The Big Ol' Counterfeit Jersey Thread

[ARTnSocal]

you forgot the part about spending nearly $300 on a simple jersey ?

or do you happen to know about an American jersey shop thats inexpensive ? if so, i would certainly like to know about it !

$300 isn't for a 'simple' jersey ... those are for authentics .... The replicas cost about $80

The authentics cost more than replicas here in the USA due to names & numbers being sewed on rather than heat-applied ... or shall we saw ironed-heat-pressed on. Plus their profit-margin they apply.

The Chinese ones, they pretty much change much of the entire blue-print of the jersey as shown in many posts on here.

[njmeadowlanders]

I was at the knick game on Friday night. The "Sharp Dressed Fan of the Game" was proudly flaunting his Chinese Counterfeit John Starks jersey...

[Brass]

Again, just because your a fan of a team, doesn't mean your entitled to a jersey of said team. If you can't afford one/don't want to buy one, buy a t-shirt instead. Supporting stealing though isn't the answer, especially on a message board like this. We all love sports and we all love logos - so why would we support something where all the finances don't go to the team we say we love so much?

[BBTV]

gross.

In addition to the obvious problems, does the jersey on the right show a "5" on the sleeve? WTF!

[charger77]

gross.

In addition to the obvious problems, does the jersey on the right show a "5" on the sleeve? WTF!

Yeah, but if you really, really want a jersey but can't afford one.

[AnythingChicago]

I want it.

[MidnightSun]

gross.

In addition to the obvious problems, does the jersey on the right show a "5" on the sleeve? WTF!

yes, at first i assumed it was just because they only had one polanco so they used a ruiz or a burrell to show both sides of a phillies jersey but i wouldn't doubt at all that it had 57 on the sleeve instead of 27.

also it has the 2009 world series patch on the jersey and polanco wasn't on the team in 2009. ugh

[Brass]

But it's so much cheaper! Who cares that it's horribly inaccurate and the jersey material will start to deteriorate after one trip through the washing machine! Look! It even has the "AUTHENTIC" MLB patch on the bottom right! It's obviously real and so much cheaper!

[aawagner011]

Has anyone realized by now that the word is "counterfeit" and not "counterfit"?

[Sec19Row53]

Has anyone realized by now that the word is "counterfeit" and not "counterfit"?

It's cheaper to type it that way, so it's ok.

[BlueSky]

Still waiting for someone to take on the profit margin argument...but then I suppose it's just easier to ignore the things that don't support your own point.

Let's throw in as well that the NFL creates its own monopoly, and the high prices that brings, by granting exclusive licenses. What say ye about that?

[IceCap]

Still waiting for someone to take on the profit margin argument...but then I suppose it's just easier to ignore the things that don't support your own point.

There's nothing to say that hasn't already been said. The NFL has the right to sell their own products at whatever prices they want. You can go on and on about the NFL selling their products at a price high above the cost it takes to manufacture them, but that's their right. It's their intellectual property, it's their merchandise. They'll allowed to sell it at any price they want, and if the market's willing to pay that price then, well, that's how the free market works.

Let's throw in as well that the NFL creates its own monopoly, and the high prices that brings, by granting exclusive licenses. What say ye about that?

The NFL has a monopoly on NFL products? Say it isn't so! Next thing you'll tell me is that Coca-Cola has a monopoly on Coca-Cola branded soft drinks!

And exclusive licences? What's wrong with that? If you own intellectual property I'm sure it's completely legal to grant an exclusive licence for that property if you decide it's in your best interests as the owners of said IP.

If the prices of NFL jerseys are to much for your liking then don't buy them. Vote with your wallet. If enough people decide their prices are to high then they'll lower their prices.

The answer is not to support the theft of intellectual property and violations of US copyright law.

[BlueSky]

Still waiting for someone to take on the profit margin argument...but then I suppose it's just easier to ignore the things that don't support your own point.

There's nothing to say that hasn't already been said. The NFL has the right to sell their own products at whatever prices they want. You can go on and on about the NFL selling their products at a price high above the cost it takes to manufacture them, but that's their right. It's their intellectual property, it's their merchandise. They'll allowed to sell it at any price they want, and if the market's willing to pay that price then, well, that's how the free market works.

Let's throw in as well that the NFL creates its own monopoly, and the high prices that brings, by granting exclusive licenses. What say ye about that?

