How much value did Mox Diamond lose? Reverberate was printed in M11, which was before their statement in 2011 which added functional reprints to their promise.
I don't know, I don't think it's really relevant since the contention is that Wizard's reprinting violated the hypothetical "binding legal contract" some people think exists between Wizards and collectors. I think the whole point of his post was it's already happened and nothing occurred, because it would be laughed out of court.
How much value did Mox Diamond lose? Reverberate was printed in M11, which was before their statement in 2011 which added functional reprints to their promise.
I don't know, I don't think it's really relevant since the contention is that Wizard's reprinting violated the hypothetical "binding legal contract" some people think exists between Wizards and collectors. I think the whole point of his post was it's already happened and nothing occurred, because it would be laughed out of court.
Courts don't care about a breach of contract unless there is damages. So, it's incredibly important and relevant.
Well I bet Karn, Silver Golem lost value. It was a rare bad card that got more copies (this usually causes a loss in value as there is no increase in demand), but if you're going to contend cards have to lose value then not-reprinting seems worse. Reprinting will likely increase the value as it did to Modern because card availability will increase which will in turn increase demand. So if you want to move the goal posts to value then reprinting is a good thing (for played cards, cards that aren't used will lose value, like Karn).
Also I have to say it sounds like you have a poor understanding of the legal system if you think this is a legally binding contract and that there would be standing. I'm sorry, but that's just the reality. Things that are exactly the same as what you're suggesting here happen constantly in many types of media. Collector's editions being reissued, pre-order bonuses becoming available to anyone, exclusives moving to other platforms, special editions making your original edition worthless. This stuff happens constantly and no one even remotely attempts to sue. I remember buying Marvel vs. Capcom 3: Collector's Edition being promised by Capcom there wouldn't be a new version before it came out and then Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 came out less than a year later making my copy worthless (couldn't even buy DLC to upgrade it). No one tried to sue them because that would be ridiculous. It would never work.
Why are we even discussing this? It's not happening, Wizard almost never gives into pressure from the community. Rule change, new frames are some issues that just stuck despite heavy protest. They especially are not going to do anything when the community is fragmented on the issue to begin with.
Why are we even discussing this? It's not happening, Wizard almost never gives into pressure from the community. Rule change, new frames are some issues that just stuck despite heavy protest. They especially are not going to do anything when the community is fragmented on the issue to begin with.
The community is fragmented on if a change will occur. To say that the community is fragmented on if the change should occur, would be disingenuous, in my opinion, as it would be overwhelmingly in favor.
Well I bet Karn, Silver Golem lost value. It was a rare bad card that got more copies (this usually causes a loss in value as there is no increase in demand), but if you're going to contend cards have to lose value then not-reprinting seems worse. Reprinting will likely increase the value as it did to Modern because card availability will increase which will in turn increase demand. So if you want to move the goal posts to value then reprinting is a good thing (for played cards, cards that aren't used will lose value, like Karn).
Also I have to say it sounds like you have a poor understanding of the legal system if you think this is a legally binding contract and that there would be standing. I'm sorry, but that's just the reality. Things that are exactly the same as what you're suggesting here happen constantly in many types of media. Collector's editions being reissued, pre-order bonuses becoming available to anyone, exclusives moving to other platforms, special editions making your original edition worthless. This stuff happens constantly and no one even remotely attempts to sue. I remember buying Marvel vs. Capcom 3: Collector's Edition being promised by Capcom there wouldn't be a new version before it came out and then Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 came out less than a year later making my copy worthless (couldn't even buy DLC to upgrade it). No one tried to sue them because that would be ridiculous. It would never work.
No, I'm quite sure my understanding of this is correct.
I would need to see more information on your analogous circumstances to compare between the two. If you truly think you have a greater understanding of the situation merely because it has happened before, you're a fool. Preorder bonuses are irrelevant. You don't invest in them. Your second example of the Marvel vs. Capcom is an entirely different case, and I'm not sure why you are even trying to compare it to this.
It will probably happen someday, but only when they're ready to give up a very large segment of the profits.
Anyone suing a major company better have a hell of a attorney, because Hasboro sure has one. Since they HAVE reprinted certain cards on the list if you had a legal reason to sue them, you could do it right now because they have already gone back on that promise a few times. The legal reason has little to nothing to do with the reason they don't go back on the promise. The major reason they wont go back on it is, they don't want be known as a company that goes back on their promises to the players. Their integrity as a company is more important to them. Almost to a fault IMO. Their promise to players is holding them back from printing what is in the best interest of the game. I am not saying reprint the power 9 and such, but even defenders of the list have to admit, which cards are on the list is pretty arbitrary. The list has failed at what it set out to do and is now a 20 year old relic of a company that has grown and evolved where others have perished.
