CPM Forum
Canadian Notes => Canadian Journey Notes => Topic started by: jonathan on April 24, 2004, 12:56:49 am
-
As I understand, there are going to be no AWQ or EWQ prefixes on our $20 notes.
They don't use the same font of letters on the new Journey notes as they do with the birds issues or earlier, so now there should be **Q prefixes on the new Journey notes.
If I ran the Bank of Canada, I'd release the entire spectrum of letter from A to Z (maybe excluding "X")!
The question is... why are there not going to be any prefixes with series letter "Q"?
Later, Jonathan
-
Q is not used because of its similarity to O. O is used, on the other hand, because zero would never appear in the third position, whereas both Q and O would.
-
Q will never be used since it resembles to much the letter O. It has nothing to do with the zero anymore.
-
BWJM and JB105, I think you're right.
For example, if there ever was to be a $5 AOQ note, people would get them mixed up with AOO (if there is to be an AOO released).
However, I believe that there are no AWQ or EWQ $20 notes released because people would get the prefixes mixed up with AWO and EWO, since the letter "O" looks like a number zero, and the letter "Q" looks more like the letter "O". I really think that the BoC should keep the series letter "O" as a third letter.
By the way, is there any way of knowing if there will be a prefix AOO on a future Journey $5?
Later, Jonathan
-
Q has never been used by the BoC since it's inception.
-
I believe that series letter "O" may very well be a short-lived third letter in prefixes AWO and EWO on our $20 notes. I believe that series letter "O" is discontinued - just like series letter "I" in recent months.
So, I guess there is absolutely NO worries about the series letters "O" and "Q" - for now.
But who knows? We might be surprised if we see AOI and/or AOO on our Journey $5's, but I won't count on third letter "Q" in any prefixes EVER!!!!
But we will have to see AOI and/or AOO to prove whether the series letters "I" and "O" still exists or not.
Later, Jonathan