The NFL has a monopoly on NFL products? Say it isn't so! Next thing you'll tell me is that Coca-Cola has a monopoly on Coca-Cola branded soft drinks!

And exclusive licences? What's wrong with that? If you own intellectual property I'm sure it's completely legal to grant an exclusive licence for that property if you decide it's in your best interests as the owners of said IP.

If the prices of NFL jerseys are to much for your liking then don't buy them. Vote with your wallet. If enough people decide their prices are to high then they'll lower their prices.

The answer is not to support the theft of intellectual property and violations of US copyright law.

So mature. I hope you're really smart enough to grasp the difference. If the NFL allowed multiple manufacturers to make jerseys the prices would be lower.

You must enjoy paying double (or more) the rate for the same hotel room when a special event happens to be in town, right? And you never gripe about paying $459 for the same airline seat as the guy next to you, who paid $169? And you never set foot in Wal-Mart, right, because they're driving Ma and Pa's general store on Main Street right out of business? That's how the free market works blah blah blah.

Doesn't the fact that a de facto black market exists at least suggest that these items are overpriced?

And I hope you never bitched about how much better NFL 2K5 was than Madden, because that's another monopoly the league created.

[IceCap]

Still waiting for someone to take on the profit margin argument...but then I suppose it's just easier to ignore the things that don't support your own point.

There's nothing to say that hasn't already been said. The NFL has the right to sell their own products at whatever prices they want. You can go on and on about the NFL selling their products at a price high above the cost it takes to manufacture them, but that's their right. It's their intellectual property, it's their merchandise. They'll allowed to sell it at any price they want, and if the market's willing to pay that price then, well, that's how the free market works.

Let's throw in as well that the NFL creates its own monopoly, and the high prices that brings, by granting exclusive licenses. What say ye about that?

The NFL has a monopoly on NFL products? Say it isn't so! Next thing you'll tell me is that Coca-Cola has a monopoly on Coca-Cola branded soft drinks!

And exclusive licences? What's wrong with that? If you own intellectual property I'm sure it's completely legal to grant an exclusive licence for that property if you decide it's in your best interests as the owners of said IP.

If the prices of NFL jerseys are to much for your liking then don't buy them. Vote with your wallet. If enough people decide their prices are to high then they'll lower their prices.

The answer is not to support the theft of intellectual property and violations of US copyright law.

So mature. I hope you're really smart enough to grasp the difference.

I'm smart enough to know that what you're angry about isn't a monopoly. The NFL owns their IP (shocking, I know). They're free to do with it what they want. If they want to give a manufacturer an exclusive licence that's their right as the holder of the IP.

A monopoly would be if the NFL started their own manufacturing company, awarded themselves their own exclusive licence, and then used that to either drive Nike and Reebok out of the football jersey business, or outright acquire the jersey manufacturing parts of their companies. Them simply deciding that one manufacturer is better then multiple is not a monopoly. Nike, Reebook, and other companies I'm sure still have to compete for the licence, and it's the NFL's licence to give to whoever they want anyway, it's their IP.

If the NFL allowed multiple manufacturers to make jerseys the prices would be lower.

Yeah, and two replicas for the same team, each one from a different manufacturer, would look different. We had this, remember? Each company that had a contract with a NFL team could manufacture ANY NFL team's jerseys for sale. A Broncos jersey made by Nike and a Broncos jersey by Puma looked different. Chargers jerseys (speaking from experience) could fluctuate in bolt dimensions and the thickness of number outlines depending on who made the particular jersey. It was inevitable because each company has its own design teams, templates, and manufacturing processes. Yeah, all the jerseys out there for a given team followed the same general design, but there were (sometimes striking) variations across manufacturers.

It's reasonable to assume that the NFL wanted tighter brand unity for its teams, hence the switch to a single manufacturer.

You must enjoy paying double (or more) the rate for the same hotel room when a special event happens to be in town, right? And you never gripe about paying $459 for the same airline seat as the guy next to you, who paid $169? And you never set foot in Wal-Mart, right, because they're driving Ma and Pa's general store on Main Street right out of business. That's how a free market works blah blah blah.

So what? You're pissy that the market hasn't brought the prices of NFL jerseys down? To me that says that their prices are ones that costumers, by and large, are willing to pay. If costumers are willing to pay the NFL's prices then there isn't a problem, is there?

Doesn't the fact that a de facto black market exists at least suggest that these items are overpriced?

