Panini is going to court

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/collector-files-class-action-suit-over-redemption-cards/?fbclid=IwAR2xIpi4mBOEZNoeLEyUOlK_11Gaguork4TA0fQIT2BlhBQoZaOxlu8fk38

Apparently, Panini is being sued for violating the state of texas deceptive practices act. sounds like they better get serious about redemptions!

I have never bought a Panini product, and hardly ever buy anything new, but the whole redemption thing is quite an issue for the hobby. Maybe something good will come from this.

Comments

  • BLUEJAYWAYBLUEJAYWAY Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Should be interesting to see how this story develops. Topps has their issues with redemption's as well. I do not buy Panini products either.

    Successful transactions:Tookybandit
  • LarkinCollectorLarkinCollector Posts: 6,525 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Redemption inserts keep me away from purchasing most modern product (probably a good thing TBQH). Unopened with redemptions that have already expired should sell for a significant discount, though it doesn't seem that's what happens.

    Is there a source that lists all products with redemptions and their expiration dates?

  • ssollarsssollars Posts: 846 ✭✭✭

    Did I read that right, so cards (or labels) are "sent" to player for them to sign? So there is no guarantee that it is the actual players signature!

    I'm glad I've never gotten into autographs.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    i wonder, is topps contractually obligated by their licencing agreement with MLB to sell products which offer "hits" either "relics" or autographs? if they are not, I wonder why they continue to manufacture these"relics" that no one gets excited about. 90% of the autos are worthless as well. It seems with the popularity of parallel rainbows and some insert sets that they could sell products with those and a smathering of autos and get rid of the vast majority of redemptions and the headaches associated with them.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 7, 2019 12:05PM

    @ssollars said:
    Did I read that right, so cards (or labels) are "sent" to player for them to sign? So there is no guarantee that it is the actual players signature!

    I'm glad I've never gotten into autographs.

    that is correct. there are seldom Topps representatives present. usually it is a friend/family member of the player acts as a rep. there is absolutely no oversight. check out the Dak Prescott autopen fiasco from last year. I believe there were also questions about some Shaq autos from a few years ago. its pretty corrupt

  • LarkinCollectorLarkinCollector Posts: 6,525 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ssollars said:
    Did I read that right, so cards (or labels) are "sent" to player for them to sign? So there is no guarantee that it is the actual players signature!

    I'm glad I've never gotten into autographs.

    I'm not sure who signed this one, but I'm 100% it wasn't Barry Larkin. The 'L' looks slightly reminiscent of his very early signature, the 'B' is nowhere close to any era.

    I think the other 'Certified Auto' issue that was obviously fake for him was from Donruss as well, bold printed in all caps 'B LARK'.

  • softparadesoftparade Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I've never been into autographs in my collecting life. I do enjoy modern issues such as Heritage but when I hit an auto I sell it just as fast as it came out of the pack.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    about the only autos I collect are the ones I have received in person. I know they are real. I dont like sticker autos and really I dont even like any autos on cards. I feel it messies up the designs. as for "relic" cards, ugh.

  • saucywombatsaucywombat Posts: 1,072 ✭✭✭

    Panini redemptions are a joke. Panini is a joke.

    Big verdict might put them into bankruptcy as I can only imagine they run on the slimmest of margins (Given their non-existent customer service).

    Always looking for 1993-1999 Baseball Finest Refractors and1994 Football Finest Refractors.
    [email protected]
  • @LarkinCollector said:

    @ssollars said:
    Did I read that right, so cards (or labels) are "sent" to player for them to sign? So there is no guarantee that it is the actual players signature!

    I'm glad I've never gotten into autographs.

    I'm not sure who signed this one, but I'm 100% it wasn't Barry Larkin. The 'L' looks slightly reminiscent of his very early signature, the 'B' is nowhere close to any era.

    I think the other 'Certified Auto' issue that was obviously fake for him was from Donruss as well, bold printed in all caps 'B LARK'.

    Yeh, I've seen some "questionable" Puckett ones out there to. I wouldn't be surprised if his ex-wife had signed some of them instead of him. There is a Leaf one from the late 90's that I especially question.

    I actively collect Kirby Puckett. I have collections of Michael Jordan, Emmitt Smith, Roberto Clemente, Dwight Gooden, Tom Seaver, Errict Rhett and Evan Longoria.

  • TabeTabe Posts: 3,368 ✭✭✭

    I hope the lawsuit is able to go forward and goes all the way to a (big) judgment in favor of the plaintiff. Redemptions are a pox on the hobby and need to disappear. And, even though the packaging will say that they may contain redemptions, the print is always really small, not obvious, and is very easy to miss. It's most certainly deceptive to at least casual consumers, if not hobby regulars.

