What are some of the cards? It could just be that the bots never updated their library databases for it.
As for the forum, I think this is a victim of being moved below the random community forums. Personally, I thought these forums were closed for a while when I couldn't find it. So, it's a sub-forum in a forum that its slow that is hard to find.
The EV varies depending on what is in them. In the last few days the EV has been around 3, and it tends to hover in the 2.5-3 range. Unless you are opening 100+, you should sell, unless you enjoy opening them.
This forum is relatively dead. Did you get a deckbuilder's toolkit? It might be included in there.
As for purchasing it: whole it will probably never sell. In pieces you might get some fractional tickets. You would likely need to sell it to a bulk bot.
So, I write for a site, and with that I generate enough credit that I am planning on redeeming some foil sets. Not sure on the quantity exactly, but probably 1-2 Kaladesh and 2+ Aether Revolt. I only ever even collected a foil set back in the dark days (Darksteel), and I sold that in the online form on eBay.
With the abbreviated redemption schedule, I know I have to redeem soonish. When should I sell? Where do people usually sell sealed foil sets?
OK, so are the retailers then buying from MJ Holdings or the retailers buy from Wizards and MJ Holdings then is a distribution branch to those retailers? Again, just wanting to get the right information. If true, the more layers of these "middlemen" the more we are going to have to pay for the product. Makes me wish we could buy "damaged product" from the retailers without it having to go back through a middleman yet another time and seeing the price marked right back up.
Back to the topic of the Mystery boxes for those that have bought them. Do they have a plastic overwrap on them? Or could someone just pop the top and look inside to see what boosters lie within. I could see some people buying these opening them, then returning for refunds. Or I could see buying opening, taking out a more valuable booster and replacing it with a junk booster. I guess too much effort for the crime I suppose.
They are sealed all neatly and the box is more professional than previous items like the 3 pack hanger or the plastic cube. I almost thought it was a WoTC product so no peaking inside. The 3 pack hangers gave away what was in them because you could see the side of the package. Tons and Tons of Born of the Gods and Core set products were left over at the stores.
As for the exact business relationship I am not sure. It might be like the Pepsi guys who stock right to the shelves, so I am not sure exactly who makes what on these items. I am guessing that they have the largest margins (highest shelf price and lowest cost from wizards) that a person off the street can buy from. They also have the highest shrinkage(theft) and high maintenance inventory.
Before BFZ release, I went to a Target to see when they would get the fat packs. My understanding was that they were stocked by completely independent realtors and Target didn't make that much money off of them. They also couldn't tell me when a product came in, because it just depended on when the guy came in, and they had no idea what the schedule was. This is also why the products are ~5% above MSRP (at least in my area) at Target--the RedCard discount was costing too much money, so the base price for a pack is 4.19, commander 36.99, fat pack (I think) 44.99 and so on.
The best was when those clear boxes had 2 Commander Decks in them. I was happy to buy those for $30 each.
Oh, they can be much better. I've found two with 3 commander decks, the first of which had Counterpunch, Devour for Power, and Heavenly Inferno. Needless to say I visited every Target within reasonable distance that day to see if there were any other jackpots (I only found 2 more with commander decks, both Devour for Power). I've also realized that the repack cubes will contain the 1-year-old commander sets a month or two after the new release, about 3 months after the old are taken off the shelve. Got the red, green, white, and black mono color ones this way (I think only 1 2-pack though). My guess is it is just completely and totally random. I've seen fat pack land packs in them. Which could be where some of these packs from the mystery box comes from.
Is there reason to believe these won't be monocolor? If they are supposed to be for new players, those have often been monocolor (save heavy themes like guilds), so it's possible we just get a U Tezz and W Ajani
I don't think Wizards will emergency ban now, but after this and Cruise I think they'll want a better way to deal with eternal "oopsies", like moving the B&R announcement to ~1 month after the set release.
Just chiming in that this would not happen. There are several mechanisms here, but two are particularly important. WotC wants the ban before the tour so that things like this happen. I say 'things like this' because WotC doesn't want exactly what happened here. But, WotC does want the pros to shake-up the format and waiting until after the pro tour would just have the pro tour look like the previous format. The other issue preventing is the actual functionality. Changing the ban list at the same time as a new set becomes legal is logistically far simpler, both in paper and in MTGO.
An emergency ban is not going to happen for a simple reason: history. An emergency ban would only happen if tournament attendance was severely depressed (look at the only emergency ban, Memory Jar). However, Modern is not the majority of tournaments, so it would probably have to take a complete abandonment of Modern tournaments to reach the requisite level. Outside of that, Modern bannings are about the Modern metagame. WotC has talked several times about waiting to see how the metagame develops over several months. An emergency ban is just not in the toolbox for Modern.
Did they form for anything beyond the bottom line?
