Your reasoning about the Chinese market’s untapped potential and its capacity to compete with the US and Japan is compelling. However, I have a few counterpoints regarding the current market dynamics for Simplified Chinese (CS) cards and the role of domestic grading.
Simplified Chinese cards had a very weird moment. Initially, there was little interest, but during the waifu boom especially with the Chinese Tag Team alternate arts prices peaked. For a brief time, some CS cards equaled or even surpassed their Japanese counterparts. People genuinely seemed to be collecting or investing in the cards themselves, not for overseas resale, as the price didn’t make sense. At that time, there were no CS exclusives, and many international collectors didn’t even know Simplified Chinese cards existed, leading to fears of fakes. The market was almost entirely domestic.
Following that boom, there was a major correction (a crush), and card values plummeted. Fortunately, thanks to new releases like the Gem Pack and 151 , along with some exclusive artwork, interest is starting to return.
Regarding pricing, the same cards available in Japanese or English are still significantly cheaper in Simplified Chinese. I’d argue that 99% of non-Chinese people who choose to collect Simplified Chinese do so for financial reasons specifically, to collect the artwork at a lower cost.
- Example (Raw NM): A Rayquaza V Alternate Art card is approximately $255 in English, $200 in Japanese, and $55 in Simplified Chinese.
If your goal is to simply own the artwork without speculation, CS is the best, most affordable option, as you receive an official Pokémon card. However, for a true investment perspective, I would still suggest English or Japanese. The potential for those cards to double, triple, or achieve a 5x or 10x return is far more established and compelling.
I strongly disagree with collecting CCIC as a strategy for maintaining or maximizing financial value. If you simply prefer the slabs, that’s fine. But from a liquidation and investment perspective, it’s currently a poor choice.
CCIC is new, and its long-term stability is uncertain. No one knows if a newer Chinese grading company will emerge in the next two years, or if international giants like PSA or CGC will significantly expand their market share there.
Cost and Quality Perception: CCIC has a very quick turnaround time (usually less than 15 days), and their price (around 75 RMB, or $10 US), is more expensive than other local services like CCG (which are 20−30 RMB or <$5 US).
Crucially, sellers of CCIC cards often include descriptions like ‘very likely PSA 10 quality.’ This indicates that collectors view the CCIC grade not as an end-value itself, but as a pre-screen for cross-grading to PSA or BGS.
Liquidity Risk: One day, you might need to quit the hobby or sell part of your collection for a larger purchase. With CCIC, you will struggle significantly to liquidate quickly at a desirable price, especially outside of the Chinese mainland.
I agree that the CCIC slabs are clean and simple. You are also correct that their standards are demonstrably stricter based on current data. However, whether stricter standards make them a ‘better’ grading company is subjective. By that logic, BGS would be the definitive best.
In my opinion, the ‘best grading company’ is a mix of factors: grading scale, brand desirability, market ubiquity, and ease of liquidation. CCIC excels in one (strict standards) but currently falters in the others, making them a financially risky choice right now."