...as it appeared today in the New York Times.
1) "The league also believes that one cardmaker can end the confusion of competitors selling multiple card series in hobby shops and big-box stores." What confusion?
2) "While the union [Major League Baseball Players Association] license gives Upper Deck the right to use player likenesses, it will no longer have the rights to team logos and trademarks." So what? The players rarely stay in the same uniform for very long these days anyhow. UD needs to GET CREATIVE.
3) The executive vice president for business at Major League Baseball said, “It’s a business that’s critically important to our mission, to make players icons to kids.” Does anyone believe this? As a mom of a true baseball card fan, I can't but help it's true. PS The players themselves have to behave in such a way that they can in fact become "icons."
4) "Since Eisner’s privately held Tornante Company and Madison Dearborn, a private equity company, acquired Topps, it has introduced 3-D cards, the ToppsTown trading and collecting Web site, and the Topps Attax game to appeal to young card enthusiasts and to develop new ones..." And have any of these introductions helped "make players icons to kids?"
5) "“We’re going to be very aggressive in letting retailers, kids and hobbyists know that we are the card that represents it all.” These words were spoken by Michael Eisner. When he says Topps "represents it all," does he have any historical depth of knowledge? Does he know who Sy Berger is?
And what MLB logo-laden Upper Deck product will you be saddest to lose?