Before the ink was even dry on the proclamation of the new pope, commercialization efforts began.
Right out of the gate, Topps, the trading card company, began offering Pope Leo XIV commemorative cards. They come in two versions: the standard card and a very limited edition one with white smoke in the background. That version will only have 267 printed, each one individually numbered, like works of art.
Topps was taking orders on its website between May 8 and 11 only and charging $8.99 per card, with quantity discounts available. Within two weeks, the company promised to mail out the cards.
In addition, depending on how many cards Topps sells in total, the company will also print several dozen so-called “parallels” or “chase” cards — very fancy foil versions of various rarities and seed them randomly across all the orders. All purchasers will have a chance of getting one of these very rare cards instead of the standard “base” card.
*MOUSE PRINT:
The question arises, however, does this promotion constitute an illegal lottery? Lotteries are defined by state law. “Paying a price for the chance of a prize” is the typical definition.
For example, if Quaker Oats was to advertise that they have hidden a diamond ring in one of every ten thousand boxes of their oatmeal, they would violate state gambling laws. But consumer products companies can legally comply with the law by transforming the promotion into a sweepstakes. To do that, they eliminate the “price” element by offering a no-purchase-necessary means of allowing anyone the chance to win. Typically that is accomplished by asking consumers to send in a three-by-five card with their name and address.
In this case, however, Topps does not offer the public a free chance of receiving one of the theoretically more valuable limited-edition cards.
We asked the company’s PR representative to comment on this issue, and checked with two legal experts who specialize in lottery law. We only heard back from one expert who has sued companies for conducting illegal lotteries. He said, in part…
…more research is needed but “the question now is what consideration are the purchasers of the ‘pope card’ giving for the chance to get [one of the special] cards. This whole scheme by Topps just doesn’t pass the smell test.” –Bill Pannell
There apparently is a history of mostly failed legal attempts to hold trading card companies liable for gambling (see page 406) when they sell card packets some of which randomly contain more valuable cards.
What do you think? Does Topps cross the line by enticing the purchase of these pope cards because there is a chance the buyer will luck out and get one of the rare and potentially more valuable ones?
I have ordered Topps cards in the past. If I happen to receive a so-called “parallels” or “chase” card, yes, it is nice, but I placed my order to receive a “basic” card.
This is just paying $8.99 for the chance to get the 1 FoilFractor card they will make that might be worth 100 bucks or more in a few years.
This is a limited time offering product with so called rare card produced in it.
At least every single person that pays $8.99 will get something.
I can go both ways on this. I think this may constitute an illegal lottery if people are buying the packs in hopes of getting the chase card and not the normal cards that come in the packs, but I think this will be an uphill battle because the moment you declare this illegal lottery, you’ve essentially declared any pack of any TCG that has chase cards in it an illegal lottery. Magic: The Gathering, Pokemon, Lorcana, and others all have packs where you are guaranteed to get a certain number of rare cards and have a chance of getting much rarer cards in the packs.
I think the difference you’re going to run into here, and the argument Topps may make, is that the cards themselves have no physical value. They only have value because other (non-Topps) entities place value on them. Going back to your oatmeal comparison, Topps is going to make the argument that they’re selling packs of Maple Brown Sugar oatmeal that have a chance of having a few Apple Cinnamon instead. The flavors have the same value to Topps despite one being rarer, it is only the secondary market that gives Apple Cinnamon more valuable.
Good comment. In those other collector card products, are the makers explicitly saying there will be a certain number of rare cards issued, or does it just become known after the fact?
At Topps, they tell you after the sale is over.