No. It proves that there are scumbags out there who are willing to steal other people's intellectual property to make a quick buck themselves. It proves that there are people out there willing to support those scumbags either out of ignorance or a flawed belief that they deserve jerseys and that by supporting an illegal operation they're "sticking it to the man."

At the end of the day two wrongs don't make a right. If you honestly believe the NFL is "wrong" to charge so much for their products then don't buy those products. Knowingly supporting criminal activity isn't somehow made ok.

[Buster]

gross.

In addition to the obvious problems, does the jersey on the right show a "5" on the sleeve? WTF!

Yeah, but if you really, really want a jersey but can't afford one.

If you look at the "2" on the back, it looks like an upside-down and backwards "5". I think they just sewed the sleeve's "2" on upside-down and backwards.

Hilarious.

[BlueSky]

Still waiting for someone to take on the profit margin argument...but then I suppose it's just easier to ignore the things that don't support your own point.

There's nothing to say that hasn't already been said. The NFL has the right to sell their own products at whatever prices they want. You can go on and on about the NFL selling their products at a price high above the cost it takes to manufacture them, but that's their right. It's their intellectual property, it's their merchandise. They'll allowed to sell it at any price they want, and if the market's willing to pay that price then, well, that's how the free market works.

Let's throw in as well that the NFL creates its own monopoly, and the high prices that brings, by granting exclusive licenses. What say ye about that?

The NFL has a monopoly on NFL products? Say it isn't so! Next thing you'll tell me is that Coca-Cola has a monopoly on Coca-Cola branded soft drinks!

And exclusive licences? What's wrong with that? If you own intellectual property I'm sure it's completely legal to grant an exclusive licence for that property if you decide it's in your best interests as the owners of said IP.

If the prices of NFL jerseys are to much for your liking then don't buy them. Vote with your wallet. If enough people decide their prices are to high then they'll lower their prices.

The answer is not to support the theft of intellectual property and violations of US copyright law.

So mature. I hope you're really smart enough to grasp the difference.

I'm smart enough to know that what you're angry about isn't a monopoly. The NFL owns their IP (shocking, I know). They're free to do with it what they want. If they want to give a manufacturer an exclusive licence that's their right as the holder of the IP.

A monopoly would be if the NFL started their own manufacturing company, awarded themselves their own exclusive licence, and then used that to either drive Nike and Reebok out of the football jersey business, or outright acquire the jersey manufacturing parts of their companies. Them simply deciding that one manufacturer is better then multiple is not a monopoly. Nike, Reebook, and other companies I'm sure still have to compete for the licence, and it's the NFL's licence to give to whoever they want anyway, it's their IP.

If the NFL allowed multiple manufacturers to make jerseys the prices would be lower.

Yeah, and two replicas for the same team, each one from a different manufacturer, would look different. We had this, remember? Each company that had a contract with a NFL team could manufacture ANY NFL team's jerseys for sale. A Broncos jersey made by Nike and a Broncos jersey by Puma looked different. Chargers jerseys (speaking from experience) could fluctuate in bolt dimensions and the thickness of number outlines depending on who made the particular jersey. It was inevitable because each company has its own design teams, templates, and manufacturing processes. Yeah, all the jerseys out there for a given team followed the same general design, but there were (sometimes striking) variations across manufacturers.

It's reasonable to assume that the NFL wanted tighter brand unity for its teams, hence the switch to a single manufacturer.

You must enjoy paying double (or more) the rate for the same hotel room when a special event happens to be in town, right? And you never gripe about paying $459 for the same airline seat as the guy next to you, who paid $169? And you never set foot in Wal-Mart, right, because they're driving Ma and Pa's general store on Main Street right out of business. That's how a free market works blah blah blah.

So what? You're pissy that the market hasn't brought the prices of NFL jerseys down? To me that says that their prices are ones that costumers, by and large, are willing to pay. If costumers are willing to pay the NFL's prices then there isn't a problem, is there?

Doesn't the fact that a de facto black market exists at least suggest that these items are overpriced?

No. It proves that there are scumbags out there who are willing to steal other people's intellectual property to make a quick buck themselves. It proves that there are people out there willing to support those scumbags either out of ignorance or a flawed belief that they deserve jerseys and that by supporting an illegal operation they're "sticking it to the man."

At the end of the day two wrongs don't make a right. If you honestly believe the NFL is "wrong" to charge so much for their products then don't buy those products. Knowingly supporting criminal activity isn't somehow made ok.

