recently.

Cam Newton Exquisite /99 $113 [ebay:388nl2ky]230658628215[/ebay:388nl2ky]
Cam newton Exquisite /25 $304 [ebay:388nl2ky]270795627567[/ebay:388nl2ky]

I'll be the ignorant *******, and you guys continue living like this board IS the entire hobby.

Apparently you will be the ignorant *******, because you think a few shops and shows in your corner of Texas is a much better gauge of national hobby trends than an internet community with people from various income levels and locations. Your shops and shows in the are just a small blip on the full market...or, irrelevant in gauging anything. You seem to think that the local inability to sell trumps the fact that Leaf sold out to distributors, and you brush Gimlore off when he has first hand knowledge. You are King Ignoramus. I could go outside and talk the needles off a pine tree before anyone here can overcome your wall of ignorance.

I do not hate Leaf. I'm just not giving them credit they have not yet earned.

In what the hell world does selling out a product not earn credit? How does a steady expansion of the company not earn them credit? I'm not going to crown them king of the hobby by any means, but I don't see how you can deny that they are a viable company on the market. Let's not forget their "licensed" Army Bowl cards. That product has even found success. A football product of kids who haven't even played a college game, let alone pro, sells. If I ever open a business, I hope that it is a huge failure and sells out of everything, giving me nice profit and room for expanse.

As long as it means I don't grab the koolaide on the way in the door.

You and your ******* kool aid line. Somebody watches too much political programming. If I hear kool aid one more time, I'm going to take the kool aid pitcher and slap you upside the head with it and pour your Haterade down the kitchen sink so you don't have anything to sip. :x

 

[Viking4Alpha]

This board living in its own microcosm needs to realize that.

Find a different microcosm if this one is chafing you. :idea:

 

[predatorkj]

This board living in its own microcosm needs to realize that.

Find a different microcosm if this one is chafing you. :idea:

Trust me...I take my breaks.

 

[predatorkj]

Okay...in a calm and collected manner, I'll address your points.

::facepalm:: No, Leaf would not make a dent in that. National Treasures is of a different tier of product than what is put out, and will always sell well regardless of competition because it has its own niche and established name. So long as NT doesn't change what it's doing, no other product (especially low/mid end) will hinder it. It's incredibly stupid to try to say a low/mid end will steal business from a high end. Would you suggest Score or Topps (flagship product) would steal buyers of NT?

Leaf also isn't going to make a dent in Topps Chrome or Finest or Contenders etc. So if it's not competing with products even on its own level, how do you think it is able to be seen as a valid competitor? I agree they do nice with what they have. I love the diecut stuff they produced. I love the design. But I don't care about someone like J.J. Watt being in a Wisconsin uniform when I buy his cards. I want him in a Texans uni. With a nice fat Texans logo on it. You think I'm alone in that? And don't get me wrong, I'm not against owning Wisconsin stuff of his. But as a Texans fan, Wisconsin means little to me. When a player makes his pro debut, you are now opening the door to a zillion new fans. Fans that care about the Pro Team that drafted him or signed him. Ask yourself this...if college stuff is where the money is at...why hasn't it ever been a real big deal in the hobby? Yes there is a niche. Yes Leaf is smart for going after that niche. But Leaf is limited in only being able to tackle just one niche. They have a very small window of being able to use any particular player in sets like that. Topps makes cards for the duration of the dudes career. And Topps does all kinds of retro themed sets with players from decades past. They have all the aces. That is all I am saying. You give Leaf a license, and now...it's only going to matter who puts out the best product. That is what I am saying.



So your argument against me pointing out that Exquisite college sells high because it is a high end product is to agree with me, but then say it would have been better as pro? Let's grab some real facts and figures of Exquisite's pro vs college releases to (dis)prove your statement.

Sanchez and Bradford, the best QBs of their respective class. Does a print run 25 shorter justify a doubling in price?
Mark Sanchez Exquisite RPA /100; $500 [ebay:251wy7dz]220822920111[/ebay:251wy7dz]
$420 [ebay:251wy7dz]370502945510[/ebay:251wy7dz]
Sam Bradford Exquisite RPA /75; $1000 [ebay:251wy7dz]290595580174[/ebay:251wy7dz]
$1150 [ebay:251wy7dz]140546458009[/ebay:251wy7dz]

Now how about Percy Harvin (pro) versus Dez Bryant (college), two of the top receivers in their respective classes, and both with a big market pro team. Again, 2010 does have a print run of 25 less, but is that enough to triple the price?

