How Did This ITG Card See The Light Of Day?

[timber09]

Based on the replies here it appears to me that we are trying to compare business ethics and legal responsibility. I know there are those on the boards that are far more versed in the legal realm than I am but, to me, this all comes down to the current status of the contract, what that contract states and if/when there is a transfer of ownership.

Sounds to me that the beef should be nowhere near this seller (assuming for a second that this individual did not knowingly purchase/acquire these goods fraudulently) but with the original holder of the cards and contract - Lindros and/or the PA in this case.

As my college stats professor told us when we hit the road for hockey games "Good luck, may you win it."

As for the card itself - I could personally care less about it. If I saw one pop up for my PC I may spend $5 on it but can't imagine going much beyond that.

 

[penguinfan]

I fully understand that if these cards are obtained because the player decided to give them away that they should be returned...but if they are pulled, Is it the collectors responsibility to return them for a replacement....Personally I probably would but someone pulled one out of a 12 year old product I doubt most would make the effort since most would just assume it was too late. However if it was a common I don't know if I'd want to waste the postage

 

[tiger tiger]

Seems like your issue should be with Lindros for not sending them back and for letting them get out to the public.....not the current seller (who is at least the 2nd person to own these and try to sell them).

I collect model trains as well, and have several factory prototypes - cars that never were produced, or mock-up samples. If I sell them, should the Lionel Train Corporation come after me, or should they be upset with the employee that let those prototypes walk out of the factory years ago?

The same holds true in the recording industry. The RIAA is going after the people who are illegally sharing their songs, not the end users who download them...

I understand your frustration, but I think your efforts to curb this are misdirected. What does Lindros have to say about this?

There are 2 issues actually.

One is that the current end user is in possession of stolen property, so the item should actually be returned to ITG, if they go through the process of having it reported as stolen, and the item seized, etc. This is a lot of work for a handful of cards. So I guess that why Dr. Price asked to just take it off the market/ebay.

The second one is with Lindros and his breech of contract. He gave away property that was not rightfully his and did not return it to ITG, which was probably written into his contract that he was supposed to return it (autographed or not).


e.g. if your friend borrowed your car, promising that he would give it back, but then turned around and gave it away, and that person sold it to another guy, who is now trying to sell it on Craigslist. Car should be returned to you, and friend should be charged with theft. Is that not correct?

The legal issue will fall on what the statue of limitations is for the breech of contract. It has been quite awhile since the cards were not returned/"stolen", so legally there might not be a lot that ITG can do.

Another issue is that in the hobby, there is a demand for "unauthorized" cards. It's seen as collectible and scarce, so hobbyists will ignore the ethical/legal side because they hope they can make a buck off of it, and PC collectors will want it in their collection, since it would be something to brag about or has a great story behind it.

 

[bprice]

In The Game has enjoyed a wonderful relationship with the players for many years now. That's why we have autographs in our products that other manufacturers have redemptions for.

It would not be good for our company going forward to sue a player whether we are in the right or the wrong, our side of the story would not get out to the other players.

Even thought the root of the problem may be the player, that doesn't make selling a card that you know is illegal, right.

Look at the description of the auction.

It's not always just about the making of a buck, sometimes its about right and wrong.

Brian Price

 

[Ferris]

I asked the seller to politely remove the auction and he would not, now that I am totally pissed, I will take the time to deal with eBay VEROS program and if the seller has problems with eBay because of it, he was asked to remove the item and would not.

Brian Price

I support you 100% on this. They are property of your company. eBay should and likely will take action against the seller.

 

[SNobles]

Knowing ITG I am sure if the seller was more reasonable they would have worked with them to replace it to keep it off the market.

 

[87sluggo]

I support you 100% on this. They are property of your company. eBay should and likely will take action against the seller.

A couple things......

A - Is ITG today the same legal entity as ITG of 2001/02?

And 2 - There's statutes of limitations on theft in both the US and Canada.

I'm no lawyer so I probably don't have a clue about any of this, but to me it comes down to the "right & wrong" VS "the buck" and unfortunately you know which comes out on top most of the time.......

 

[Leafsfan1967]

What's stopping someone to buy up those cards, and taking them to a Lindros public signing, and having him sign those? He may refuse, but then again, if he's getting $50, or more an auto, why would he care what he signed? I doubt he'd even know the history of these cards. Now you have a one of a kind gem worth a ton of money, because it's the only one in existance. Those cards should have been returned, and destroyed by ITG, not on the open market.

Everyone assumes this is Eric Lindros' fault, and it very well may be, but there is a very good chance he never even seen these cards. Nobody knows for sure they were in his possession, they may not have got past his agent, and more than likely were at his parents home all these years. (I think his dad was his agent) Heck, a family friend may have ended up with a few these, and then later moved them when they needed some cash.

I hope it all works out, and the right thing is done here. Best case scenario is that Lindros still has most of these, and he signs them, and sends them back, so Brian could use them as a buyback in a new product. I know I'm dreaming, and that won't happen, but that would be cool.

 

[terry1hockeyfan]

I think ITG has to take some responsibility here as well. They should have actively pursued these cards to make sure they were returned, even if unsigned to prevent something like this from happening. Sorry Dr. Price, but if this is your common business practice, more should be done on your end as well. I agree that the seller should not be selling these cards also and know from personal experience that they can be difficult to deal with. On a side note, could I borrow $1000000 and you not look for it back?

 

[LSOH]

What's stopping someone to buy up those cards, and taking them to a Lindros public signing, and having him sign those? He may refuse, but then again, if he's getting $50, or more an auto, why would he care what he signed? I doubt he'd even know the history of these cards. Now you have a one of a kind gem worth a ton of money, because it's the only one in existance. Those cards should have been returned, and destroyed by ITG, not on the open market.

