Hailing from the Japanese Base Set release in October 1996, the “No Rarity” Charizard ranks among the most significant, valuable and collectible TCG cards ever created.
Though not the first Pokémon cards ever created, with sets like the Carddass releases coming before, unlike prior issues, the 1996 Japanese Base Set was a true TCG, whereas Carddass was meant for consumers to collect and learn about the characters.
In this initial release of the TCG, which predated its American counterpart by three years, there were two main batches. The first grouping was missing the “No Rarity” symbol meant to appear on the bottom right corner of the cards. This was quickly rectified, with the second batch featuring the “Rarity” symbol.
However, the “No Rarity” designation has become highly coveted due to its rarity — far fewer were produced compared to the corrected version — and due to the fact it represents the very beginning of the most popular TCG in world history.
Of course, like just about anything else related to Pokémon, Charizard is the grail.
Between PSA, CGC and BGS, just 1,205 copies of the No Rarity Charizard from the 1996 set have been graded, including just 16 gems (of those, 10 are PSA 10s).
It’s exceptionally rare for any of the PSA 10 copies to hit the auction block, with CardLadder sales records showing only two examples in recent years; an April 2022 sale for $324,000 and a December 2023 sale for $300,000 — in the same price range as its more famous peer, the 1999 1st Edition Holo Charizard in a PSA 10. That is despite the fact the 1999 Charizard is more than 10 times more common in a PSA 10 and has been graded nearly six times more overall.
One of the PSA 10 No Rarity Charizards is currently at auction as part of the Goldin 100, with bidding currently sitting at $231,800, including buyer’s premium, with a month left at auction.
As pointed out in Goldin’s lot description, the No Rarity label is not the only element that differentiates the card from later printings. The card also lists the character’s dimensions as "1.5km" and "70.5kg.” This would be corrected to “1.7m” and “90.5kg”
Will Stern is a reporter and editor for [cllct], the premier company for collectible culture.