Percy Harvin /99 $87.76 [ebay:251wy7dz]250870514533[/ebay:251wy7dz]
Dez Bryant /75 $265 [ebay:251wy7dz]170677607425[/ebay:251wy7dz]

And finally, please point me towards a non-auto rookie that touches prices like these Cam Newtons. It can't be done with Cam's rookies this year since it's so early, but feel free to use any player in the past few years. The only ones I have come up with are the "breakout" guys like Tom Brady. Hell, even Andy Dalton's Exquisite sold at $40 recently.

Cam Newton Exquisite /99 $113 [ebay:251wy7dz]230658628215[/ebay:251wy7dz]
Cam newton Exquisite /25 $304 [ebay:251wy7dz]270795627567[/ebay:251wy7dz]


Okay...so now you are trying to compare prices on Mark Sanchez versus Sam Bradford? Or Percy Harvin and Dez Bryant? And you you say you know a thing or two about the football end of the hobby? As for the Cam Newton example...uh wait until something similar drops and we will see. You are trying to compare apples to thin air. I doubt those prices hold anyways. They are just like any other set that hits first. They get much love because it's all that is out.


Apparently you will be the ignorant *******, because you think a few shops and shows in your corner of Texas is a much better gauge of national hobby trends than an internet community with people from various income levels and locations. Your shops and shows in the are just a small blip on the full market...or, irrelevant in gauging anything. You seem to think that the local inability to sell trumps the fact that Leaf sold out to distributors, and you brush Gimlore off when he has first hand knowledge. You are King Ignoramus. I could go outside and talk the needles off a pine tree before anyone here can overcome your wall of ignorance.

Yes, I've never been outside of my little cardboard box right in the center of Texas. Man, you've got me there. I knew I should have kept my mouth shut. Damn! In other news, just because a product sells out does not mean it is nationally well received. There are products that do sell out and customers are not necessarily stunned by the product. What I have seen and heard comes from other places too like Chicago and Florida as well. It's not just here. People want a competitor in the ring. There is much bitching right now about Topps and Panini and a lot of people barely batted an eyelash at Leaf because it had no license. They want quality with a pro product. You act like this is all my idea. Dude...I've busted like a few blasters of score. I'm not even in on this game. If Leaf was a big deal around the world, it sure as hell wasn't here and it sure as hell wasn't in the other places I've talked to people in. One of my local shops didn't even order any because not a single person wanted any. Not one. This isn't all my idea here. I talk to a lot of people. I ask questions. I'm curious. I see what you guys talk about here and I want to know how it fits with the real hobby world I see and deal with and then I can put two and two together. It's one of the main reasons (and no sportscardtheory...not everyone here is a prospector but if you read this board enough you'd think it was a hell of a lot bigger than it actually is)I get irked with a lot of people here. You guys are really caught up like this board is more than it is. It is a drop in the vast bucket of this hobby. That is it.


In what the hell world does selling out a product not earn credit? How does a steady expansion of the company not earn them credit? I'm not going to crown them king of the hobby by any means, but I don't see how you can deny that they are a viable company on the market. Let's not forget their "licensed" Army Bowl cards. That product has even found success. A football product of kids who haven't even played a college game, let alone pro, sells. If I ever open a business, I hope that it is a huge failure and sells out of everything, giving me nice profit and room for expanse.

That's just an assnine statement right there. If you gave me long enough I could probably sell 5 bags of dogcrap to somebody. They don't even necessarily have to be happy with it either. They are expanding and I do give them credit for that. Viable though...I'm not sure. If I were Topps or Panini, nothing they are doing would be bothering me. Not even the product that Topps is now suing them over. What they have done and continue to do does very little to strike fear into Topps or Panini. Not really sure what the ARMY Bowl stuff means to this conversation. I too purchased some of it. It's a very tiny niche thing man. Tiny. But cool nonetheless. UHMM...as for selling out, you mean to tell me that they didn't just make the items to order based on what kind of orders they were receiving? So they printed like 200,000 cases of their products and hoped like hell they'd sell out?

As long as it means I don't grab the koolaide on the way in the door.

You and your fracking kool aid line. Somebody watches too much political programming. If I hear kool aid one more time, I'm going to take the kool aid pitcher and slap you upside the head with it and pour your Haterade down the kitchen sink so you don't have anything to sip. :x

I hate politics. I think they are all crooks. Everyone should just be careful who they take their koolaide from. Never know...might be another Jim Jones type running around. It seems there are enough people here who would blindly drink.