Uhm, when you file a civil suit, you do so to receive compensation for damages. A few mox diamonds isn't a lot of damages, so you wouldn't get much and as such there's no reason to file the lawsuit. If they do a mass-reprinting of popular reserved list cards to open up Legacy by significantly reducing the prices on those cards, then the damages go into the billions and it becomes well worth it.
Ahh yes... I see quite clearly now. I always had the suspicion that SCG and friends were -insert negativity- hiking up prices, but now I realize that it was fail-safe plan.
I've always thought that (to the extent which a bunch of posters on a forum makes any difference) pushing for a "Legacy Masters" without reserved list cards is more realistic. Such a product would sell incredibly well while not violating any "pledges," appeal to a wide audience, increase the supply of certain staples (see: Force of Will, Wasteland, Onslaught Fetches, etc.) and even provide an avenue to reprint Modern cards as well. If Wizards is unable/unwilling to do even this, what are the chances they are willing to risk whatever legal repercussions (they believe) may/may not occur in abolishing the reserve list?
I don't think there's a legal issue with them abolishing the Reserved List. Collectors in favour of the RL would get pissed and may sue Wizards/Hasbro but they would not win. The PR-storm that would result in all those lawsuits, however, is what I think Wizards/Hasbro is ultimately afraid of.
I just wish they'd look the other way and see that it is worth it. Legacy currently gets next to no support from Wizards and is certainly far less supported than Modern is, yet the format has managed to attract 1700 players at Grand Prix DC and 1580+ players at the recent Grand Prix Paris. The numbers are there for Legacy and I wish Wizards would actually take steps to support it.
Just pointing out, while I want the Reserved List abolished and for there to be reprints so that I can play MUD in Legacy, Grand Prix Richmond has over 2500 players preregistered for it 5 days in advance. Modern is more profitable for Wizards than Legacy.
I never said it would be painless, However it would broker creativity and get people to make changes to the format, New decks would emerge, many of which quite likely will be fun! Storm can exist without LED. Sometimes healthy skin needs to be cut so that the cancer can be removed, with the removal of the cards from the list legacy can get all kinds of support for WOTC. Since it would effectively be one of the biggest cash cows ever.The format it self would live on, a touch weaker, but able to thrive for years to come.
I don't think there's a legal issue with them abolishing the Reserved List. Collectors in favour of the RL would get pissed and may sue Wizards/Hasbro but they would not win. The PR-storm that would result in all those lawsuits, however, is what I think Wizards/Hasbro is ultimately afraid of.
I just wish they'd look the other way and see that it is worth it. Legacy currently gets next to no support from Wizards and is certainly far less supported than Modern is, yet the format has managed to attract 1700 players at Grand Prix DC and 1580+ players at the recent Grand Prix Paris. The numbers are there for Legacy and I wish Wizards would actually take steps to support it.
Just pointing out, while I want the Reserved List abolished and for there to be reprints so that I can play MUD in Legacy, Grand Prix Richmond has over 2500 players preregistered for it 5 days in advance. Modern is more profitable for Wizards than Legacy.
This makes no sense. With the amount of support it is being thrown, it would be downright embarrassing if Modern didn't have these types of numbers. Are you really trying to say that WOTC making a Legacy Masters, Legacy Event Deck, more GPs etc, wouldn't help Legacy reach these levels?
I don't think there's a legal issue with them abolishing the Reserved List. Collectors in favour of the RL would get pissed and may sue Wizards/Hasbro but they would not win. The PR-storm that would result in all those lawsuits, however, is what I think Wizards/Hasbro is ultimately afraid of.
I just wish they'd look the other way and see that it is worth it. Legacy currently gets next to no support from Wizards and is certainly far less supported than Modern is, yet the format has managed to attract 1700 players at Grand Prix DC and 1580+ players at the recent Grand Prix Paris. The numbers are there for Legacy and I wish Wizards would actually take steps to support it.
Just pointing out, while I want the Reserved List abolished and for there to be reprints so that I can play MUD in Legacy, Grand Prix Richmond has over 2500 players preregistered for it 5 days in advance. Modern is more profitable for Wizards than Legacy.
