quote:

Originally posted by webjon:
I think a lot of the criticisms are based on unrealistic expectations, and that in general the Inkworks critics are much harsher on Inkworks for doing the same things that other manufacturers do/did.

quote:

Originally posted by X:

• Why did they have SO much in inventory left over? There were THOUSANDS of autographs and pieceworks in the liquidation, enough to create an entire product (or two?) by Razor. Some cards are always needed for damage replacements but would the majority of cards not have been better served inserted in boxes of the original product? For both collectors and dealers? So many cards would have been more accessible for so many.

There are many valid reasons to have inventory -- many were already discussed, but also nearly every manufacturer who has gone out of business has had lots of excess inventory left over -- and -- it's not like all the sudden thousands of really rare cards popped up. Mostly it was mid range to average cards.

But where Inkworks differed was that in addition to cards needed for damages, as every manufacturer has, they also had lots that should have always been in the product in the first place.
Regarding rarity, the majority of cards in a set, and people's collections, are made up of "mid-range to average cards". Apart from the absolute rarest cards, everything else tanked in value. I can't spin that as a positive.

quote:

Originally posted by X:

• They were great at fulfilling expired redemptions, the best in fact, but this positive image cultivated by Inkworks caught people with their pants down at the end. Particularly dealers sitting on unsold product. As has been mentioned in the thread, Inkworks kept their closure quiet up to the last moment... the cynic in me says to avoid conversations about refusing redemptions and thereby allowing them to keep hold of stock for liquidation, rather than for their original customers.
  

Isn't this how just about all businesses close? They've closed several chains around me in the last year, and none of them whispered to their customers that the end was near. . . just one day they announced they were closing. . . That's it. I think it is unreasonable that anyone expected more than that.

What average business can include something like redemptions for trading cards? It's not a fair comparison. People thought they had time for Inkworks to make good on the redemptions when they did not.

quote:

Originally posted by X:
[LIST]

They accepted redemptions far too easily as part of their business model, from start to finish. How much time and money was wasted on their end administrating redemptions over the years that could have been better spent surviving in the marketplace? No collectors want redemptions. Surely any card manufacturer would rather avoid them too?

Valid criticism, however I'm sure Inkworks would have preferred avoiding redemptions, and part of that was going to sticker autographs which some vocal people really screamed about. . . If you talk to any manufacturer about getting autographs and avoiding redemptions it's kind of a nightmare. There is a thread right now on Blowout where Marco from 258 has talked about no longer doing autographed cards because it takes 2 weeks to get cards printed and that 2 week window creates a big enough risk of celebs backing out that he'll no longer do them (which is a huge bummer). Brian Gray talks about stickers/redemptions on Twitter from time to time as well.

What you're saying does not hold water. Two of their last sets, The Spirit and Supernatural Connections, both used sticker autos and ALL were via redemption. Plenty of other manufacturers avoid redemptions more deliberately and successfully.

quote:

Originally posted by X:

• If a licensor mandates the destruction/non-distribution of cards due to end of contract, Inkworks should not have had certain cards available to liquidate. But they did, and lied about it, and that showed some shady business practice. Sorry, but it was. Just because a licensor didn't appear to go after them doesn't make it OK. Just because collectors got another shot at cheaper cards doesn't make it OK.

There are assumptions here. I have no idea what the inner workings were, but it is entirely possible that Inkworks sold the assets prior to the license expiring. Perhaps Inkworks the company sold them to Caplan personally.

That might not make it 'ok' in some people's mind, but from a license standpoint it is entirely possible that nothing shady happened.

I understand that's not what he told you personally, and that you may personally feel slighted by that, but I also don't think the CEO of a manufacturing company owes collectors any sort of explanation and can understand why they might keep things from collectors.

On a side note -- I've heard stories of Dino from Dart drilling holes through cards and cringe at that thought that a stack of Steve Irwin autographs was destroyed. Personally I'd rather see the cards hit the market that get destroyed, so I definitely have a bias on destroying cards . . .

quote:

Originally posted by X:

What average business can include something like redemptions for trading cards? It's not a fair comparison. People thought they had time for Inkworks to make good on the redemptions when they did not.

