CPM Forum
Special => Test Notes => Topic started by: X-Savior on June 19, 2006, 04:11:26 am
-
Hello Everyone!
Well, as the Title Reads...
I am 99.9% Sure I have discovered some new Journey $5 Test Notes. NO THIS IS NOT A JOKE!!! :o
I have worked with Journey $5 notes for quite sometime. They have the usual stiff paper that we know from every other note.
Well, recently I got a few Bricks of HOW 0.53-0.54 and 0.83-0.84 (Lowest by far ever seen).
Something that REALLY bothered me right from the first note I touched was "This Paper is REALLY SOFT". :-?
I mean not a little bit, but a [size=14]TOTALLY different Paper Composition.[/size]
So I started compairing and aksing around if ANYONE has noticed anything different. NOTHING!!!
[size=14]I asked a Very Reputable Local Dealer and he has NEVER seen anything like it![/size] He was eager to get some from me but I decided to investigate further instead.
So, Why is this Paper so soft right out of the Brick??? :-/
Possible Polymer Testing???
I just got a few bricks of HOV notes and Guess what.... Regular Stiff Paper Material. :o
I asked Brent and he has no idea. I am sending him a few notes to check it out. I am [size=14]VERY SURE[/size][/b] these are new Test Notes trying a new Paper Composition. :o
Thus the very limited number of HOW notes even spotted.
So Here is the problem. [size=14]I can't hold onto the remaining bundles of these notes very long[/size][/b].
Anyways, I hate to see these notes go to waste and put them into Circulation. THIS COULD BE A REAL GOLDMINE FIND!!!
These will be high value notes! [size=16]I have this REALLY DEEP GUT FEELING ON THESE NOTES! [/size]I wish I had more time to work on this!!!
I am NOT pulling anyones leg here, no pranks or jokes. This is going to be one of those time you will be kicking yourself for not getting these notes super cheap! [size=14] I am SO SURE of this I have put away over $2000 worth of these notes for myself!!![/size]
Let me know if you are interested!!! These notes are being destroyed and put into Circulation this Wednesday - Thursday.
[size=14]You Can E-Mail me at Spams@Telus.net or PM me if you are interested. [size=18]First Come First Serve, there is a limited number available![/size][/size]
-
Question:
Has the BOC ever released polymer notes in the past that we know of ?
-
Can you post a scan of both sides here?
Tom
-
You should take the time to get your notes confirmed as " high value test notes " before you market them as such on this site. I wouldn't want to see any financial loses if your notes don't turn out to be what you claim.
The paper used on the journey series reacts with humidity and temperature. The hotter and more humid it is the limper notes feel. This may in fact be the case with your notes. We have had a few posts already on $5 paper that is somewhat thinner or thicker than is usually seen. This could also be the case.
The scarcity of prefix HOW is due to it only being issued for a few weeks. I have some notes in the 5million range so I'm sure HOW was fully printed.
I would rely on the expertise of members of this site, and the CPMS, before I would take the word of a dealer as gospel when it comes down to recent issues not currently in Charlton. Most dealers are only as up to date as the last Charlton. Dealers buy and sell notes and coins and generally don't have the time to " study " current issues.
With approx 1 billion modified journey notes alreay issued I'm sure the BoC would have already done any paper test it deemed necessary.
Better to be safe than sorry.
Gary
-
Never heard of any polymer notes printed for the BoC.
-
Yea, I agree.
The Polyumer theory was mentioned to me by another member.
I amf trying to make sense of these notes. I have worked with a lot of these notes and there is something VERY different about these notes. Everyone who has touched one noticed RIGHT AWAY something was really different about the notes.
I have an E-Mail into BoC requesting more information.
I have presented my findings. My Problem is that these notes will be long gone before this is figured out. I have vowed to get to the bottom of this...
But it would also make sense if the BoC was starting testing for a new Series of Bank notes for the future.
But I agree, this is not gospel but something is not adding up.
Why would there also be 5 Million notes showing up but no one has seen ANY very low serials??? Just a Little something to think about. :-?
Thank you very much for the Advice and I hope together we can all figure out what is going on...
Thank You!
Cam
PS>>>> I will take a close picture of one of the notes and post it. :)
-
Hi There,
Thanks! ;)
I had to attract some attention.
I have had an overwhelming response to these notes and I would like to thank EVERYONE!
