Cardbound Project Documentary

Hi folks, new here.

I watched the whole documentary, and couldn’t find answers anywhere and just had to ask.

  1. The marketing variant, at 45:50 the documentary mentions two cards in existence.
    1. One is the one owned by Sub F, which John buys and gets graded by CGC
    2. The other graded by PSA
    3. And then, a third copy comes out, found by Max’s friend at 1:11:40.

So, does this make 3 copies in existence that we know of? or did I miss something?

What happened to the PSA copy and the one found at the end of the video?

anybody have any clues?

1 Like

Update: got a reply from lavish collectibles. apparently there are only two marketing variants they know of.

So yeah. That answers the first half of my question. But I still do not know what happened to the copy Lavish has found in his collection.
My guess is that Logan Paul some how got it? Or it is a very recent find, and he still has the card. Anyways, I think sooner or later the other copy will pop up somewhere. Especially since a purchase like that would be huge.
My guess is that it will be featured in Logan’s next video or smth. lol

There likely are more copies out there then just those 2-3. It’s an old Japanese card, so it’s likely more of these cards are in Japanese collections than elsewhere.

And by the ‘unknown copy of unknown location’ mentioned, I assume they mean the first one that was discovered by a Japanese store back in August 2021?
Here a link to that tweet and the posted comparison pictures:




It indeed wouldn’t surprise me if that one is still somewhere in a Japanese collection.
Likewise, it wouldn’t surprise me if there are more copies out there to be found. :person_shrugging:

Greetz,
Quuador

13 Likes

Yes, I completely forgot about this post in Japan.

I guess you are right, that unknown copy must be this one.

And completely agree with how there could be more. Although the documentary mentions that regularly marketing materials that would be sent to magazine publishers like corocoro, would be given 2~4copies, I still believe that there could be more out there not as marketing copies but for test of production.

It kinda doesn’t make sense to print only 4 prototypes. Normally you would want to print alot more to test with QA, but this is just from my head so I don’t know.

I spent a few hours after watching the documentary on Japanese second hand websites to see if the 1998 or 1996 keiji’s listed would be the marketing variant. But had no luck lol. Now that the info is out there, I think sooner or later more with pop up.

Thanks for the input quuador.

Must mention that ur comments helped me alot when I was learning about these promo Pikachus here in Korea. So thanks for all the info.

Best regards,

jooz5m

6 Likes

Hey!

I didn’t see your question about the marketing copy found in the doc. If your question is where did it end up, I still have it.

Regarding the potential of others being out there in the wild, I’m not ruling out the possibility. However it’s a 30 year old card that wasn’t discovered on e4 until 2020 or 2021. That should speak to its rarity. I also know a handful of people who have been watching eBay and yahoo auctions like a hawk for years and haven’t had any luck. Sometimes I even scroll on Japanese twitter accounts of people going to card shops in Japan searching for it. I think it’s a cool piece of Pokémon history.

I also wanted to make a quick comment about the E4 4chan thing. I’m a longtime Smpratte YouTube channel viewer. E4 during all my years of collecting has been a place full of wisdom. It’s a resource I use whenever I need scans of vintage magazines or if I need to familiarize myself more with a specific release. It paved the path for Pokémon collecting.

I can’t speak on behalf of the creator for the 4chan comment however I think it’s important to remember a doc is unscripted. E4 is a forum where people exchange ideas and discuss amongst themselves. I see how he could have made the comparison. I don’t think there was any malintent.

Cheers

10 Likes

Hey thanks for the reply, here and even on YouTube!

It’s really cool that you still have it.

I would imagine people would be all over you giving offers and what not.

I wish you best of luck with what ever decision you do with the card :slight_smile: .

I’ve been translating and telling the story of the documentary to the collectors in South Korea, and so far they’re enjoying it.

Again, thanks for the update

Best regards,

jooz5m

6 Likes

Random Q but the energy symbol on the marketing pika is centered or shifted like the Sugimori and lottery glossy pika? The more ya know…

A.f.a.i.k. the Energy symbols and illustrator are the same as the 2k lottery version. Only difference is the shifted artwork.

Greetz,
Quuador

3 Likes

We already settled this: Topsun, print order, and why release dates decide

The CardBound documentary claims the marketing Ivy Pikachu is “the first Pokémon card ever,” on the grounds that it was likely at CoroCoro’s offices by ~10 September 1996 [1] — before Carddass (late September) [2] and the issue 223 glossies (15 October) [2][3].

Credit first: the ‘marketing[?] card’ is a real and genuinely interesting object, and PFM’s forensic work on the play-test fakes was excellent and protected a lot of people. What follows is about the priority claim and the method behind it, nothing else.

We’ve been here before

This forum already litigated whether an earlier existence date beats a documented release date. Topsun cards carry a 1995 copyright, and for years that date was used to claim them as first. The claim died here — on the principle that a copyright date is not a production date, that Creatures wasn’t even founded until 8 November 1995 [4], and that release dates are the record we can actually verify [5]. Carddass came to be recognised as the first (albeit non-TCG) Pokémon cards on release-date grounds.

The marketing-card claim asks us to reverse that principle for exactly one object. Last time, a too-early date was used to inflate a claim and we rejected it. This time, a pre-release date is doing the same work. If it’s accepted here, we reopen the door we closed in 2021, for every future “well, it existed earlier” claim anyone with an interesting object cares to make.

