Thanks guys!! Appreciate it!!
1 Like
I see, crazy how one guy has so much influence on the Pokémon market. I know he’s very popular, but I don’t know why so many people seem to hold his opinion in such high regard when it comes to this hobby.
does anyone know of one for sale ? what’s the going rate. I got burnt on a mislabeled one after I read this thread.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/277948579619
I’ve been following this listing for about a month now. It started at 175k, and dropped to 89k. I messaged the company that put it online, and there isn’t any historical sales they know of.
One sold for 50k a little while back
If you don’t mind me asking, do you know which platform it was sold on & what the grade was?
it was on ebay, psa 8
3 Likes
Does anyone know how many of the 1996 NON GLOSSY Ivy pika were issued? I dont think they were a lottery. I thought they were very common im seeing PSA 10 with huge bids . This is not a rare card ? Some are getting more than the sugimori card. https://www.psacard.com/cert/41910770/psa
Good question, have asked myself the same thing and I am led to believe more of the first glossy corocoros were printed simply because print circulation would have been greater than the how to play booklets (no glossy). In saying that the how to play variant is likely an easier grader sooo one less of but easier to grade, one more of but harder to grade and more desired for obvious reasons. Right now simply anything high grade (10) is a rocket so I wouldn’t over think it too much beyond… oh look early pika high grade $$$$$$.
thats crazy. I been to a few cards shows trying to look for the sugimori card and not a single person knew what that card was. Tick tock I guess
2 Likes
I will confess I was confused and did not really understand all the variants and back story myself not long ago. I credit this forum and its members who have done a lot of work and research to the betterment of all who join. And yes, tick tock, never know when a ball will be picked up, then dropped then picked up again lol I thought the back story, significance and cool factor make them all great collectors pieces.
3 Likes
That’s the regular Oct. 1996 Glossy variant. I’m pretty sure vint’s original post was referring to a graded 1998 lottery variant he bought, which turned out to be this same 1996 Glossy variant with the wrong label instead. (Unless vint bought the non-glossy Nov. 1996 with incorrect Glossy Oct. 1996 label. The title of this thread focuses on the 1998 Glossy lottery reprint, though.. 
)
Greetz,
Quuador
4 Likes
Hello, can you provide better photo from front and back?
I really apprecaite
Do you still have this card or not?
Thanks in advance
Hi guys,
First of all I am so happy that there is such a nice place like here to share valuable knowledge.
I followed the information by informative guys here.
I just confused a little bit because this card graded by CGC as 1998 Lottery glossy but its colorless energy is well centered. is it possible or not?
Is there any confirmed copy of Glossy well centered colorless energy recorded?
As I know the True first print that is shifted Tail Pikachu, is Glossy and also well centered colorless energy.
So is there any chance to see any none shifted (normal) Pikachu as glossy and well centered colorless energy?
Can it be called as new variant or same print run for 1998 just shifted slightly ?
Thanks in advance
Based on those Energy symbols, that CGC-graded Pikachu appears to have the wrong label.
Happens very often with this card. I’m pretty sure at least 1/3rd of all PSA-graded versions that states they’re the 1998 version are mislabeled as either the Glossy Ken Sugimori variant or non-glossy Keiji Kinebuchi variant, instead of truly being a Glossy Keiji Kinebuchi from the 1998 lottery release.
It’s annoying to say the least, but since people can select the 1998 variant when sending in cards, and the average minimum-wage grader at PSA/CGC may not even know these differences exist in the first place, they’re often not corrected to the correct version during the grading process.
As for this question of yours:
No, not yet, except for a bunch of miss-graded cards like this one.
Greetz,
Quuador
5 Likes
Great, thanks a lot for your prompt response Quuador.
Here is also another probably mistake by PSA for label.
So, based on our current information, this one also should be “How to play Pokemon” variant that mislabeled 1998 COROCORO.
1 Like
Yep, that one also seems to be a mislabel indeed, and is the non-glossy How to Play (Nov. 1996) version from what I can tell. 
Greetz,
Quuador
1 Like
Thanks a lot dear Quuador for very prompt reply.
1 Like
Hey,
came across this today, this looks like a standard how to play keiji pikachu, but i have never seen such a thick font on the card. Does anyone have experience with this? Card does absolutely do not look fake (no idea yet if its glossy)
And no its not the marketing variant sadly.
I mean even if the picture quality is bad, this cant be the reason the font looks so thick? Does anyone here have a pikachu variant with such a font?
Cheers,
mrcorocoro
