View Poll Results:
- Voters
- 0. This poll is closed
-
0 0%
Results 1 to 10 of 24
-
08-19-2009, 03:48 PM #1
Problems in the hobby?
Earlier this afternoon, I posted a rough critique of an article from the SCF article site. The gist of the article was that the decision by MLB to sign an exclusive contract with Topps for baseball cards would help cure some of the problems of the hobby.
Upon further reflection, I can assert that while I believe the card companies might face problems, that the hobby is doing relatively well. In aggregate, sports cards may command less of the world's wallet than they use to. But, I don't understand how this affects "the hobby."
So, I'm looking for more points of view about problems with the hobby. If you are dissatisfied with the hobby, please explain why.
-
-
08-19-2009, 04:14 PM #2
I wont comment on this one just yet but i'd love to read an article about this once you get more opinions ;)
-
08-19-2009, 04:28 PM #3
The hobby survived for years when it was basically just Topps producing sets (and the oddball/regional issues being on the side)
In my opinion Topps has done things the right way more often than not and will continue to do so. I think the hobby is alive and well for the collector. For the "investor", well that may be another story
-
-
08-19-2009, 04:37 PM #4
i dont think topps should be the only mlb brand. It would be a monoply!!!!!
My issues are that upper deck cards and sometimes topps cards have quality control issues. in The high end upper deck baseball products like exquisite and black, most of the cards have chipping on them and corner damage. The companies will replace it but it can be months until you see the card again
-
08-19-2009, 04:40 PM #5
I don't consider this a collecting hobby anymore, everyone tries to make money off of it.
-
-
08-19-2009, 04:52 PM #6
Sorry man, I have to disagree with that statement. I ONLY collect, rarely sell....and rarely means I have sold a grand total of two cards (and that was very unique circumstance), and I have been collecting since I was 13!
as far as a sole licensing goes....I can't stand it!! Just look at Hockey and its "monopoly". I for one can't believe this is happening in other sports. Cause from what I have seen, this has NOT been good for hockey collectors. UD has an arrogance about them now that says to me...."You'll like what we tell you to like". I wonder if other card companies will adopt this attitude?
Whatever happened to freindly competition?
-
08-19-2009, 05:22 PM #7
I for one dislike the fact that Topps will be the only one producing MLB licensed cards. Competition ups the ante for better ideas and production purposes. Back in the 80's when Topps was the biggest company, they produced nothing but ugly and boring cards. It wasn't until Upper Deck came in the picture that Topps slowly began making better cards. In my opinion Topps is inferior to Upper Deck. UD began innovating the hobby and Topps was playing copycat and catching up to UD.
-
-
08-19-2009, 08:10 PM #8
I like the hobby...Cards seem to be more expensive but that's not the manufacturers fault...I think it is devastating for the BASEBALL hobby.
Topps is not creative and just doesn't stand up to UD.
Football and basketball are doing just fine
-
08-19-2009, 08:20 PM #9
My favorite brand has always been DONRUSS talk about great inserts and other speciality sets! By far and away the best ideas came from them. Topps seemed to think cards are cards lets just keep them simple. I want to see new sweeter looking cards.
Topps is the one that puts boxing autos in their baseball product!!! What is that all about? One company with one license stinks for us the collectors because they certainly do not listen to what we have to say.
-
08-19-2009, 09:53 PM #10
It seems to be big hit though as A&G has a huge following.
I don't mind simple if the cards have a solid design w/ great photography.
-
Originally Posted by Glebe 