I know there is SOMETHING special about these notes and the Paper Used. I am trying to get info from BoC but it is like pulling teeth. >:(
ANyone have any connections to make some more headway? :-/
These notes will most likely be worth SOMETHING be it a Test Note or something similar. :)
As I have Mentioned. THESE NOTES ARE NOT OFFICAL TEST NOTES YET!!! ::)
I am working with quite a few people to determine this. I also do appreciate the assistance from Gary and Brent. With their help we will figure this out. A few members will be getting their notes soon. Feedback from them would also help back up my claim.
I don't want this to sound cheezy but I really do wish I could hold on to these notes but they must move on to make way for new arrivals. I really wish I was not so rushed. :(
-
Also,
Sudz will be getting a Complete Brick Breakdown tonight to help determine what is going on. 8-)
I do appreciate the help, and I hope as a Community we can work together to figure this out.
Thank You!
-
Hi There,
Ok, I have hosted some Super High Resolution pictures of one of the notes. For everyone to see!
http://www3.telus.net/Ravy/HOW-Back1.JPG
http://www3.telus.net/Ravy/HOW-Back2.JPG
http://www3.telus.net/Ravy/HOW-Front.JPG
-
It is difficult, well impossible, to see from the pictures to see the composition of the note. It would be much better to feel the note in person to draw a personally conclusion. However, like Sudzee mentioned, the notes feel thicker/thinner in coordination with the temperature. I have seen some other posts about thick/thin feeling notes. None the less, best of luck and you have my support!
-
I left a note on general forum that the HOP seemed to be thicker. I thought I was going nuts but we just have to wait and see if it is a test note. I would assume that the bank would be having the test notes out sooner. Hey the BOC has done weirder things before.
Cheers
Polarbear ;D
-
Hi There,
I agree with all of you.
But these notes do not seem Thicker OR Thinner. They Feel DIFFERENT. The entire surface is different
-
As the 1954 S/R Lawson Bouey $2.00 test notes came out in 1973 (just before the new 74 MC series) a test doesn't necessarily have to coincide with the beginning of an issue... it could happen before. The R/S tests occured in 75 and 76.
However, I am extremely skeptical abou the HOW being a TEST note. If all you have to go by is paper thickness, texture, tint, or any of a combination of those characteristics -- it gives you little to jump to such a conclusion. HOW have been spotted too many times to qualify...though maybe there is a specific range of HOWs (this is huge leap in faith) -- but not impossible
If one has seen a prefix which doesn't really follow the pattern of prefixes issued (and isn't counterfeit)-- that would be a much better candidate. I even believe that test/experimental notes would come out like BABN replacements - and NOT in bricks. This would just defeat the purpose of their issue. Remember BOC does not want anyone to know they're testing their product --otherwise the test will be invalidated.
Like anyone-- I wish you the best too in your "discovery."
-
;)
I share all your feeling!
I think the question is now is.... What ARE these notes? and WHY are they like this?
Everyone will be getting them this week and next week so I would really like to hear from the others what THEY think. :-?
Thanks!
Cam
-
Compared the HOW notes to several other notes from the HOE and HOG series.
I wasn't able to pick out the HOW notes from a group of 8 notes based on the feel of the notes.
My son amd wife were also asked to see if they could notice anything special. No hints.
Same result with my wife and son. My son has an acute sense of touch due to his poor vision, while he noticed a variation in the notes, no note stood out as significantly different.
No significant differnce under UV light.
Conclusion: HOW 0950920 and 21 don't stand out.
-
This is very interesting.
One Idea (Far out or not :o) is that maby there is a Note Range for the Test Notes (Just Like Inserts). The Printing Companies seem to really like doing this now so if they do it for inserts, why not test notes?
-
One Idea (Far out or not ) is that maby there is a Note Range for the Test Notes (Just Like Inserts). The Printing Companies seem to really like doing this now so if they do it for inserts, why not test notes?
I think that if BoC was to issue a test note it would be done in a number range. Like they have done in the past with 1923 $1 test notes and 1954 G/R $2 notes.
-
Well, I got some HOW 2.708 notes and they feel like normal paper. :o
So, the strange paper so far seems to be 0.52 - 0.84. :-?
