(12-30-2011 10:28 AM)vgqv Wrote: Yup, the greedy self centered NBA commish awarded the contract to Panini over UD & Topps. Not because he thought they would do a better job but because they paid the most money and are an internationally based company (Italy, right?). NBA is all for overseas now. Think Stern was ever thinking about us basketball card collectors? He don't give a damn. All about that green.
(12-30-2011 10:44 AM)dodgytrousers Wrote: Yeah, it was probably one of 20 licenses Stern signed that day for various products. I doubt he has given Basketball cards a second thought since.
Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea if everyone contacted the NBA and let them know we want more companies making licensed cards.
(01-01-2012 05:22 PM)taffster74 Wrote: Quavis is correct - both UD and topps had an oppotunity to renew their license but they chose not to. I have told people this repeatedly, but it seems they just don't want to listen which has me thinking no one really paid attention to the news as it broke besides me. People are so set on this whole monopoly BS -what about Ice hockey between 2004 and 2010? What about Upper Decks exclusive deal with NCAA/CLC? What about UD's strangle hold on MLS? No one seems to be whinging about that.
(01-02-2012 12:55 AM)tmakact7 Wrote: I think a lot of people don't like change (like when your favorite player on your favorite team gets traded away to another team). They're use to a certain way of doing things and certain products. It's tough when changes happens. I think a lot of people (not all) never really gave Panini a chance when they first jumped into the NBA market. Even if UD and/or Topps comes back into the NBA game, won't Panini still have a strangle hold on the NBA market with all of these contracts with Kobe, Durant, Wall, Griffin, Irving, etc?