The criterion is being read from both ends

Watch what “first” is doing. Carddass sold to the public before anything else — so release order is dismissed: those aren’t a game [1]. The glossies were distributed before Base Set — so distribution order counts again when it ranks the glossies above No Rarity [1]. The marketing card was never released at all — so now the criterion becomes physical existence, estimated.

But here’s what press records would actually show, if we had them: marketing/press copies, No Rarity sheets, the glossy promo inserts, and Starter Pack cards all came off presses in the same late-summer window, with only a 5 day release window difference. Their relative print order across products is unrecoverable — there is no stamp, no dated document, nothing. What is documented is distribution order. The marketing card gets called “first” only because it sits earliest among surviving objects in the distribution sequence — which is release-order logic, the exact criterion the claim rejects when Carddass is the beneficiary.

A definition that accepts distribution order when it helps and rejects it when it doesn’t isn’t a definition. And a claim that rests on cross-product press order — a fact nobody can check — isn’t wrong so much as unfalsifiable by construction.

The ~10 September date is an estimate wearing a discovery’s clothes

The documentary’s own sourcing: publishers received promotional samples “two, three weeks, sometimes even a month or more” before printing, per sources who can’t be named [1]. Work backwards from the print date, land on ~10 September. That’s a rule of thumb run in reverse. No printer’s mark, no date stamp, no document. It may well be roughly right! But it has error bars, and it cannot displace a documented release date — especially when the same lead-time logic applies to every printed object in this story. (It applies to the CoroCoro ads for Carddass too, whose samples were also at the publisher weeks early. Nobody proposes crowning those.)

What the documented pipeline actually shows

We don’t have to guess what September 1996 looked like inside this project, because the production ramp is unusually well documented:

  • Jan 1996 — test cards complete, production begins in earnest [6]
  • Jun 1996 — Media Factory selected as manufacturer [7]
  • 15 Jul 1996 — first card images in CoroCoro [6][7]
  • 23–24 Aug 1996 — the WHF flyer, headline 「製造快調!」(“manufacturing in full swing”), publicly commits in print to the exact 20 October release date, final pricing for both SKUs, and the distribution channels [8]. The card images on it are composited design files still differing in detail from the released print [5][8]
  • ~Sep 1996 — final samples at CoroCoro for the November issue (the marketing card’s window, per the documentary’s own estimate) [1]
  • 15 Oct 1996 — glossy promos distributed in issue 223 [2][3]
  • 20 Oct 1996 — retail release [2][6][7]

Read that sequence and the marketing card stops being a mystery demanding a title. A publisher holding final card samples in September, six weeks after the manufacturer publicly declared the factory at full capacity with a locked launch date, is the advertising pipeline operating normally. The card is a pipeline artifact — a genuinely scarce and historically illuminating one — not a first.

On scarcity

The 223 promos are routinely described as vanishingly rare. The print figures say otherwise: circulation for that issue was roughly 1.8 million copies [7] — note that’s 部数, circulation, not sell-through, and note CoroCoro’s 1996 baseline was ~1.2m [7]; the 1.8m is the Pokémon-boosted November issue. Two cards per copy: on the order of 3.6 million promo cards printed. What’s perhaps rare is high-grade examples and an intact magazines. Condition rarity is real. Print rarity is not. The two keep being conflated in one direction.

Where this leaves things

The glossies are the first Pokémon TCG cards distributed to the public — a real title, five days ahead of Base Set [2][3]. Carddass is the first Pokémon card product sold at retail [2]. The marketing card is the earliest surviving artifact of the TCG’s advertising pipeline.

“First Pokémon card ever” belongs to no object, because it requires comparing press dates nobody has. We knew this when it was Topsun’s 1995 copyright on the table. Nothing about the reasoning has changed except whose object benefits.

Yes - I had Claude help me compile my notes and no, I don’t care. I will be releasing a more in depth article later (possibly today), which again pulls a lot of this and other production information together from 1996, in an honest and factual discussion, which I’m sure many will find interesting.


Sources

  1. CardBound documentary (2026) — the priority claim, the ~10 September estimate and its publisher-lead-time sourcing, and the qualifier framing, as stated in the film
  2. [Author], “1996 — Verified Timeline of Pokémon Card Release Dates,” Elite Fourum — release dates for Carddass Parts 1–2, the issue 223 promos, and Base Set, with contemporary print citations
  3. CoroCoro Comic issue 223 (Nov 1996 issue, on sale 15 Oct 1996) — the glossy Pikachu/Jigglypuff furoku
  4. Creatures Inc. corporate site, company history — founding date 8 November 1995
  5. shizzlemetimbers, “Guide to Early Pokémon TCG History (1995 Test Card Versions),” Elite Fourum — incl. qwachansey’s copyright-date argument in-thread, the Topsun licence research, and the flyer-vs-release design differences
  6. Lizardon tournament-history book (『めざせ!リザードン』), Part 3, 「ポケットモンスターカードゲームの歴史 1994–1998 timeline
  7. Kimura Makoto, ポケットモンスター(19961998, Waseda University RIIM Case No. 4, 2nd ed., Feb 2006 — Media Factory selection (June 1996), circulation figures (p. 10), distribution history via the Iwasaki interview
  8. Media Factory pre-release flyer, distributed at the 4th Next Generation World Hobby Fair, 23–24 August 1996
5 Likes

I ain’t reading all that AI

7 Likes