Very Interesting... :-/
-
Hi,
Found 44 in sequence 5$ HOW 3350871-914,and nothings seems differente to me.Bye
Claude
-
I received some HOW's from X-Savior. They do feel different to me. I will bring some to Torex on Saturday if anyone is interested. I should be there around 2pm.
Scott
-
This Discussion is continuing in the "Test Notes" Thread. ;)
Very Interesting Though. :)
-
I just recieved my notes today from x and I will admit they feel different almost like a thin plastic film on the notes they still have some roughness but it does not fell like a regular 5 IMO
P.S.
Thanks for the fast deliver X
-
No problem! ;)
I have heard back from several people who got their notes who are and are not members and they are all really excited. They all say the same thing...."These Note ARE different!'
Anyone who has asked for information from BoC has not gotten an answer back or had no comment. Further adds to the Mystery! :-?
I do have some notes left but they are starting to sell again VERY quickly. :o
Contact me if you are interested in getting any of these notes. ;)
-
I got my notes today (thanks). There is no doubt in my mind that they are different. They do feel like very thin Tyvek, a semi industrucable material used in packaging (think those thin plastic Purlolator bags). It's a bit strange, all the polymer currency I've felt is thick than this stuff.
I tried tearing it (YIKES :o) and could not (of course, now I'm down to one UNC).
-
Is it possible that the notes were printed on material that was meant for non Canada notes? Just a thought.
-
Received mine today. They do feel rather strange, almost slick, on a cursory examination. With regards to the possibility of humidity being a factor, I am going to test a common UNC note with a water spray here in sunny, and humid, Victoria...
Very intriguing...
Fenian
-
Inks used on paper would not adhere to polymers. If these are accidents, they accidently used polymer inks too.
-
Hummm..... Very VERY interesting....
Incidently: it is not for lack of technological “know how” that the BOC doesn't issue polymerized bank notes. The BABN were one of the first companies to produce polymers. The policy not to employ a polymerized currency must be economically driven.
Hummm...... ::)
I Wonder..... ;)
-
I tried tearing it (YIKES ) and could not (of course, now I'm down to one UNC).
so just to confirm you tried to rip the note and you could not rip it or you had to put alot more force into it?
-
In my case, the HOW note required considerably more force to cause a rip in the paper ( not that I like ripping up money ) :o
-
If it's really a new material, maybe the BOC runs a short sequence of test notes in order to learn the durability of this new material. And I think that if the still unproven "test" is successful, the improved fiver to be released in November could be made with this material...
It's to follow...
-
Don't you think the new five's to be released in November are already printed and warehoused somewhere?
-
Of course they are, and they are paper, not polymer. Following the test run, the Bank will take a considerable amount of time to analyze the results, draw conclusions, make decisions, place orders, etc. So, if they are doing polymer tests now, then assuming they pass, we will see all notes going to polymer probably around the time of the next series.
-
Brent!
You make a very good point. This is WAY too late for use in the current series. ;)
It will be a few years EASY before these notes are even considered for full scale implementation! :o
-
Copperpete suggests:
And I think that if the still unproven "test" is successful, the improved fiver to be released in November could be made with this material...
but Eyevet questions: that wouldn't new five's to be released in November are already printed and warehoused somewhere?
then BWJM concludes: Of course they are, and they are paper, not polymer
I would suggest that BWJM is correct provided the "polymer notes" in question are indeed test notes, and not just an initial trial run. If they're an advance trial run (320,000 from CBN printers or BABN) for the BOC then they may or may not monitor how durable/economical they are. The new security featured notes in November could be of the same material because it generally doesn't take them long to implement new technology these days. The notes could even be printed by BABN which has the technology (and we've seen the BOC fiddle with prefixes before).
We have such short memories! The BOC are so full of surprises nothing is certain. Look at the insert replacement policy they instituted at the end of the Birds (dropping the X designation), or the prefixes of the new $20, or the new Journeys themselves(none of which were tested externally)? Look at the lasting Impressions set which were printed by the CBN co with BABN prefixes.
In today's technologically savvy world (with scanners and computers) I'm sure they can test whatever notes they want-- (do notes need a special designation but a prefixed SN?) and I'm sure they don't need to be a "rocket scientists" to figure out that their old paper $5.00's haven't been holding up well.
