RE: auction lot #774

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

I did not get to the auction , can anyone tell me who bought the 1973 $2 replacement *BC 6183999  ?

http://cgi.liveauctions.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=52622&viewitem=&item=300125653652


$4,500

The lot was purchased by a floor bidder for CDN $4,500.00 plus the juice.  I received an email last week
from the previous owner of this same note who advised me as follows:

Let it be known that I sold a 1974 $2  *BC 6183999 to C&P, which is listed in the up coming auction next weekend. I graded it an EF, but has now been
graded by Andrew, & is graded a AU-55. This note has been pressed & has a bad smell to it (some kind of chemical). I'm not sure, but I don't think the
listing says anything about the smell. I know you buy & sell some higher end notes, so just beware, & tell anybody else that you know that maybe
intrested in this note about it's problem.

The note was actually graded by CCCS not CCGS (Andrew), but regardless would heve been enclosed in
a sealed holder possibly preventing a prospective buyer from noticing any solvent smell.  The previous
owner of the note is a well respected collector and contributor to the Charlton catalogue so I have no
doubts as to the credibility of his comments on this note.

I was unable to attend this year's CNA due to personal reasons or I would have raised the issue with Marc
or Eric prior to the auction.

Again a case of "Buyer Beware".

...Arthur

Thanks Arthur,
I will take this new info into account next time the note comes up.
I will also be at the Paris show so I guarantee I will hold the $50 error note for you
Rocken

Was very good of canada-banknotes to clarify that it was CCCS not CCGS who certified this note. Tread carefully with the one service who certified this note.

 I sure hope the new buyer/owner ripped that note outta the packaging & had a good smell without hitting the floor !! When I owned this note, you didn't even have to take it outta the holder to smell it. It was the worst smelling note that I have ever owned. But it was , what it was, RARE, & smelly. There are other members here that handled the note & knew about it's smell, as I never hide the fact that it was tampered with. They can verify that I was the past owner, & the smell.

 To he or she that bought the note, feel free to contact me thru Arthur, as  I'm sure he would gladly forward you to me.

  Arthur, Sorry for the confusion on the grading company, my appoliges to Andrew, even though I hadn't talked to him yet about it. Your the only one I talked to about this note before the auction.

 Happy Hunting   Darcy Snyder

The lot was purchased by a floor bidder for CDN $4,500.00 plus the juice.  I received an email last week from the previous owner of this same note who advised me as follows:
"The note was actually graded by CCCS not CCGS (Andrew), but regardless would have been enclosed in a sealed holder possibly preventing a prospective buyer from noticing any solvent smell.  The previous owner of the note is a well respected collector and contributor to the Charlton catalogue so I have no doubts as to the credibility of his comments on this note."

This classic example exposes yet another major pitfall associated with buying slabbed notes. I had never even thought about this possible problem before. Plastic holders are known to obscure evidence of washing & pressing and lighter handling marks but now we know that a real "stinker" could be lurking inside. On the other hand, it's possible that the note in question could have been chemically "reprocessed" to remove the smell before being submitted to CCCS (Quebec).

While on this topic, I believe that CCGS (Alberta) holders have two small circular "breathing" holes punched in them which may allow the contents to be sniffed out. This is a good idea as long as you're not inspecting your notes while taking a bath ...

Yes Ottawa the CCGS notes do have side holes to allow the note to breathe and I'm sure if the note wasd worked like this one sounds to have been, smelling the odour wouldn't have been a problem-small though the holes may be. 
On a more serious note, I've never had a problem when inspecting my notes while taking a bath. Now when showering, well the 37 series does have a tendency to run....

On a more serious note, I've never had a problem when inspecting my notes while taking a bath. Now when showering, well the 37 series does have a tendency to run....

The paper used for the 37s is quite durable, too.  Comes in handy if you're out of facecloths... 

On the "Bills Grading" page of the CCCS website, the following line is included in the description for AU grade:

See:      http://www.canadiancoincertification.com/index2.php?c=8&lg=1

1. A note which has never been processed but may have been pressed

It is difficult to believe that the grader of this note did not associate the smell of the note with some form of "processing".

Point 4. in the same AU grading section is confusing and appears to conflict with point 1.

4. May not exhibit original paper ripples and if the note appears flat, there still must be evidence of embossing, however, the note ,must not show signs of being pressed

The CCCS note holders are similar to the CGS holders in the US, and are sealed plastic.  As such it is very
unlikely that a buyer would be able to detect any chemical smell that may exist on the note.

The CCGS slabs on the other hand can be easily opened so that the note can be examined and returned
to the plastic slab.

With the new and stricter grading standards in the 20th Edition catalogue, it is inevitable that new currency
grading companies will start to show up on the marketplace to capitalize on a revenue opportunity.  My bigger
concern is that a large Quebec based dealer, that has a history of selling processed notes, will diversify and
start their own currency grading business.

As I noted earlier in this thread it's very possible that this note was re-processed using various organic chemicals (solvents) in order to remove the smell before it was submitted to CCCS. I cannot believe that CCCS would not say anything at all about the smell if it was putrid and stinking to high heaven. Lest we forget, there are more than a few collectors and dealers out there who have university degrees and diplomas in Chemistry and related fields .....   

Hello paper money collectors.  First of all, thanks for bringing the typo in the grading rubric on the website to my attention.  The Webmaster will be correcting this very soon.

Now, I would like to take a moment to address your concerns regarding the $2 *BC banknote.   

First and foremost, when the banknote arrived for certification, I can assure you, there was no questionable odour. 

Regarding the design of the paper money certification holders, they are not sealed in plastic.  CCCS’s holders are made out of mylar and do have holes to allow the note to breathe, also making any odours obvious.  Following-up on the auction with C&P, I was informed that the buyer of this note is a prominent and experienced paper money collector who is more than capable of accurately examining the value of the note.  In fact, this collector also purchased the $50 Osborne for $22,000: in our opinion, a testament to the accuracy and value of CCCS certification.

If anybody has any further comments, I invite you to contact me directly a 450-723-1204 and I would be happy to talk to you. 

This is the only comment I intend to post on this matter.  Enjoy the great summer weather this week!

Louis Chevrier