As TolarianAcademy said, Modern has been the babied, favourite child of Wizards for years now and it's only right that it has these numbers. If anything, this is an argument IN FAVOUR of the Legacy format because it shows that Legacy events can have high attendance numbers even with next to zero support from (and virtually left for dead by) Wizards. A Legacy Masters set, even without reserved list cards, would be just as profitable for Wizards as Modern Masters was.
Furthermore, much of GP Richmond's success has to do with Starcitygames backing, promoting, and facilitating the event. I have no doubts that if SCG hosted a Legacy Grand Prix, we'd be seeing crazy attendance numbers too.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Special thanks to Hakai Studios and SushiOtter for the sig!
Legacy:UR Sneak and Show IUBG Team America IX Metalworker MUD Modern:UBR Blue Jund IWBX Eldrazi Processors IX Affinity IWRG Nacatl Burn IGR Tron IUBR Grishoalbrand
I'm amazed that this doesn't get brought up more. The reserved list has been altered multiple times in different ways. Cards like Clone used to be on it, and I'm fairly sure that card would be worth a lot more if not for the multiple reprints.
The original list also included rules about adding more cards to it. It promised a certain number of cards from each set would be reserved. Mark Rosewater even said on his tumblr that they used to do that to legendary creatures often because they never expected to reprint them anyway. By my count, the number of ways the reserved list has been broken:
Cards have been removed from it.
The promise to add a certain number of new cards to it was rescinded.
The exception for foreign cards was removed.
The exception for foil cards was removed.
Each one of these could be argued to have caused damage to collectors.
On a different topic, maybe there is a different direction to go that would give people the ability to play legacy (and modern) and might even grow the paper game.
First, leave the paper game un touched. There is a reason that MTG is the eternal champion of CCGs.
Why has wizards not taken Duels and MTGO and merged them into a F2P style game? You could use the same engine as Hearthstone. Buy packs, earn some sort of currency, buy currency straight from wizards, use that currency to straight buy singles, etc etc etc. No
This could be able to created ranked play que's for each format. Online tourneys, everything. It would be the perfect compromise and even fuel the paper game with interest. Leave the major events and money to paper.
Just a thought, but I really think wizards is going to take a beating from games like Hearthstone. Online card games are a real threat.
Cards have been removed from it.
The promise to add a certain number of new cards to it was rescinded.
The exception for foreign cards was removed.
The exception for foil cards was removed.
Each one of these could be argued to have caused damage to collectors.
1. Which cards and what were their values before and after?
2. That's not a binding promise.
3. That's not a binding promise.
4. That's not a binding promise.
Do you realize the volume of cards removed by the common, uncommon removals? It's much too large to even calculate how much value may have been lost. Probably the biggest loser would have been Sinkhole as it is still the most expensive common in the game, but Lotus Petal and numerous others (Wasteland, Karakas, etc.) likely lost value as a result of reprints. I don't know why we're still debating this though. The evidence points so far against the claims you're making that the dead horse isn't even recognizable at this point.
Do you have any particular reason for determining that the certain parts of the reserved list were a "binding promise" while others were not?
Yes. I stated them earlier. You need a bargained-for consideration for a contract to be binding (among other thing). This means that either the promisor must benefit or the promisee must gain a detriment and there must be a bargain for this said benefit/detriment. Exceptions to foils or foreign language cards does not have said consideration. Retaining the ability to reprint them is not bargained for (whereas the reserve list is an exchange of a benefit for a detriment). It's a mere statement. One would argue that the exceptions is included in the contract of the reserve list as a whole, but courts don't care about a breach of contract unless there are damages. An efficient breach, when it happens, is something that is ignored by courts.
Do you realize the volume of cards removed by the common, uncommon removals? It's much too large to even calculate how much value may have been lost. Probably the biggest loser would have been Sinkhole as it is still the most expensive common in the game, but Lotus Petal and numerous others (Wasteland, Karakas, etc.) likely lost value as a result of reprints. I don't know why we're still debating this though. The evidence points so far against the claims you're making that the dead horse isn't even recognizable at this point.
No offense, but your opinion is irrelevant if you're going to keep using words such as "probably" and "likely." I'm not saying that they don't exist, I merely want to know the before and after prices of a card that was taken off the reserved list. I'm quite sure that the damages are not near as high as you think they are. And just because nobody filed a suit before does not mean it cannot happen now (when the damages would not doubt be incredibly higher.) That's a ridiculous statement to make by you.