Do they need to test polymer notes when polymers have already been tested the world over? Do they need a few years before full scale implementation. I really doubt it. This is old school thinking. A penny pinching BOC would surely just go ahead with whatever is the most expedient/economical note to use. Or whatever managment dictates. But then again: they're a government agency and I've been plenty wrong before!
In the end: The specific range of HOW's discovered by X-Savior are important (no matter whether they're intended for testing or not). Whether the BOC considers them an advance trial run, a test note, or a sign of the times (for the next series) the notes are definitely a collector's item (and worth saving).
If polymer is on the horizon: Then crack open the champaigne!
-
I did have a look at one of these notes last Sat but didn't notice any difference between it and the HOT or U that I had with me. The HOTs and Us are somewhat thin and difficult to tear as compared to many of the earlier prefixes that generally had thicker feeling paper.
Maybe someone could do a test with a drop of water on the face of an HOW of the questionable range and an earleir prefix to see if they both wet thru. If a polymer coating was used it should resist water.
Gary
-
Do they need to test polymer notes when polymers have already been tested the world over?
The Zambian polymer notes printed in Canada did not hold up very well and there was considerable cost in fixing the problem and reprinting notes at no charge. I'm sure they would want to prevent a similar disaster here in Canada.
Africa's first polymer bank notes to remain in circulation
Africa's first and only polymer banknotes, issued by the Bank of Zambia, will remain in circulation despite their disappointing performance, the bank said Tuesday.
Speaking at a press briefing, Bank of Zambia's Deputy Governor Denny Kalala denied the rumor that it is withdrawing the controversial polymer banknotes from circulation.
"The position is that the Bank of Zambia is not withdrawing the polymer notes from circulation, rather it is expediting the process of exchanging unfit or faded polymer banknotes with fit notes," he said.
"This process of exchanging unfit notes, whether paper or polymer, with fit banknotes is a routine and on-going core activity of any currency issuing authority including the Bank of Zambia. The replacement process is intended to ensure a continuous flow of fit and clean banknotes in circulation," he said.
The Bank of Zambia officially launched 500 kwacha and 1,000 kwacha polymer banknotes on September 26, 2003. It was the first and is still the only African country to have polymer notes in circulation.
Bank officials said the polymer notes, printed by the Canadian Banknote Company, could last four times longer than the normal paper notes.
Even though the cost of polymer notes is twice that of the paper notes, bank officials said the long life span of polymer notes will result in much lower costs for the bank to maintain quality of notes in circulation.
According to bank officials, there are currently 22 countries in the world that have issued polymer notes, while Romania, Australia and New Zealand have gone full polymer notes.
The fate of polymer notes in Zambia, however, has been bad in the very beginning.
Even during the launch of the polymer notes, it had been found that the serial numbers on the notes could be easily rubbed off.
The bank then held urgent discussions with the printer and the problem was rectified. The printer met the cost for issuance of new notes and the withdrawal of problem notes.
Months after the polymer notes were in circulation, new problem occurred again. There are growing public complaints of notes features fading seriously.
Deputy Governor Kalala said the bank has raised the issue to the printer who have undertaken to take corrective measures to ensure that the notes perform to expected standard.
"Following our observation of accelerated fading and public concerns, further tests and analysis of notes were undertaken. These tests indicate that the principal problem of accelerated fading of notes appear to be a printing problem related to the formulation of the special inks," he said.
While the problem is being sorted out by the printer, the bank appealed to the public to change their unfit notes for fit ones at any commercial banks.
"The Bank of Zambia would like to assure members of the public of its commitment to ensuring that the benefits of using polymer technology accrue to the country," he said.
The deputy governor dismissed speculations of any foul play in the bidding process in selecting the printer. "We followed the procedures that are normally observed," he said.
Kalala also said that his bank has no regret for choosing to become the first African central bank to adopt polymer notes.
"In everything, there are people who start and there are people who follow," he said.
The deputy governor said polymer notes is a proven technology and that the problem of accelerated fading has a solution in the industry.
As a support to his case, he said Singapore has recently introduced polymer notes that were withdrawn in the 1990s.
"We believe polymer notes is still the way for future," he said.
-
VERY INTERESTING!
I also heard that some polymers don't hold up well in humid climates. A leading world paper dealer said that they're worse than paper in some countries where dirt is a problem too. If there's lots of sand it tends to wear the notes quick. So testing certainly could be back!
hmmm.... :o
-
I have not yet felt the HOW notes but I did just try to tear a Unc HOT note and it was, as Gary stated, difficult to tear. If someone could try and rip one HOW note and one other of the more recent $5 notes to see if it is just as hard to tear or harder.
