Funny you mention that article, Bruce. I've come to learn a bit more about the licensing situation.
When it comes time to discuss licensing fees, the PA and the Sport Authority decide on how much they want to be paid AND how many products in total. For the sake of argument, let's say basketball decides they want $10 Million and 36 brands over the year. The suitors sit down and figure out if they can do that and remain profitable. In the case of basketball, I think I got the cart before the horse - it wasn't so much that Basketball turned their backs on UD and DLP, so much as the companies said that they couldn't make a go of basketball paying out the money required. Panini stepped in at that point and said that they'll do it.
The licensing offices and in particular the players' associations are relatively unanimous on one point: their licensing fees are not negotiable, nor are they going down. One or two of the PA's (Football sticks in my head for some reason) as having said that their sport will go without licensed trading cards before they'll lower those fees.
Moving right along, Panini in the NHL. Their license currently is for stickers. Period. The NHL is apparently militantly uninterested in offering them any more than that. They are satisfied with the results of the exclusive licensing...although there were rumours of overtures to Topps by the NHL and PA at the All-Star game.
Single-source licensing is a reality in most aspects of sport. One company for jerseys, one for jackets, one for beer mugs, etc, etc. I think it'll take something fairly major to break that notion.