14 Comments

A 2011 product releasing in March 2012. The ball DID drop in Times Square on January 1st, right? Just want to make sure I didn’t miss anything.

2011…probably so that they can avoid being sued by Topps for the Griffey Jr autos.

That’s a bit of a reach, pastor.

Jaypers: Yeah, I’m a big fan of that, too. I’m betting it’s from stuff getting delayed in licensing/approvals stages, meaning that they can go over by that amount of time on the back end of the deal.

I wish I could get excited about Panini’s NoLoGos products, but I can’t.

I’ve got to agree with ‘Phil’ on this one. An airbrushed card is still JUST that. I don’t want cards that show NO affiliation with the team that they were famous for playing for! Panini can make all the baseball cards they want, but I will still avoid anything that doesn’t allow MLB logos for the players who are known for playing for that team. That is exactly why my Ozzie Smith collection is still mostly devoid of Prime Cuts cards from the mid-2000′s. The only ones I have are from package deals where I mostly got MLB-licensed cards!
Panini NEEDS an MLB license to excite the true MLB collectors!!! I also want them to get one to FORCE Topps to make their products worth buying again. The only difference b/t Panini and the unheard-of MiLB manufacturers (Star, Grandstand, etc.) is that the MiLB unknowns can show the logos for the teams that they represent. I can only hope that these Panini offerings are helping the MLB realize that they need another company to compete with Topps to make MLB cards interesting/intriguing to collectors.

Now since it is an 11 product does that mean Rookie cards or not ? I would love another shot at a nice Lawrie.

Adam: If Panini shows its products are money-makers, MLB can’t help but notice because it will want someone who can make money for them doing just that.

I think when it comes to high-end memorabilia cards, there aren’t a whole lot of hang-ups about logos — it’s about the memorabilia.

why not release 2010 cards too

Chris, some of the products might be “money makers” for Panini only because they
don’t have to pay the MLB fees. Not to mention they could not include players that
MLB bans like Pete Rose or Shoeless Joe.

I no longer buy new memorabilia cards of inactive players. I’m no longer confident
that the material is game used by the player since they do not specify specifically
the nature of the material. The way the certs are now written, it can be a piece of
the visitors bench that happened to at one time in a stadium where an official MLB
event occurred, which could include spring training or the like and has no actual
tie to the player pictured on the card. Unless the card is specifically stated to be
worn by the player and the nature of the event is also specified, I’m not touching it.

overkill by panini
we do not need another round of the same old 2011 prospects

This product looks horrible. Everyone looks like they are wearing milkmen outfits from the 70′s.

give it to upper deck…..they know how to print things past the date

airbrushed or not……if its a player/set/etc. that you (“you” is a collective term meaning all of us hobbyists) want in your collection-GREAT !!!!! I also understand the true collectors that do not care at all for the airbrushed helmets or uni’s (oh….who can ever forget Joe Montanas RC…………………………..LOL ). And finally……..how true a statement that Topps needs some sort of truely liscensed competition !!!!!!!