-
I just tore 2 HOTs in the 7 and 1 million ranges
-
I've got an HOP 3.2M, and it tears as expected: easily.
-
Yes Brent, the prefixes previous to the HOR notes have always felt lighter to me - those tear easily as expected. As for the HOR and on the have tore slightly harder - in my experience. James how did the HOTs tear? I know that it is possible to tear the HOT notes but it is just slightly harder to tear. Thoughts.
-
As outlined in the other thread, I tried, but failed to tear my HOW. My regular $5 note tore easily. HOW may not be the only prefix involved though.
-
Completely failed?? It was physically impossible or just super hard to tear? Can you tear a HOT note or equivalent to test both?
Brent: Tear one more HOP and a HOT to compare and I will replace them when we see each other next - I would like to see some more opinions. I believe that the HOR and prefixes after that are slightly harder to tear and the prefixes before that are easier. Thus the HOW notes would tear the same as the HOT notes.
-
The 2 HOT notes weren't exactly easy to tear but they weren't difficult to tear either. I Tore a HOR and it was about the same. It would be interesting to know how the HOY stand up.
James
-
Just tried tearing a polymer New Zealand fiver. Lots of force but couldn't. Put a match to it and the corner immediateky shrivelled up whereas an HOT burned.
-
Just tried tearing a polymer New Zealand fiver. Lots of force but couldn't. Put a match to it and the corner immediateky shrivelled up whereas an HOT burned.
Gotta luv ya Sudzee, you have $$ to burn ;D
-
Hmm... interesting... I am a cashier, something tells me that tomorrow I am going to be acquiring a range of $5 notes to fold, spindle, and mutilate... ::) I am finally beginning to see the HOT, HOU, HOY notes...
Though I have not tried folding or tearing my HOW notes... I only have two, and don't want to ruin them... ;D
-
I have to agree with Paul! ;)
I tried to tear a note and I could not. I applied a lot more force than required for any paper note I have ever dealt with.
It only crunched and bunched up. :o
I have not had the guts to mutilate one of these notes till now.... But I didn't want to miss the fun! ::)
I know what all you are refering to with the Pre vs Post HOR. The HOW notes are difficult in a totally different way! :-/
-
I can't believe my ears! Us lot are supposed to be paper money lovers but some of us are going around tearing and burning paper money :o Great, now when I start to get $5 notes with blackened corners and/or Scotch tape all over them, I'll know why ;D Where is Bitburger and why is he standing idly by why some of our fellow collectors have gone mad and are defacing legal tender! :D
Has anyone tried the Strauss test on the HOT notes yet? You know, you get two horses facing in opposite directions to pull on the note with all their might? This is the Levi Strauss test ;)
-
I bet the paper change has a direct coorelation to the CBN company going public. (Responisbility is now to shareholders). There must be some significant cost differences. Then for them to try polymer (or whatever it is), you know they are trying to roll back costs. They could roll back costs immensely if a polymenr note lasted for 3 years instead of 8 months.
-
Not a cost savings issue for CBN. If you were a company would you rather have a contract to build something every 8 months or every 3 years? They'll take the more frequent order every time.
-
Never thought about that - with that line of thought, you could possibly say that they would WANT the $5s to last for a shorter time frame.
Hmm. anyone else have a thought about this?
-
Well first off: there's no certainty that a switch is on to polymer... only a hopeful probability according to some of us here Huds.
So if the switch does occur: it would have little to do with CBN's going public (or desire for greater profits).
I think it would be more likely a request by BOC who will have to dish out more in the short run but then likely save (and save the taxpayers $) in the long run. I have no doubt that studies to this effect would have already been done.