  • ArtVandelayArtVandelay Posts: 145 ✭✭✭

    I like Panini. They tend to put out the best new product. While I have never had to deal with redemptions I don't see the problem with them as long as they put the expiration dates which they do. The individuals buying the product know exactly what they are getting into when they purchase the product as well. The only people that seem to get upset are people that open the boxes well after the date of expiration. It's really on them. They generally knew what to expect. It's kind of like being upset about opening a 1972 vintage pack and suing Topps because one of the cards was damaged from the gum.

  • vintagefunvintagefun Posts: 1,942 ✭✭✭

    Except when you have sent in over 15 redemptions and only received 6, most pretty worthless so I don’t stress too much except I’d really like my Kemba Walker RC Auto. And would’ve liked my Isaiah Thomas RC Auto before his injury, but still waiting for both. Most redeemed in period, and about half from premium product. But the low rate of follow through leads me to believe that they’re obviously issuing cards that they don’t have but hope to get, and charging a premium for a checklist they can’t fulfil. I do on occasion get a surprise in the mail, but guys like Lance Thomas and Jon Leuer don’t really float my boat.

    To me, a redemption should only be issued if the card is especially special, AND in hand.

    52-90 All Sports, Mostly Topps, Mostly HOF, and some assorted wax.
  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    ^this companies are issuing cards they do not ever even plan on making. the modern market has been ultra saturated with autos anyways. I mean, look at a guy like mike trout. how many tens of thousands of autos are out there for him? ultimately it doesnt matter if the card is numbered to 10/20/100 etc because it is an auto. if you miss this years, there will be 1000 more issued next year and the year after etc. how many will the market sustain until prices crash. I remember years ago Bill Russell was an exceedingly difficult auto to find, and prices were extremely high. look at it now.

  • miwlvrnmiwlvrn Posts: 3,205 ✭✭✭

    I like the upper level Panini Soccer products but haven't encountered any redemptions among them.

  • countdouglascountdouglas Posts: 700 ✭✭✭✭

    @craig44 said:
    ^this companies are issuing cards they do not ever even plan on making. the modern market has been ultra saturated with autos anyways. I mean, look at a guy like mike trout. how many tens of thousands of autos are out there for him? ultimately it doesnt matter if the card is numbered to 10/20/100 etc because it is an auto. if you miss this years, there will be 1000 more issued next year and the year after etc. how many will the market sustain until prices crash. I remember years ago Bill Russell was an exceedingly difficult auto to find, and prices were extremely high. look at it now.

    I agree completely. I was fortunate enough to pull a Mike Trout Red Ink #/25 from 2018 Heritage retail blaster bought off of eBay. The experience itself was neat, but I couldn't sell that card fast enough.

    Besides being cognizant of the sheer number of Trout autographed insert cards in the hobby, part of the problem for me (besides this particular auto having a skipping line of ink from a drying up pen) was that his autograph is just a bunch of scribble, as is the case with most modern autographs. Players need to have a legible signature. People that know little to nothing about sports can read the name Mickey Mantle, Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Pete Rose, or Nolan Ryan and appreciate immediately that you have a ball or bat or some other collectible piece of some significance. If you have to stop and explain even to followers of the sport that this is Mike Trout or Shohei Ohtani or Bryce Harper or Jose Altuve, it kind of ruins the moment. I suppose their face and name printed on the card is meant to do the explaining for you, but if it looks like a 2 year old got ahold of a marker and started drawing on cards, it ruins it aesthetically for me.

    About a week later, my local Wal-Mart had some blasters, so I bought 2 more, and from one of them I pulled an Orlando Cepeda Red Ink #/69. He writes with the unsteady hand of an 80+ year old man, but by God, at least I can kind of make out who it is. Having sold the Trout, I decided to keep the Cepeda, and have it displayed in my card room.

    I don't buy much modern stuff, but if the companies are going to include autographed items, they should already be inserted into the product. It was a thrill to open those Heritage packs and have those 2 cards in hand immediately, not some printed card telling me I've won a random unknown autograph, that anecdotally, I may or may not ever receive.

  • lahmejoonlahmejoon Posts: 1,483 ✭✭✭

    I waited 3 years for a Kawhi Leonard redemption and finally got it a couple of months ago. I have a few others I've been waiting the same amount of time for that have not been filled. I tried a number of times to get in touch with someone over there to see if I could just get replacements for the redemptions, but would never get a response.

  • GreenSneakersGreenSneakers Posts: 312 ✭✭✭

    To state the obvious ... it’s clear that part of the business model is for the card company not to actually get (pay for) the auto until it is redeemed. If the redemption card is never turned in, expired, lost, or whatever, they increase the bottom line.

