Topps: The Odd One Out?
Topps is out of football!
Topps is out of football?
Topps is out of football.
Wow! I didn’t see that coming. Topps without a football license? That just seems . . . odd. After all, the New York-based trading card giant has produced at least one football product a year since 1955. For those counting at home, that’s 55 consecutive seasons.
Look, it’s all the rage these days for licensing entities to trim manufacturers from the mix in the name of bettering a battered business (see the NHL and Upper Deck, MLB Properties and Topps, the NBA and Panini, the CLC and UD, etc.); and the fact that Players Inc was planning to reduce the number of football players had been rumored for months. So the finality of that Monday-afternoon announcement surprised no one.
It was the cut player’s identity that seemed so shocking.
Personally, I figured Upper Deck the most likely to be eliminated based on nothing more than trending momentum that saw the company lose the NBA and MLB Properties but counter with the CLC exclusive in the first eight months of 2009. Now, suddenly Topps appears vulnerable after losing the NBA and the NFL in 2009 and entering 2010 with baseball and the UFC.
There are bound to be any number of meaningful reasons why Players Inc executed this particular move. Soon enough, whenever officials from all sides of the issue start talking, we’ll begin to figure them out.
For now, all we have to go on are the readily available rumors, hearsay and speculation making the rounds . . .
- Could it be that Players Inc felt Topps would be too focused on baseball in 2010 to devote the desired amount of resources to football?
- Or that Players Inc felt the internationally founded Panini America and the marketing-savvy Upper Deck gave the football category a better chance to grow? Some say Topps didn’t help its case by ruffling corporate feathers earlier this season with a popular Magic release that allegedly attempted to evade NFL Properties licensing requirements.
- Or, just maybe, this is merely a counter punch in the continuing and fierce rivalry between industry heavyweights Topps and Upper Deck. Perhaps, as the theory goes, Topps did everything in its power to squeeze UD out of the MLB Properties picture; UD simply returned the favor with Players Inc.
- Collectors in favor of Topps’ gridiron dismissal – by all accounts a very vocal, very small minority – point to supposed substandard product quality and persistent redemption card issues.
Again, that’s speculation, but let’s be honest: If we deleted manufacturers for an occasional dud product or redemption cards, we wouldn’t have any trading cards left to collect.
To be sure, there are far more questions than answers at this point.
Credit Players Inc for making what, on the surface, appears to be the boldest possible move in removing Topps from the mix (and for also for keeping it quiet for as long as it did; that’s an unheard of accomplishment in this industry).
In the coming days, it is hoped that folks in the know can touch on some of these issues and detail not only why Topps was pulled from the game, but, more importantly, what go-forward plans are in store to meaningfully address the ultimate objective: Bettering a battered business.
— Tracy Hackler
It’s very very simple: the exclusive licensee that would pony up the most $$ won. They certainly offered more than the players association felt it could get from the other licensees combined. As much as I’d love to speculate that there is some good hobby-centric reason this happened, it comes down to the money.
Just remember that NFL Properties has yet to chime in on its plans for 2010. In theory, it’s possible that Topps could attempt to land individual agreements with a host of players and essentially do in 2010 what it did with Topps Magic in 2009 — player-focused but with no NFL or college logos.
Are you guy’s employed by Upper Deck? After reading the blog entry, one gets that impression.
Really? How so? The short answer to your question is “no, we’re not employed by Upper Deck.”
what it boils down to is topps pulled a no no
and tried to back door players inc with the magic cards
i personally like topps they always have an abondance of rookies in any sport where as upper deck has short prints nothing heats me more than paying a high price for cards and getting nothing in return
Maybe Upper Deck and Panini agreed to give to the Players Inc. 2011 Strike Fund. However, this seems like a market correction. It may be more cost efficient for the Card Companies to concentrate on one sport. I have not seen any numbers in recent years but I am assuming baseball contols most of the sales. I wonder if it is 50% with BK, FB and HK having the other 50% of the sports card market.