My biggest concern would be, what is stopping someone from getting a hold of "unsigned" versions of these card(s) and grabbing a sharpie and laying down their own Lindros auto? Then taking them to a show, and pawning them off as legit Lindros autos? They already come with their own ITG COA on the back? As the card itself is legit. The big quesiton is, how many are floating around out there? Or this this a pretty isolated case? That to me is the biggest question. Hopefully this sorts itself out.

Cheers,
Eli:beer:

 

[Leafsfan1967]

My biggest concern would be, what is stopping someone from getting a hold of "unsigned" versions of these card(s) and grabbing a sharpie and laying down their own Lindros auto? Then taking them to a show, and pawning them off as legit Lindros autos? They already come with their own ITG COA on the back? As the card itself is legit. The big quesiton is, how many are floating around out there? Or this this a pretty isolated case? That to me is the biggest question. Hopefully this sorts itself out.

Cheers,
Eli:beer:

Absolutely, that too!

 

[cardz1976]

Lindros probably held some cards back for himself or family and they have lost interest sold them for a few bucks. The current seller could possibly shed some light on how they got into his hands so you could check and see if more cards might head to auction in the future.

 

[tiger tiger]

I think ITG has to take some responsibility here as well. They should have actively pursued these cards to make sure they were returned, even if unsigned to prevent something like this from happening. Sorry Dr. Price, but if this is your common business practice, more should be done on your end as well. I agree that the seller should not be selling these cards also and know from personal experience that they can be difficult to deal with. On a side note, could I borrow $1000000 and you not look for it back?

Actually, you don't know for sure what ITG did to try to get the cards back. And you don't know what excuse was given for not being able to find or return them.

As for "actively persuing" the cards, so ITG is going to hound Lindros about cards that he hasn't returned?? You can pretty much say goodbye for any future signings. It's a business relationship. You have to pick your battles.

I'm sure ITG will lend you $1,000,000 and not actively hound you for it if you were doing $1,000,000,000 worth of business with them.

 

[bapfan]

For what it's worth, I have a copy of that Lindros card, in both silver and gold variations, both unsigned.

There were a few cards from that set that made it into public hands... I have an unsigned gold Jason Arnott, and there is a signed Martin Brodeur as well (I don't have that one). And the Fleury as mentioned...

There are scans of these on my website.

 

[bapfan]

And also for what it's worth, I know the seller and have dealt with him many times. I think Dr. Price should take up his issue with Eric Lindros (and his legal people), as he is the one who is ultimately responsible for these cards getting out. Chasing after individuals who happen to own the cards is a futile activity, IMO.

In terms of collector value, I consider them to be oddball items and the value depends on the collector. Since I am a big collector of this set, I paid a good price for my Gold and Silver Lindros cards.

 

[thorn]

I know Upper Deck and Panini don't care about these things but I do.

Brian Price

How Upper Deck or Panini are related to this exact matter?

Can't understand.

 

[frankiefives]

Seems like your issue should be with Lindros for not sending them back and for letting them get out to the public.....not the current seller (who is at least the 2nd person to own these and try to sell them).

I collect model trains as well, and have several factory prototypes - cars that never were produced, or mock-up samples. If I sell them, should the Lionel Train Corporation come after me, or should they be upset with the employee that let those prototypes walk out of the factory years ago?

The same holds true in the recording industry. The RIAA is going after the people who are illegally sharing their songs, not the end users who download them...

I understand your frustration, but I think your efforts to curb this are misdirected. What does Lindros have to say about this?

Just because you aren't the one who stole it doesn't make you any less culpable. If you purchase something that was stolen by someone else, you're just as wrong as the thief himself

 

[Bossy22]

I think ITG has to take some responsibility here as well. They should have actively pursued these cards to make sure they were returned, even if unsigned to prevent something like this from happening. Sorry Dr. Price, but if this is your common business practice, more should be done on your end as well. I agree that the seller should not be selling these cards also and know from personal experience that they can be difficult to deal with. On a side note, could I borrow $1000000 and you not look for it back?

Sorry, but this is one of the stupidest posts I have ever read. Could it be ITG's fault to a degree, possibly, but unlikely. If the player says they lost them or they never received them do you want ITG to break in the said players house and search for them. They can not do anything if the player "lost" the cards sent to them. They must accept what the player is saying in good faith. Especially, as mentioned above, you want to work with said player again. Lindros, is a fairly big name, you don't hound the stars. You may ask once, twice, even three times. Anymore would be negative for your business.

 

[timber09]

So let me get this straight - just so I can understand this complete leap in logic.


1. These cards ARE stolen (although that hasn't been shown to be the case at all).
2. If these cards are stolen, no guilt and/or responsibility is to be brought down on the athlete or his management team for this theft (even though this appears to be where the likely breach took place).
3. The responsible party for these egregious crimes is the person who is currently in possession of the items and has such decided to sell them.


Does this sound like the wrong party is being held accountable for this "theft" to anyone else?
If theft is what is at stake here - which are the words that Dr Price used - then who stole the items? Start there and move forward. If you are unwilling to penalize the original "thief" then how can you hold the person who currently holds possession of the items responsible.

 

[terry1hockeyfan]

My point was more about any company should not be shocked or surprised if they know cards weren't returned and then end up on the secondary market. Perhaps better steps can be taken to ensure cards get signed and returned at the same time. I thought companies used to have people responsible for this. Now it seems they just mail them to the athlete and include what gets returned on time and the rest become redemptions. How eagerly are the cards pursued that don't get returned on time? Or in this case, returned at all? Just taking a different approach since it wasn't made clear as to when or where the cards went missing. Do we know that they were ever received by the athlete? I would think some sort of tracking must be involved in the delivery of cards to athletes.