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:
I feel like I'm trying to have a rational conversation with a conspiracy theorist.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
While many would say that Inkworks was the gold standard, and I am not disagreeing with them, my own personal favorite was Breygent because I loved the quality of their cards. Their autograph cards and relics were second to none and I really miss that. Like all stories, there were two sides to it, good and bad. And just like Inkworks, the good far outweighed the bad. It's all in the history of this hobby and yeah, that is my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by barobehere:
This thread just shows how much an impact Inkworks had. 12 years later and we are still all passionate about this company. Do we talk about Artbox? Dart? Skybox? with such vivaciousness? Inkworks supporters minds and Inkworks detractors minds are not going to be changed at this point no matter what is said.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
While many would say that Inkworks was the gold standard, and I am not disagreeing with them, my own personal favorite was Breygent because I loved the quality of their cards. Their autograph cards and relics were second to none and I really miss that. Like all stories, there were two sides to it, good and bad. And just like Inkworks, the good far outweighed the bad. It's all in the history of this hobby and yeah, that is my opinion.

I think I agree, Inkworks used cheaper and thinner card stock. Seems that Breygent spent more time in the design phase and their costume and convention cards are pretty awesome. Surprised that titles such as AHS and Bates Motel weren't more popular.

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:
I don't know why the AHS and other sets they made didn't resonate with collectors. The sets are VERY well made. . . I think it just goes to show how difficult it is to pick a license that is going to connect with collectors.

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
While many would say that Inkworks was the gold standard, and I am not disagreeing with them, my own personal favorite was Breygent because I loved the quality of their cards. Their autograph cards and relics were second to none and I really miss that. Like all stories, there were two sides to it, good and bad. And just like Inkworks, the good far outweighed the bad. It's all in the history of this hobby and yeah, that is my opinion.

I think I agree, Inkworks used cheaper and thinner card stock. Seems that Breygent spent more time in the design phase and their costume and convention cards are pretty awesome. Surprised that titles such as AHS and Bates Motel weren't more popular.

Breygent was awesome. I probably have more Breygent cards in my collection than any other manufacturer.

Their designs are awesome -- I love the later AHS costume/relic card designs. I loved that they produced many different formats of cards from regular boxes to set boxes to premium packs to mega-set boxes. Their Red Sonja set boxes to this day are one of my top sets ever produced.

I don't know why the AHS and other sets they made didn't resonate with collectors. The sets are VERY well made. . . I think it just goes to show how difficult it is to pick a license that is going to connect with collectors.

quote:

Originally posted by catskilleagle:
No matter how well a set is put together, the customer has to know and like/love the subject. AHS and Bates Motel were on cable networks that don't get the viewership of others though Bates Motel (A&E) lasted a few seasons and AHS (FX) is still going. Neither of them had or has had a season that got caught fire and compelled a much larger audience to watch the other ones.

And yeah, it's tough to pick what reasonably-priced license of a low-mid profile property is going to be "trading card gold." Companies have gambled on "Warehouse 13" and "Supernatural," scoring big with "Outlander" but choose poorly once and you're in trouble. Choose poorly twice and the company is on the brink.

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:
Why did Outlander do well with collectors? I've never seen the show. . .

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by catskilleagle:
No matter how well a set is put together, the customer has to know and like/love the subject.

Jess

Yes, that's something that all card makers have to watch out for. You want to keep doing what works and sells, but by the same token, if your licenses have no diversity, you are putting yourself in a box.

Between AHS, Dexter and Bates Motel, all you had was creeps and serial killers. If card collectors didn't watch those shows, or worse, hated the subject matter, then they just have no interest in the cards except from some few of the autographs on eBay.

Falling back to Inkworks, the Golden Compass is a very nice looking set. The movie bombed, the set had no chance and didn't even have autographs as a lure.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:
Why did Outlander do well with collectors? I've never seen the show. . .

Me neither and I don't collect the cards, but there are a couple of reasons I can think of that might have made Outlander cards more attractive than some other more expected titles.

Outlander is sourced from a series of books, so some people may be readers. Its a romance based on historical fiction and that always has fans. It is set in Scotland for the time traveler. I have noticed that a lot of the Outlander card collectors who post here are from the UK and in fact many of the actors are better recognized in Europe than in the US. Not saying that most support is international, but it does seem to have a strong following in different countries.

As for the card sets, like everything else, repeat autograph cards are getting less special and the premium price of the last product was probably a bad idea. So I'm not sure that they aren't trying to ring too much out of it now, even with loyal viewers.