You run purely off conjecture and you're calling someone just going off facts as being ridiculous? There is zero evidence to support your position and you disregard any evidence to the contrary through some arbitrarily changing criterion (this promise is binding, this one isn't, this didn't lose value, this would lose value). There is no point to continue this discourse with you because you are uninterested in facts, you're just pushing this legal narrative that you think exists despite all evidence to the contrary.
Here you go. This is the Restatement of Contracts. It is a recollection of common law. While it is only persuasive, it is the most persuasive material you're going to find on contract law. http://home.comcast.net/~rnhauck/BusLaw/201RestConts.pdf
Chapter four is the formation of contracts. Some key things to note are consideration. I would also take a look at Topic 4 in chapter 16 for restitution. It will also apply.
Looking through that I didn't see anything I didn't pick up in the Business Law class I took and I also saw nothing that indicates a promise a company makes to a set of customers that has been modified multiple times over the years constitutes a legally binding contract. I'm just not seeing it. Everything in there deals with typical contract law where you have a party and another party agreeing to some terms. This was just Wizards making a promise to customers. Companies break promises all the time, and other than some bad PR nothing happens legally. I don't see the part where contract law applies to the reserve list. If there is some specific aspect of the document you posted that I missed that is somehow legally binding in this case, can you post the relevant part in the topic?
Legal facts aside as i have no clue about thats stuff.
IF it was allowed, I don't really see a downside for FTV legacy from wizards point of view.
- it would inject new players into the format with less of an expense barrier. Its what stopped me for so long. The people buying into the format atm ARE the future of legacy and I see too many giving up after a fortnight which will lead to a stale small format 3yrs down the track.
- the prices of original legacy lands wouldn't drop very much anyway.
- it would create awareness of the format.
- it would get them profit off of legacy players where as currently only the 2nd hand market makes profit from legacy.
- i would buy 4
I hate to say this but I'm a player and a collector and it would offend me if a court order was used to end the reserve list. Maybe we should get a court order to unban Black Vise? Or maybe I should sue Wizards for Urzas block, Hell type 2 was a nightmare back in those days! I'm seriously, I hate stupid lawsuits, if there was a way we could knock out stupid lawsuits (it would free up 75% of the court system)...
I would be more happier if wizards make a new set of dual lands that is Legacy/Vintage/EDH playable.
Legal facts aside as i have no clue about thats stuff.
IF it was allowed, I don't really see a downside for FTV legacy from wizards point of view.
- it would inject new players into the format with less of an expense barrier. Its what stopped me for so long. The people buying into the format atm ARE the future of legacy and I see too many giving up after a fortnight which will lead to a stale small format 3yrs down the track.
False - Had you seen what happen with the cards reprinted for Modern? Cards shops swooped in and the price of the cards are just as expensive or even more (because of new art). Look at EDH's TNN... I cannot find the box that sell it anywhere but if I'm going to buy it from Amazon I'm looking at 60 dollars.
- the prices of original legacy lands wouldn't drop very much anyway.
True...
- it would create awareness of the format.
False - Players are aware of the format, most that do play legacy play it casually because the format allows the most cards that Magic had ever made. Casual players will proxy cards they don't have.
- it would get them profit off of legacy players where as currently only the 2nd hand market makes profit from legacy.
Sort of true and sort of false - sure they will receive a small profit but in the long run the profit is aimed at the card shops/collectors.
- i would buy 4
False - After the announcement of the reprints - the card prices will (especially for dual lands) will double the cost of Revised edition duals... Why? Two words - BLACK BORDER! It'll be far cheaper then the beta dual lands but it'll be more then the Revised Edition ones... If you don't believe me then you have not played the game long enough.
Here you go. This is the Restatement of Contracts.
That's your conjecture. We don't know if Hasbro considers the Reserved List a legally binding contract, and you're just guessing based on what you know about contracts. All of the legal arguments regarding what did or did not cause damage are irrelevant because we don't know that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't know, I don't think it's really relevant since the contention is that Wizard's reprinting violated the hypothetical "binding legal contract" some people think exists between Wizards and collectors. I think the whole point of his post was it's already happened and nothing occurred, because it would be laughed out of court.
