I disagree that this is Wizards of the Coast's fault. It would not matter how much Wizards printed, it would have sold out regardless. Players would have bought it up like crazy, speculators would have bought it up like crazy. Printing more certainly makes Wizards more money but there's only so far you can go with something that has been designated as "Limited Edition" from its inception.
Be happy that you have a Fat Pack that sells out instantly as opposed to sitting on the shelf after the initial rush. Fat Packs going all the way back to Born of the Gods are still readily available from distribution.
The frenzy of demand is also somewhat exaggerated. When a customer can't buy something they want from their primary source, they go to the next one and then the next one and so forth. One person wanting a Fat Pack could generate a dozen calls to various stores. That's not a demand for 12 Fat Packs, that's still a demand for one because if you have limitless Fat Packs, so will everyone else and then the customer won't have to go to secondary sources.
Wizards Direct is also not meant to be your primary supplier of Magic. They have limits in place because they're really only meant to supply you with enough to cover organized play events. If you order 500 Fat Packs from Wizards, you'll have to get in line because 500 other stores will do the same and many of those would have done it on speculation when the set name was released. You might have ended up with zero instead of the 24 you got. The nice thing about limits is that it ensures everyone gets a slice of pie. 24 Fat Packs has been the pre-order limit for Fat Packs for several years now so it's not like it was a surprise.
If you want a higher allocation of product, talk to a regular distributor. They can choose to sell you any amount they want. That doesn't mean you'll get everything you want, but just that the limits that Wizards Direct has don't exist for them.
So if "debacle" is French for "giant pile of cash," I'll take all the debacles you got.
The opinions expressed in this Talk Back are solely those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff of ICv2.com.