This rhetorical question you ask cuts strongly against the argument you are making as well as highlighting that you missed the point of the post you replied to. You are saying that this is some extreme overreaction that WotC clearly hasn't thought through. But, as you so graciously pointed out, Wizards still has a bottom line to meet. So, this decision most likely went through a lot of people and looked at their bottom line. In the end, the company did what it though best for its own bottom line, again, as you so graciously intoned. Whether it actually is the best choice remains to be seen, but Wizards is a successful business, so my pre-information hunch is that long-term this was the right thing for Wizards. Maybe not, but saying the sky is falling and this is Wizards making terrible business decisions still has a long time to prove.
And no, I'm not a transactional attorney, but you should really stop embarrassing yourself.
Any claim brought would easily been seen as a settlement grab. There simply is not law supporting the idea that volunteer judges getting a suspicion from an entirely private organization is an actionable event. You make it sound like defamation is as easy to prove as a car accident--it isn't.
While the issue needs discussion, suggesting court action is not helpful to the discussion, it just inflames people and closes off reasonableness. There are legitimate issues here, but those are mainly PR and community interaction issues for Wizards. If the judges want an amicable resolution that works well long term, a court case is certainly not the correct path.
Maybe it's time for you to admit that WOTC isn't perfect and not presume to tell other players it's time for them to "take a break from the game". I've defended WOTC when they are right, but this is a case where they simply are not right.
Your response to being given evidence was, essentially, 'it's all a cover up.' I do not believe everything Wizards says (notice how I write articles for Magic Online? I would have to be committed if I believed some of the things they say about MTGO). I just believe something that makes sense--leaks can blow Wizards marketing plan to pieces, and in case you hadn't heard, marketing increases sales--and that evidence that makes sense also has little reason to be fabricated. You talk of how it's to cover up the 'poor' quality of NPH but don't actually say anything about how it was poor. NPH was a solid set.
Right now, you just want people to believe the mumbling person in the corner because you think Wizards is wrong, despite not all the information being out there.
And why wouldn't I have hostility on a subject that I openly disagree with WOTC on and call BS on? Has it crossed your mind that I'm entitled to my belief and my feelings on the matter? Nothing short hard hard numeric data will sway me on this matter. Have a great night.
And my opinion is that even if you got that information you would still argue it was wrong, or fake, or fudged. Hence my recommendation you take a break as you seem to not be able to look at things rationally.
So someone provides Maro with more reasonable explanations and his response is automatically "lol leakz" and "sekret numbers!".
Maybe its time for you to take a break from the game. You clearly do not trust Wizards and seem downright hostile to them, no matter what information is presented to you.
Burden of proof lies with the prosecutor (WOTC in this instance)
Clearly, if you are the judge burdens and proof don't matter, just that you know Wizards lies.
From the mouth of babes, if you will:
Quote from Blogatog »
lyciana asked: RE: NPH leak. I think the leask isn't the only thing that hurt the sales of NPH. We didn't know the real name for way too long, so it was hard to get excited for the real set. Also, after a while, most people got bored and annoyed by the whole question "Will it be Mirrodin Pure or New Phyrexia?" Also the whole block made you chose a side, so my guess is that quite a lot of Mirran fans were pissed when their side didn't whin. I'm not defending the leak, I'm just saying it wasn't the everything.
[MaRo:] We have had numerous sets leak ahead of time and we have data from all of those as well. The data is crystal clear. Leaks hurt sales.
Where's the evidence to support their claim? What, Wizard said it so it must be true? It couldn't be that the product was poorer quality? Yeah, that evidence thing works both ways
So, no matter what, Wizards is wrong? This is a particularly naive and conspiracy minded view. Wizards is a successful business and the good business sense would be to compare NPH to a similarly received set. Of course, you are probably just going to say that Wizards doesn't have good business sense.
If I am presented with two sides of a conflict, one with evidence to support it and the other just conclusory statements from random internet theorists, do you honestly think I should go with the random internet people?
To the people who seem to think leaks help sales, Wizards has stated that NPH had reduced sales because of the leak. What evidence do you have to support your argument?
I hope the judges take WotC to court; reading other's comments briefly on the Reddit pages, sounds like there is no solid evidence of being harmed/defamed.
There's literally no court case here. And WotC wouldn't make this move without some form of evidence that these judges did something wrong. They didn't just pick names out of a hat.
Oh ho, lookie at who's a lawyer all of the sudden!
There is, in fact, a perfectly sound cause of action here. If Wizards takes negative action against judges without any evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever, the company has, at the very least, defamed said judges by publicly insinuating that they had done something illegal when, in fact, they had not. Of course, the suspensions also likely represent real financial damage to these judges, and if done without any evidence of wrongdoing, Wizards may be on the hook for it under some other legal theory. Lastly, there is likely some kind breach of contract, real or implied, on Wizards' part.
And if you're wondering, yes, I am a lawyer.