You're so self-righteous about this. And wrong, at least about one thing:

--

mo·nop·o·ly   /məˈnɒpəli/

[muh-nop-uh-lee]

–noun, plural -lies.

1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.

--

Sorry, the NFL's control of who makes their jerseys qualifies.

I'm not angry or even pissy. As I've posted before (guessed you missed those), I'm torn on this issue, which makes me a hypocrite, but we all are (yeah, even you) in some way or another.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, specifically answering the post about why leagues don't crack down harder on counterfeits by barring people from stadiums and so on. You have a lot to say (much of it obvious btw) but still haven't addressed the fact that no league would want to bring too much scrutiny on their profit margins (which are probably obscene), especially at a time when most fans have already been priced out of even attending an occasional game (much less the economy, unemployment rate et al). Do you agree or disagree, and why?

[IceCap]

You're so self-righteous about this.

I had no idea simply pointing out that illegal activities are illegal was self-righteous.

See, I'm not angry or even pissy. As I've posted before (guessed you missed those), I'm torn on this issue, which makes me a hypocrite, but we all are (yeah, even you) in some way or another.

I never claimed I haven't been guilty of hypocrisy.

You have a lot to say (much of it obvious btw)

Yet it seems to fly over the heads of so many people. Who knew "knowingly buying illegal goods is wrong" was such an aloof concept, but here we are.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, specifically answering the post about why leagues don't crack down harder on counterfeits by barring people from stadiums and so on....but still haven't addressed the fact that no league would want to bring too much scrutiny on their profit margins (which are probably obscene), especially at a time when most fans have already been priced out of even attending an occasional game (much less the economy, unemployment rate et al). Do you agree or disagree, and why?

I agree, believe it or not.

Of course the NFL doesn't want to much scrutiny regarding their profit margins on jerseys. Right now the market is at a point where costumers are willing to pay their prices for their products. If the profit margins on their products are examined more people might decide the jerseys aren't worth the price tag and stop buying the product. This would force the NFL to lower the prices on their jerseys, which means less revenue.

The thing is, I don't see the supposed crime on the NFL's part. They're free to mark up their own products to their hearts' content. Whether the market will support that is something else entirely. Right now it is. In order to keep the situation favourable they're not going to do something that will reflect negatively on their products' price ranges.

Now we're a small group of people that, due to our mutual interest in such things, are at least somewhat aware of the profit margins made on jerseys. So the decision's on each of us, personally. Are you ok with paying the NFL's prices for jerseys? If so, cool. Buy yourself a jersey. If, due to what you know, you're not then just buy a t-shirt or a cap. Supporting intellectual property theft isn't justified, anyway you cut it. Especially on a forum like this.

mo·nop·o·ly   /məˈnɒpəli/

[muh-nop-uh-lee]

–noun, plural -lies.

1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.

Sorry, the NFL's control of who makes their jerseys qualifies.

No, it does not.

The NFL's exclusive licence does not qualify as a monopoly because the football jersey market is not just the NFL.

The NFL and its teams are simply brands in a market that include college and university teams, other pro teams from other pro or semi-pro leagues, and manufacturer specific stuff like Fubu jerseys. If the football jersey market was confined to just the NFL then yes, you would have a point. It isn't though. The NFL's exclusive licence only covers a portion of the wider football jersey marketplace, only 32 brands when you get right down to it. That's not a monopoly.

[BlueSky]

mo·nop·o·ly   /məˈnɒpəli/

[muh-nop-uh-lee]

?noun, plural -lies.

1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.

Sorry, the NFL's control of who makes their jerseys qualifies.

No, it does not.

The NFL's exclusive licence does not qualify as a monopoly because the football jersey market is not just the NFL.

The NFL and its teams are simply brands in a market that include college and university teams, other pro teams from other pro or semi-pro leagues, and manufacturer specific stuff like Fubu jerseys. If the football jersey market was confined to just the NFL then yes, you would have a point. It isn't though. The NFL's exclusive licence only covers a portion of the wider football jersey marketplace, only 32 brands when you get right down to it. That's not a monopoly.

Of course it does. People don't want just a jersey, they want their team's jersey, and if that team happens to be in the NFL, their only option is the NFL or a licensee. Wherever they get it though, the NFL sets the price.

BTW, did the issue of homemades ever get addressed? By your thinking, wouldn't a homemade (regardless of quality) be illegal?

[MidnightSun]

[MidnightSun]