RGoblinsR
RWerewolf StompyR
URU/R DelverRU
RGBelcherGR
BThe GateB
GBLoam PoxBG
WGBNic FitBGW
UHigh TideU
UMerfolkU
UFaerieNinjaStillU
WBUAffinityUBW
GSquirrelsG
UWGSliversGWU
Courts don't care about a breach of contract unless there is damages. So, it's incredibly important and relevant.
Also I have to say it sounds like you have a poor understanding of the legal system if you think this is a legally binding contract and that there would be standing. I'm sorry, but that's just the reality. Things that are exactly the same as what you're suggesting here happen constantly in many types of media. Collector's editions being reissued, pre-order bonuses becoming available to anyone, exclusives moving to other platforms, special editions making your original edition worthless. This stuff happens constantly and no one even remotely attempts to sue. I remember buying Marvel vs. Capcom 3: Collector's Edition being promised by Capcom there wouldn't be a new version before it came out and then Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 came out less than a year later making my copy worthless (couldn't even buy DLC to upgrade it). No one tried to sue them because that would be ridiculous. It would never work.
RGoblinsR
RWerewolf StompyR
URU/R DelverRU
RGBelcherGR
BThe GateB
GBLoam PoxBG
WGBNic FitBGW
UHigh TideU
UMerfolkU
UFaerieNinjaStillU
WBUAffinityUBW
GSquirrelsG
UWGSliversGWU
Dream, baby, dream.
Commons and uncommons from Limited Edition (Alpha and Beta) were removed from the reserved list due to overwhelming public support for this change.
The community is fragmented on if a change will occur. To say that the community is fragmented on if the change should occur, would be disingenuous, in my opinion, as it would be overwhelmingly in favor.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/legacy-type-1-5/661941-list-of-stores-that-support-legacy
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?28892-Compilation-Of-Legacy-Streams
No, I'm quite sure my understanding of this is correct.
I would need to see more information on your analogous circumstances to compare between the two. If you truly think you have a greater understanding of the situation merely because it has happened before, you're a fool. Preorder bonuses are irrelevant. You don't invest in them. Your second example of the Marvel vs. Capcom is an entirely different case, and I'm not sure why you are even trying to compare it to this.
It will probably happen someday, but only when they're ready to give up a very large segment of the profits.
Ahh yes... I see quite clearly now. I always had the suspicion that SCG and friends were -insert negativity- hiking up prices, but now I realize that it was fail-safe plan.
Just pointing out, while I want the Reserved List abolished and for there to be reprints so that I can play MUD in Legacy, Grand Prix Richmond has over 2500 players preregistered for it 5 days in advance. Modern is more profitable for Wizards than Legacy.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
This makes no sense. With the amount of support it is being thrown, it would be downright embarrassing if Modern didn't have these types of numbers. Are you really trying to say that WOTC making a Legacy Masters, Legacy Event Deck, more GPs etc, wouldn't help Legacy reach these levels?
As TolarianAcademy said, Modern has been the babied, favourite child of Wizards for years now and it's only right that it has these numbers. If anything, this is an argument IN FAVOUR of the Legacy format because it shows that Legacy events can have high attendance numbers even with next to zero support from (and virtually left for dead by) Wizards. A Legacy Masters set, even without reserved list cards, would be just as profitable for Wizards as Modern Masters was.
Furthermore, much of GP Richmond's success has to do with Starcitygames backing, promoting, and facilitating the event. I have no doubts that if SCG hosted a Legacy Grand Prix, we'd be seeing crazy attendance numbers too.
Special thanks to Hakai Studios and SushiOtter for the sig!
Legacy: UR Sneak and Show I UBG Team America I X Metalworker MUD
Modern: UBR Blue Jund I WBX Eldrazi Processors I X Affinity I WRG Nacatl Burn I GR Tron I UBR Grishoalbrand
The original list also included rules about adding more cards to it. It promised a certain number of cards from each set would be reserved. Mark Rosewater even said on his tumblr that they used to do that to legendary creatures often because they never expected to reprint them anyway. By my count, the number of ways the reserved list has been broken:
Cards have been removed from it.
The promise to add a certain number of new cards to it was rescinded.
The exception for foreign cards was removed.
The exception for foil cards was removed.
Each one of these could be argued to have caused damage to collectors.
First, leave the paper game un touched. There is a reason that MTG is the eternal champion of CCGs.