The primary gains would be less bills ordered to be printed, and less counterfeiting/breaches of security. Polymer is apparently very difficult to forge. Also the less notes used the more environmentally conscientious they can claim to be. 2004 (new security featured) twenties have already been counterfeited. With all the $ and research they've done to try to make this new version of money safe-- only to be proven wrong-- could also be an embarrassment to the BOC brass. The remedy: polymer (which has probably been suggested a number of times before).
that's my 2 cents
-
Hmm. Polymer or plastic or whever it was, there must be some reason. UNLESS they were just printed on the wrong stock- but wait that was ruled out, because then it would have had to be the wrong ink too. Or is it? Has anyone tried to rub the ink off one? Tom, with your damaged note, maybe it could be the sacrafiicial lamb for this. Try rubbing the ink off, maybe they DID use regular ink and put this pile of sheet stock by mistake (by some rookie maybe). Kind of like when a loonie gets stamped onto a blank from another country. CBN prints alot of things, not just Canadian Currency, it could have been stock from another one of their product lines (money is really one of their products).
fyi- I have see fake Journey $100s too- very good, but ser. no. YBJ dead give-away.
Whether they are test or errors, well I dont know if that issue is completely decided on yet (based on my crazy ink idea).
Here is some other food for thought.
When was the last time a company, directly related to the federal government, not do well? the gov't is not exactly the most effecient at its money management, although CBN might be. Perhaps the CBN is working their system into having shorter life span notes in order to have the Gov't pay them more?
Ahh politics- I am not getting into this one any further re: the politics (it was joking in nature please know). Well, I am interested to see how this pans out.
Huds
-
I think a better experiment would be to compare the ripping to other HOW notes not in the ranges above mentioned and it seem that a sure way of proving the notes as poly is to burn a corner someone who has tried to tear theres should try to light a corner and see if it burns or shrivels
-
Hi There,
Ok, I am here to the rescue...
I just happent o have a spare note. I will try to rip it (Compaired to a HOW 5.85) burn it and Wet it.
Then Try and Spend it! ;D
I will do it tonight and post the results tomorrow (Or tonight if it proves interesting).
I will also take pictures of the notes. ::)
-
You are a wild man x-savior.
Cheers
Polarbear
-
Well, The results were interesting... :-/
(I am sorry. My pictures turned out HORRIBLE!!!) You can't really see anything (Camera Trouble). >:(
Results
--------
HOW 5.85 : Tore quite easy by tearing a straight line. Tore with a twisting motion. :-?
HOW 0.84 : Tore with more difficulty but did tear with more strength. Could not tear the note with a twisting motion. :)
HOW 5.85 : Lit Bottom Right Corner on Fire with BBQ Lighter. Lit and Burns VERY quickly. Only let burn for about 2 secs and entire corner was gone. :o
HOW 0.84 : Took about 2.5 Secs to really start and burned about 1/2 the speed. Same amount was burned in about 5 seconds of burning.. :-?
HOW 5.85 : Placed a few water drops on the middle right. Water was absorbed in about 2 seconds. ::)
HOW 0.84 : Sat there for about 5 seconds and then 1/2 Soaked. There was a small water drop remaining on the surface of the note. Seemed the Paper would not absorbe any more in those spots. :-/
Conclusion : Notes tore but with a difference. Really noticeable with Twisting motion. I have never burned money before, Notes were close (As it went so quick) but there was a burn rate difference. Fire was more contained to the local spot VS Spreading very quickly. Water drops was a big one. I could not get the Test Note to soak the drop to 100% like the Regular note. ;)
-
Well, The results were interesting... :-/
(I am sorry. My pictures turned out HORRIBLE!!!) You can't really see anything (Camera Trouble). >:(
Results
--------
HOW 5.85 : Tore quite easy by tearing a straight line. Tore with a twisting motion. :-?
HOW 0.84 : Tore with more difficulty but did tear with more strength. Could not tear the note with a twisting motion. :)
HOW 5.85 : Lit Bottom Right Corner on Fire with BBQ Lighter. Lit and Burns VERY quickly. Only let burn for about 2 secs and entire corner was gone. :o
HOW 0.84 : Took about 2.5 Secs to really start and burned about 1/2 the speed. Same amount was burned in about 5 seconds of burning.. :-?
HOW 5.85 : Placed a few water drops on the middle right. Water was absorbed in about 2 seconds. ::)
HOW 0.84 : Sat there for about 5 seconds and then 1/2 Soaked. There was a small water drop remaining on the surface of the note. Seemed the Paper would not absorbe any more in those spots. :-/
Conclusion : Notes tore but with a difference. Really noticeable with Twisting motion. I have never burned money before, Notes were close (As it went so quick) but there was a burn rate difference. Fire was more contained to the local spot VS Spreading very quickly. Water drops was a big one. I could not get the Test Note to soak the drop to 100% like the Regular note. ;)
No posts on these notes for a few days. Has anyone found anything about them.