    Another of the many reasons I don’t chase modern. Although I have to admit, if my kids hit an auto or relic, they do get juiced about it, even if a fringe player. Thank goodness they never got a redemption for anyone they actually cared about.

  • MrHockeyMrHockey Posts: 552 ✭✭✭

    These lawsuits have been tried before and stand a very small chance of succeeding.

    They have good lawyers and a lot of fine print.

    The class action component makes it even more difficult.

  • Despite this, less than a month ago a redemption for a Baker Mayfield 1/1 sold for $8000 (with 57 bids). Incredible risk being taken there

  • 1970s1970s Posts: 3,037 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I knew a major league pitcher and his entire family. The mother once told me that she signed all the cards that got mailed to the house. He just didn't have time to do it, but they didn't want to disappoint their fans. I didn't want her to know I was in the hobby, so I just let it die at that.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    @1970s said:
    I knew a major league pitcher and his entire family. The mother once told me that she signed all the cards that got mailed to the house. He just didn't have time to do it, but they didn't want to disappoint their fans. I didn't want her to know I was in the hobby, so I just let it die at that.

    I am sure this happens all the time


  • There’s no way the same person is signing these. Bring back the days when a rep from the company actually sits with them at the signing.

  • MrHockeyMrHockey Posts: 552 ✭✭✭

    Those 2 graphs were signed by the same person.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    How in the world would you know that with such certainty?

  • MrHockeyMrHockey Posts: 552 ✭✭✭

    Magic

  • MrHockeyMrHockey Posts: 552 ✭✭✭

    Or many years of collecting autographs.

    One or the other

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    If you have done any research on forgers like Greg Marino and how they commonly were able to beat top authenticators, I don't think you would be quite so confident. Look at the recent t206 fiasco. I am firmly of the opinion that if one does not watch the autograph being signed, there is no certainty as to its authenticity. Regardless of how great an "expert" authenticator thinks he is.

  • BLUEJAYWAYBLUEJAYWAY Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @craig44 said:
    ^this companies are issuing cards they do not ever even plan on making. the modern market has been ultra saturated with autos anyways. I mean, look at a guy like mike trout. how many tens of thousands of autos are out there for him? ultimately it doesnt matter if the card is numbered to 10/20/100 etc because it is an auto. if you miss this years, there will be 1000 more issued next year and the year after etc. how many will the market sustain until prices crash. I remember years ago Bill Russell was an exceedingly difficult auto to find, and prices were extremely high. look at it now.

    Agree. Same thing will eventually happen to Derek Jeter graphs.

    Successful transactions:Tookybandit
  • MrHockeyMrHockey Posts: 552 ✭✭✭

    It is a truism to say it’s not 100% certain if you didn’t see it signed yourself.

    When you pull a 1990 Donruss card out of a pack, how do you know it certainly is real if you didn’t see it printed yourself?

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    @MrHockey said:
    It is a truism to say it’s not 100% certain if you didn’t see it signed yourself.

    When you pull a 1990 Donruss card out of a pack, how do you know it certainly is real if you didn’t see it printed yourself?

    It is much, much, much,much easier to produce passable counterfeit signatures than it is manufacture passable counterfeit cards.

  • ghooper33ghooper33 Posts: 171 ✭✭✭

    Interesting conversation. I don't buy much modern but I am a Hawks fan (yep I'm the one), and picked up a couple of John Collins rookies. It looks like they are signed by two different people.

    “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then is not an act but a habit.” -Aristotle
  • MrHockeyMrHockey Posts: 552 ✭✭✭

    @craig44 said:

    @MrHockey said:
    It is a truism to say it’s not 100% certain if you didn’t see it signed yourself.

    When you pull a 1990 Donruss card out of a pack, how do you know it certainly is real if you didn’t see it printed yourself?

    It is much, much, much,much easier to produce passable counterfeit signatures than it is manufacture passable counterfeit cards.

    Of course, but the standard you set was certainty.

    Once you say this, the standard shifts to “is the likelihood of it being real strong enough for you to be comfortable buying it?”.

    Then, a whole range of variables kicks in (provenance, context, appearance of auto, prior authentication, etc). Not just “did I see it signed myself”, because requiring certainty is an awfully difficult way to go through life.

    From what I can tell (you not seeing the clear similarities in the 2 Luka autos, referencing the Net 54 t206 “scandal”, 30-for-30), it seems like you are a non-auto collector who has observed from the outside a bit. I’d posit—and you can mull this over—that you might want to learn more about what you are disparaging before doing so publicly.

  • BatpigBatpig Posts: 233 ✭✭✭

    For anyone having issues with getting redemptions back, complain to the Panini CS Twitter account.

