I’m reaching out today to seek the most up to date information. It is indisputable, that the first official Pokemon cards are the 1996 Bandai carddass. But are they the first ever period? I would say so because the prototype cards (if they’re real) are technically not cards. They are thin paper, mounted onto a card. They are more-so relics of the pokemon industry, rather than true cards, printed on cardstock. Making the Bandai carddass the true first Pokemon cards.
The only argument I can possibly dig up are these “print test” cards. These would be considered cards as they are printed on cardstock, and outdate the Bandai. But the question is, are they real?
I believe it is assumed those cards were printed on ancient mew card stock. Which was released after base set.
These were also obtained through Akabane if I’m not mistaken so there is some authenticity issues.
If you are especifically focusing on cards, then yes, 1996 bandai carddass are the first “cards”. If you focus on flats, then you have the 1996 bandai club sticker seals which came before and are the true rookies. PSA’s official intagram account just posted about these. Its a shame that mistakes, confusions and scams like the recent prototype cards scandal or the 1995 topsun mistake by grading companies have made collectors not trust anything that comes out anymore, but if you ask any collector who truly knows his stuff, they will all tell you this.
When it comes to this topic I always feel like the word “first” is being used as some justification of value. But I think a majority of collectors aren’t particularly interested in non-tcg and just because Bandai has an earlier production date, doesn’t necessarily make it more compelling. In other words, “what’s the first Pokemon card?” Is a different question than “what’s the first card with a Pokemon on it?”
If we are going to value a “first appearance” then honestly the video game is more of a correct answer
Thank you dearly for your answer. Please allow me to state my confusion.
“What are the first Pokemon cards” would equate to the tcg game right? And “first cards with a Pokemon on it” would equate to the Bandai? But aren’t the Bandai carddass still Pokemon cards, making them the first regardless? And the Bandai was released before the Pokemon game, so how would this be first appearance? My apologies, I’m still learning.
Maybe it’s semantics, but no, I would not consider these Pokemon cards. In my opinion, these are licensed cards with Pokemon printed on them, but not “Pokemon cards.”
Pokemon cards are made by The Pokemon Company / The Pokemon Company International (TPC/TPCi) for official play. This would make Japanese Base Set the first Pokemon cards.
But if your question is, “What unofficial, licensed cards first had Pokemon on them?” then sure, you can look at non-TCG products like Bandai Carddass.
What @dyl is highlighting is the general consensus. When people say, “pokemon cards”, they are typically referring to the tcg. In a way you are both right, as you can technically refer to Bandai or any other non tcg cards as pokemon cards. However what dyl and others are pointing out is the market/social reality. Similar to why 1st Ed base is considered the 1st set, as it’s true for English, but obviously there were prior Japanese releases. Basically both can be correct, it’s just about understanding the context.
I have to say i see no reason to call bandai or other non tcg brands something else than pokemon cards since that’s what they are, obviously tcg cards are the most popular ones and when people think of pokemon cards that’s probably what they first think of, but to say cards produced by brands like topps, bandai or topsun aren’t pokemon cards is imo a bit odd thing to say
If you wanted to simplify things a bit by excluding test prints, prototypes and other cards of potentially questionable authenticity, then the first mass produced, demonstrably authentic, TCG cards were the No Rarity variant Japanese Expansion Pack (Base Set) cards. Edit: although I guess the coro’s which came a month or so before might be considered ‘mass produced’ too…
They may not be TCG cards, but they’re still Pokémon cards. What else would they be? They’re cards, and the entire series of those cards contains Pokémon.
I think you’re confusing ‘Pokémon TCG cards’ with ‘Pokémon cards’.
(I do agree stickers and those unpeeled pogs aren’t cards.)
I agree the line between what is card and what is not can be a bit shady but the obvious card ones in your post are definitely pokemon cards, i think the biggest brand can easily absorb the whole title to itself but that doesn’t mean there isn’t more of it in reality. I know it’s exaggeration but we aren’t calling only toyotas cars since it’s the biggest brand
Let’s say Rolex allowed another company to manufacture watches with their name on it (i.e., provided a license). If I bought one of those watches, it wouldn’t be a “Rolex” per say. It’s not about brand size, but about authentic/official vs. inauthentic/unofficial products.
Are they Pokemon cards? In my head, they aren’t. Maybe I would call them “unofficial Pokemon cards” or “licensed non-TCG Pokemon cards,” but Pokemon cards to me means officially released under the company that owns the property.
I think we just have different opinions and definitions.
The first TCG Pokemon cards were Pikachu and Jigglypuff, these laid the foundations for why we are still here today.
I agree the other cards are Pokemon cards, but almost everyone knows what a Pokemon card is, no one knows what a Carddass card is. Ask your parents or your work colleagues.
Like the words Hoover, Jacuzzi, Jet ski or Band-aid, we all are familiar with them…but it’s not exactly correct. These are brand names, not the items names.
Pokemon cards I think are similar, we within the hobby know that other pokemon cards exist however, since it’s recognised by the wider audience for the reason of popularity it’s hard to argue the other fact.
In the majority of people’s minds, a Pokemon card is a TCG card.
What else would they be? They’re cards, and the entire series of those cards contains Pokémon.