Want more from Front Office Sports
in your search results?
A new lawsuit claims Fanatics and its partners in U.S. pro sports illegally monopolized the trading card market, increasing prices for consumers.
Antitrust lawsuits are old hat in sports, and Fanatics is already embroiled in very similar litigation brought by trading card competitor Panini. What makes the latest iteration notable is the breadth of the defendants. The list includes Michael Rubin’s sprawling company as well as the NBA, NHL, and NFL; unions for players in all three leagues; and the group licensing venture OneTeam.
The suit claims the defendants conspired to drive competitors out of business and raise prices.
Many, if not most, of the allegations in the 47-page complaint are also found in the Panini lawsuit, which a federal judge recently gave the green light to proceed. Some law firms will piggyback on existing suits and file similar cases after a motion to dismiss fails, which recently happened in the Panini suit.
“This baseless complaint is fundamentally flawed in numerous respects and we look forward to presenting to the court how we continue to elevate and enhance the collecting experience by relentlessly focusing on collectors,” Fanatics said in a statement to Front Office Sports.
The man who filed the new lawsuit is an Austin resident named Robert Scaturo. Lawyer John Radice, who is representing Scaturo, emailed, “I don’t have anything to add on the record other than what’s in the complaint.”
The core of both lawsuits: In 2021, Fanatics began acquiring trading card licenses from the leagues and union by signing 10- to 20-year contracts, offering equity as an inducement to do the deal.
By 2026, the latest lawsuit alleges, Fanatics will control 100% of the trading card market.
“The collective equity stake of the Leagues and players associations (plus NHL and MLS) is worth approximately $5 to $10 billion,” the complaint alleges. “In this way, Fanatics and each of the leagues and each of their player associations agreed to split the monopoly profits caused by the anticompetitive agreements.”
According to the lawsuit, prices for MLB cards from Topps—which Fanatics acquired in 2022—have risen 50% since 2021, while Panini cards remained flat or declined. A chart in the complaint, however, shows Panini prices declining before the Topps acquisition and rising afterward. Fanatics’s rights for NBA cards begin in September.
The new suit claims Fanatics bought the printer company that Panini used for 90% of its cards, and then slowed down deliveries to the competitor. Fanatics is also charged with using its market power to require local card shops to accept minimum price requirements or be cut off from supply, withholding supply to shops that sell trading cards on business-to-business websites, and forcing case breakers onto Fanatics’ new case-breaking platform. (Case-breakers are influencers who stream opening packages of cards.)
“Fanatics has successfully foreclosed one hundred percent of the market for Major U.S. Professional Sports Leagues trading cards for the next decade at least,” the complaint charges. “Rivals have been sidelined due to these exclusive agreements and consumers will suffer.”
The Panini case focuses on alleged moves by Fanatics to oust its Texas-based rival from the marketplace; the new suit, a consumer class-action case, is brought on behalf of all consumers who bought trading cards from one of the defendants starting Jan. 1, 2022, and until the alleged conduct ceases.
As is typical at this early stage of litigation, the complaint does not include a damages figure, an amount that emerges far closer to trial. The complaint also asks for injunctive relief, meaning the court orders Fanatics to cease its allegedly monopolistic practices.
The complaint, which borrows heavily from the Panini complaint—down to including charges that were dismissed last week—also alleges:
- Fanatics raided Panini’s staff “using threats and false statements to poach dozens of Panini’s employees. … Fanatics threatened to blacklist Panini employees from ever working in the industry again when Fanatics’ exclusive long-term licenses took effect unless they immediately quit Panini and joined Fanatics.”
- Fanatics used these raids as an inducement to get the NFL Players Association in 2023 to end its deal with Panini three years early. An arbitrator would later order the union to pay Panini $7 million in damages.
- “Fanatics strong-armed athletes to refuse agreements with Panini, using a similar combination of payoffs and threats. For example, Fanatics threatened that players would never get an autograph deal when Fanatics’ long-term contracts took effect in the future unless they immediately signed with Fanatics.”
- Fanatics used its “monopoly” power to cut off sales of worn jerseys to Panini.
Trading cards require a license from both the league—for team and league intellectual property—and the players, for NIL (name, image, and likeness) rights. With trading cards, the players’ rights are ceded to the players’ unions for group licensing. Unions for players in the NFL and MLB have used OneTeam in recent years to sell those rights.