  • krisd3279krisd3279 Posts: 688 ✭✭✭

    The only similarities I see in the Luka autos are the blue ink. One starts on an upward motion and one starts on a downward motion. One has four sharp points and the other has one. One ends in a smooth upward motion and one ends immediately like it was cut short. The second loop is wider and flowing in one and very narrow and sharp in the other. One has the whole auto angled downward and the other I can't even tell what angle it is at. Did I miss any normal ways of comparing an auto? I'm not an expert, but they don't look anything alike. My signature never looks the same twice, but there are certain parts that are similar.

    Kris

    My 1971 Topps adventure - Davis Men in Black

  • HighGradeLegendsHighGradeLegends Posts: 1,565 ✭✭✭✭

    I am fairly certain someone sued upper deck in the 2010ish time frame over redemptions and won.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭

    @MrHockey said:

    @craig44 said:

    @MrHockey said:
    It is a truism to say it’s not 100% certain if you didn’t see it signed yourself.

    When you pull a 1990 Donruss card out of a pack, how do you know it certainly is real if you didn’t see it printed yourself?

    It is much, much, much,much easier to produce passable counterfeit signatures than it is manufacture passable counterfeit cards.

    Of course, but the standard you set was certainty.

    Once you say this, the standard shifts to “is the likelihood of it being real strong enough for you to be comfortable buying it?”.

    Then, a whole range of variables kicks in (provenance, context, appearance of auto, prior authentication, etc). Not just “did I see it signed myself”, because requiring certainty is an awfully difficult way to go through life.

    From what I can tell (you not seeing the clear similarities in the 2 Luka autos, referencing the Net 54 t206 “scandal”, 30-for-30), it seems like you are a non-auto collector who has observed from the outside a bit. I’d posit—and you can mull this over—that you might want to learn more about what you are disparaging before doing so publicly.

    I never said I was not certain that I could determine the authenticity of original card stock. I am quite certain I can tell the authenticity of original cards. Card doctoring, to a slightly lesser degree of certainty. I was referencing the ease of manufacturing fake autos to the difficulty of finding correct card stock, gloss, foil, font etc to manufacture counterfeit cards. there are many many many artists in this country and the world who can replicate an auto so it is impossible to detect with any degree of certainty the authenticity.

    If a card is written on by anyone other than the player depicted, for myself and the vast majority of folks in the hobby, it is rendered near valueless. that is why I personally want certainty when owning an autograph. You may be comfortable with 90% certainty or 85% or 76 1/2% certainty of authenticity. That is just fine with me. Personally, If any tiny lingering doubt is there (and there always will be unless you saw it being signed yourself) I may just as well sell it, because I will never enjoy ownership.

    I am sure you have many years of experience in the world of autographs, but you are fooling yourself if you believe you will never have a fake auto get by you. I believe I can be quite sure that the hobby of autograph collecting has been disparaged publicly long before me, and for good reason.

  • MrHockeyMrHockey Posts: 552 ✭✭✭
    edited February 11, 2019 7:47AM

    "there are many many many artists in this country and the world who can replicate an auto so it is impossible to detect with any degree of certainty the authenticity"

    This is a completely inaccurate, uninformed statement.

    I would respond to other parts of your post in the interests of continuing the conversation, but it has devolved into a bunch of straw-people. Of course, I would never say that I have never had a fake auto get by me. Of course, I would not tell you that you should collect autos if you're hyper paranoid about them. To each their own. But to assert broad ranging facts without basis is wrong.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 11, 2019 8:18AM

    @MrHockey said:
    "there are many many many artists in this country and the world who can replicate an auto so it is impossible to detect with any degree of certainty the authenticity"

    This is a completely inaccurate, uninformed statement.

    I would respond to other parts of your post in the interests of continuing the conversation, but it has devolved into a bunch of straw-people. Of course, I would never say that I have never had a fake auto get by me. Of course, I would not tell you that you should collect autos if you're hyper paranoid about them. To each their own. But to assert broad ranging facts without basis is wrong.

    If a second tier artist ( or third or fourth) like Greg Marino can pick up a pen and sign thousands and hundreds of thousands of autographs that get by the top "experts" in the field, you better believe other better artists could, and no doubt have, done the same. certainly not an inaccurate or uninformed statement. there is basis. look at operation bullpen. do you really believe things have gotten better since then?

    It is clear you have a dog in this race. you are either very naive or have fully suspended your disbelief in this matter. the autograph market is a dirty dirty one. there are no degrees in autograph authentication. there is no certainty. there are opinions. of course you have had autos get by you. everyone has. even the "experts" have. If you are comfortable having a % of fakes in your collection, more power to you. I am not comfortable with that, and I sure wouldnt be comfortable when it comes time to sell the collection knowing there are fakes, but no one knows which ones.

Sign In or Register to comment.