My guess is you are a transactional lawyer. Seeing that defamation needs actual malice (arguably the judges are public officials for this controversy; also being that the 9th circuit is generally protective of free speech, I doubt a case would hold water) and there is no evidence of the legal actual malice, there is no defamation suit. Real financial damage is not a tort, and promissory estoppel wouldn't work (not at all reasonable to rely on what probably isn't a legally sufficient promise). Because the judges here also violated a contract (by joining the group, they likely had constructive notice that there was activity they should be reporting under the contract), even if Wizards violated some contract, as a matter of equity, the court will just wash its hand of the case. So, no, there is not a winning court case here.
Your intellectual property? I'm sorry?
Your copyright mark and the various company legal details remain sprawled all over the bottom of those cards. About the only IP the leaker is breaking is that they're maybe stealing hits from your website. They're not printing wads of the things and flogging them on eBay. Good luck proving loss of income on that one in court. IP, my hat.
And protecting the Magic community? From what? From the horrible Spoiler Mafia Goons?
Intellectual property is far more than just copyright. Wizards also probably has a copyright in each card. Reproducing it in a meaningful way (which prior to official release, this would likely qualify) could easily constitute a violation. There is also very likely contracts that were violated here because someone at some point in the chain broke some provision. As far proving damages, Wizards could easily use data from NPH leak to show damage and where there is a willful violation of either IP or contract, a court could very easily accept that information. Protecting the community could easily include things like protecting the community members who get a spoiler--there will be many fewer spoilers for the community this time, which lowers traffic and then business for those community members. That is just one way preventing leaks helps the community.
So really this article was nonsense to me. If anything, getting a massive leak like we did for OGW did more good for the set than not. I didn't sit around getting my enthusiasm poisoned with cards I could care less about before I finally saw cards like the new Nissa, or the new Octopus and Sphinx mythics that I do actually want and inspire me to invest in the set. But by all means make everyone wait weeks to throw darts around. We all saw how well that worked for the sister set of OGW that everyone is still complaining about.
You really believe Wizards has zero evidence that leaks of this kind hurt various metrics for a set? It's baffling how many people think Wizards is terrible at being a business despite the blatant evidence to the contrary.
Mesmeric Orb hands down. It really messes with people and brings a vastly different perspective to games. It also works wonders to have a deck built around it.
As for the forum, I think this is a victim of being moved below the random community forums. Personally, I thought these forums were closed for a while when I couldn't find it. So, it's a sub-forum in a forum that its slow that is hard to find.
As for purchasing it: whole it will probably never sell. In pieces you might get some fractional tickets. You would likely need to sell it to a bulk bot.
With the abbreviated redemption schedule, I know I have to redeem soonish. When should I sell? Where do people usually sell sealed foil sets?
Oh, they can be much better. I've found two with 3 commander decks, the first of which had Counterpunch, Devour for Power, and Heavenly Inferno. Needless to say I visited every Target within reasonable distance that day to see if there were any other jackpots (I only found 2 more with commander decks, both Devour for Power). I've also realized that the repack cubes will contain the 1-year-old commander sets a month or two after the new release, about 3 months after the old are taken off the shelve. Got the red, green, white, and black mono color ones this way (I think only 1 2-pack though). My guess is it is just completely and totally random. I've seen fat pack land packs in them. Which could be where some of these packs from the mystery box comes from.
An emergency ban is not going to happen for a simple reason: history. An emergency ban would only happen if tournament attendance was severely depressed (look at the only emergency ban, Memory Jar). However, Modern is not the majority of tournaments, so it would probably have to take a complete abandonment of Modern tournaments to reach the requisite level. Outside of that, Modern bannings are about the Modern metagame. WotC has talked several times about waiting to see how the metagame develops over several months. An emergency ban is just not in the toolbox for Modern.
While the issue needs discussion, suggesting court action is not helpful to the discussion, it just inflames people and closes off reasonableness. There are legitimate issues here, but those are mainly PR and community interaction issues for Wizards. If the judges want an amicable resolution that works well long term, a court case is certainly not the correct path.
Right now, you just want people to believe the mumbling person in the corner because you think Wizards is wrong, despite not all the information being out there.
And my opinion is that even if you got that information you would still argue it was wrong, or fake, or fudged. Hence my recommendation you take a break as you seem to not be able to look at things rationally.
From the mouth of babes, if you will:
If I am presented with two sides of a conflict, one with evidence to support it and the other just conclusory statements from random internet theorists, do you honestly think I should go with the random internet people?
My guess is you are a transactional lawyer. Seeing that defamation needs actual malice (arguably the judges are public officials for this controversy; also being that the 9th circuit is generally protective of free speech, I doubt a case would hold water) and there is no evidence of the legal actual malice, there is no defamation suit. Real financial damage is not a tort, and promissory estoppel wouldn't work (not at all reasonable to rely on what probably isn't a legally sufficient promise). Because the judges here also violated a contract (by joining the group, they likely had constructive notice that there was activity they should be reporting under the contract), even if Wizards violated some contract, as a matter of equity, the court will just wash its hand of the case. So, no, there is not a winning court case here.
You really believe Wizards has zero evidence that leaks of this kind hurt various metrics for a set? It's baffling how many people think Wizards is terrible at being a business despite the blatant evidence to the contrary.