Are we any closer to any conclusion about what if anything is going on with these notes.
I got some from X-S and they are different. Not complete polymer though. I have a 20 Peso
Mexican Polymer and it's pretty different. Maybe they are a paper polymer mix of some sort.
I could beleive that
-
Here is what I have gathered from talked and hearing...
These notes were put into the hands of a few people out here, and that is where they are staying. Dealers, collectors alike, these notes are going to be hard to get out of anyone's hands who has them now.
Just kind of the feel of what is happening after talking to a few....
-
I am still reserving comments until I can examine these notes first-hand. (Yes, they have yet to arrive) :'(
-
Went to meet with someone who has the notes- and examined them (the notes). They ARE DIFFERENT. There is no question in this. For anyone that has one that has the courage to test one, pinch it near the end and slwloy pull apart, as though you were going to create a small tear. The note will not tear (unless you pull very hard), and it will resume it's shape, but with obvious rippling, like when you stretch a plastic material, and then bring it back into shape.
Regular paper on the other hand will tear. Just one more thing to add to the differences.
Brent, I think these would be worthy of some further testing if you have the resources.
Huds
-
Brent will be getting his notes VERY soon! 8-)
As Huds has noted I also have tried to tear the note in the corner and was unable to. :o
Also, as a note.... No other Low Serial HOW notes have yet to surface anywhere. In fact we are well into HOY and even HOZ now. :-/
These "Test" notes are now all but impossible to get now. There are so few of them available the demand for the notes are extremely high. :D
-
I did receive my notes a week or so back now. I haven't put it to any tests yet, but hope to on Sunday. They really do feel different, but I will do as many tests that I know how to. I will report my findings here when done.
Tom
-
Pretty Cool 8-)
-
If you have one that you have already tried to tear, Tom, try to slowly stretch it between your fingertips, like slowly stretching a shopping bag with your fingertips. Paper notes will split, these did not. They actually stretched (like plastic!).
Yes, I am anxious to see how this develops.
-
I'm curious as to whether anyone has tried weighing one of these notes? Unfortunately I don't have access to a good jewelers scale with multiple decimal points. I'm curious if there is a difference probably not in the tenths, but perhaps in the hundredths of a gram between these notes and a regular note.
-
Here is what you do about that. Go to your freindly neighborhood post master, and just toss them on the scale. A full bundle of 100. Then toss on a regular bundle of $5s. Those scales are very accurate, the ones they measure letter weight on.
Anyone who has a bundle of these HOW's should try that. I went and saw them-- they are heavier in my opinion, but it may be from what I sensed as static electricity drag.
It is true that is the differences are the way we are speculating, that the charges built up through friction from note to note, would be different to some degree. When I felt them, and moved them around, I felt a stronger feild that what I had felt with regular $5s. At risk of sounding like a wacko, this is one of the main differences that I could sense when I handled them.
-
Do you practice reiki by any chance Hudson?
-
:o
You mean I can use HOW Notes to power my Computer??? ;D
-
Found HOW0524163 today in montreal.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm :o :o :o :o :o
first find VERY NEAR the possible test range
I quote that post from the $ 5 high/low thread on HOW
-
As noted....
This is not one of my notes. I never got any 0.524 range notes.
My Lowest Note was 0520000 so this note is right in the middle of my notes. :-/
One thing that has been noticed about the test notes....
SMELL THEM!!! ;D
Regular Notes smell like.... Well.... New Money. These Test Notes smell like an old Rubber Ball. Not a very nice smell actually. This is one of the definite tests for any of these Test Notes. 8-)
-
Hi all...
1. I bet they still smell better than new US money (y-u-c-k)
2. Cam, you could create a friction machine, somehow with the function similar to two tiny paint machines, shaking the notes tightly pressed to eachother, and then having some sort of channel for the energy flow into your power cord on the computer (somehow). It would be as effective as lets say... and excercise bike that powers a TV. (Just when you want to relax lol )
3. Manny, I sent you a PM. :) I have been thru a bit of this and that in that kind of stuff. One night Brent and I stayed up on MSN discussing astrophysics and the like, in relation to that kind of stuff. Like wow!
Now, test note related...