Why has wizards not taken Duels and MTGO and merged them into a F2P style game? You could use the same engine as Hearthstone. Buy packs, earn some sort of currency, buy currency straight from wizards, use that currency to straight buy singles, etc etc etc. No
This could be able to created ranked play que's for each format. Online tourneys, everything. It would be the perfect compromise and even fuel the paper game with interest. Leave the major events and money to paper.
Just a thought, but I really think wizards is going to take a beating from games like Hearthstone. Online card games are a real threat.
1. Which cards and what were their values before and after?
2. That's not a binding promise.
3. That's not a binding promise.
4. That's not a binding promise.
RGoblinsR
RWerewolf StompyR
URU/R DelverRU
RGBelcherGR
BThe GateB
GBLoam PoxBG
WGBNic FitBGW
UHigh TideU
UMerfolkU
UFaerieNinjaStillU
WBUAffinityUBW
GSquirrelsG
UWGSliversGWU
Yes. I stated them earlier. You need a bargained-for consideration for a contract to be binding (among other thing). This means that either the promisor must benefit or the promisee must gain a detriment and there must be a bargain for this said benefit/detriment. Exceptions to foils or foreign language cards does not have said consideration. Retaining the ability to reprint them is not bargained for (whereas the reserve list is an exchange of a benefit for a detriment). It's a mere statement. One would argue that the exceptions is included in the contract of the reserve list as a whole, but courts don't care about a breach of contract unless there are damages. An efficient breach, when it happens, is something that is ignored by courts.
No offense, but your opinion is irrelevant if you're going to keep using words such as "probably" and "likely." I'm not saying that they don't exist, I merely want to know the before and after prices of a card that was taken off the reserved list. I'm quite sure that the damages are not near as high as you think they are. And just because nobody filed a suit before does not mean it cannot happen now (when the damages would not doubt be incredibly higher.) That's a ridiculous statement to make by you.
RGoblinsR
RWerewolf StompyR
URU/R DelverRU
RGBelcherGR
BThe GateB
GBLoam PoxBG
WGBNic FitBGW
UHigh TideU
UMerfolkU
UFaerieNinjaStillU
WBUAffinityUBW
GSquirrelsG
UWGSliversGWU
No my friend. This is hardly conjecture.
Here you go. This is the Restatement of Contracts. It is a recollection of common law. While it is only persuasive, it is the most persuasive material you're going to find on contract law.
http://home.comcast.net/~rnhauck/BusLaw/201RestConts.pdf
Chapter four is the formation of contracts. Some key things to note are consideration. I would also take a look at Topic 4 in chapter 16 for restitution. It will also apply.
RGoblinsR
RWerewolf StompyR
URU/R DelverRU
RGBelcherGR
BThe GateB
GBLoam PoxBG
WGBNic FitBGW
UHigh TideU
UMerfolkU
UFaerieNinjaStillU
WBUAffinityUBW
GSquirrelsG
UWGSliversGWU
IF it was allowed, I don't really see a downside for FTV legacy from wizards point of view.
- it would inject new players into the format with less of an expense barrier. Its what stopped me for so long. The people buying into the format atm ARE the future of legacy and I see too many giving up after a fortnight which will lead to a stale small format 3yrs down the track.
- the prices of original legacy lands wouldn't drop very much anyway.
- it would create awareness of the format.
- it would get them profit off of legacy players where as currently only the 2nd hand market makes profit from legacy.
- i would buy 4
MTG Legacy and Vintage extraordinaire (jokes), if it doesn't play blue I most likely don't play it.
I would be more happier if wizards make a new set of dual lands that is Legacy/Vintage/EDH playable.
False - Had you seen what happen with the cards reprinted for Modern? Cards shops swooped in and the price of the cards are just as expensive or even more (because of new art). Look at EDH's TNN... I cannot find the box that sell it anywhere but if I'm going to buy it from Amazon I'm looking at 60 dollars.
True...
False - Players are aware of the format, most that do play legacy play it casually because the format allows the most cards that Magic had ever made. Casual players will proxy cards they don't have.
Sort of true and sort of false - sure they will receive a small profit but in the long run the profit is aimed at the card shops/collectors.
False - After the announcement of the reprints - the card prices will (especially for dual lands) will double the cost of Revised edition duals... Why? Two words - BLACK BORDER! It'll be far cheaper then the beta dual lands but it'll be more then the Revised Edition ones... If you don't believe me then you have not played the game long enough.
In his Second 100 days - Yawgmoth's Bargain is unrestricted in Vintage.
What is going to happen in the Next 100 days!!!