4. I have found HOW 0.8 I think, and it was not the same as the test notes, I am positive.
5. I have another post somewhere in here about one member's ability to nail down the numbers on a sheet, from inputting on number into a graph of sorts. I do not remember who has it, if you know, please let me know. please!
6. I decided to write in point form because it is a little more easytodistinguishwhereanewideastartsandends.
7. As said, I am really interested to see what will happen regarding these notes at the CNA.
Take care all,
Huds
-
Cam,
Would appreciate the breakdown of the bricks of HOWs. Hopefully you have kept the info in the following format:
HOW Mixed brick
6558312 + HOH7074284 - 5 + 6558313 - 393 + 260 - 266 + 6547940 - 945 + 6557480 - 482 (2 HOH Inserts)
6556986 - 999 + 845 - 884 + 894 - 939
6545845 - 939 + 812 + 6556808 - 811
6557250 - 307 + 312 - 344 + 385 - 393
6557894 -939 + 6557768 - 811 + 6558250 - 259 (Quad 7 md)
6554940 -999 + 6557440 - 479
6554758 - 811(missing not 805) + 6557485 + 6554894 - 929 + 6557991 - 999 + 6558439
6557946 - 990(missing note 454) + 6545440 - 495 (3 Digit radar)
6558440 - 444 + 750 - 752 + 812 - 893 + 930 - 939 (Quad 8 md)
6545250 + 6557483 - 484 + 654251 - 311 + 113 -344 + 996 - 999
HOW Mixed brick
6545312 + HOH7074282 - 3 + 6545345 - 439 + 498 - 499 (2 HOH Inserts)
654258 - 311 + 6556940 - 985
6556885 - 893 + 812 - 844 + 750 - 807
6557421 - 439 + 345 - 384 + 308 - 311 + 6558940 - 976
6558977 - 999 + 894 - 929 + 445 - 485
6558486 - 499 + 394 - 438 + 6554930 - 939 + 845 - 858 + 860 - 876
6554877 - 893 + 812 - 844 + 750 - 757 + 6557486 - 499 + 394 - 420 + 6558267
6558268 - 311 + 6545940 - 994 + 813
6545814 - 844 + 750 - 811 + 6557940 - 945 + 879
6557859 - 878 + 888 - 893 + 845 - 858 + 832 - 844 + 881 - 887 + 812 - 831 + 6545496 - 497 + 6557750 - 767
Gary
-
Information has been sent to Gary! 8-)
-
Cam,
Compare notes 0837773 and 0838324 to see if they feel and look the same in every way.
Gary
-
Hi Gary,
Ok, I looked the the notes. ;)
They appear to the the same. Front side has a very slight out of register and the back the perfectly aligned. Both notes have the exact same slight defect. I could not find anything else to connect them. Other then that they appear to be perfectly printed notes. I kept looking for some small print dots in the back areas and stuff like that but everything looked good. :)
Hope this helps!
-
Something different about the position numbers.
0837773 - 19/49
0838324 - 16/49
0537634 - 19/49
0539058 - 32/49
0539207 - 32/43
The red position numbers should be identicle. Check to see if you documented the position numbers correctly.
Gary
-
I am sorry, I was half asleep when I input the numbers... :-[
Correct Numbers are: 32,43
Nice catch on that! ;)
-
[size=18]Ok, So Just a Quick Recap Of What We Know So Far With These New Polymer Style Test Notes...[/size] 8-)
[size=14]1)[/size] 2 Seperate Serial Number Ranges [size=14]HOW[/size][/b] ([size=14]0.52 - 0.54[/size][/b]) & [size=14]HOW[/size][/b] ([size=14]0.83 - 0.85[/size][/b]) Printed in 2005. :)
[size=14]2)[/size] UNC Test Notes [size=14]feel very limp[/size][/b] and the surface has a different texture compared to UNC Paper Notes that are very smooth and crisp :)
[size=14]3)[/size] Test Notes have a [size=14]very different smell[/size][/b] to them unlike Normal Paper Money (Smells Like an old Rubber Ball, or uncured rubber) :P
[size=14]4)[/size] Test Notes [size=14]Can not be ripped in the Corners[/size][/b] (Without Excessive Force) unlike normal Paper Money what rips very easy. 8-)
[size=14]5)[/size] If you pull outwords from the sides of the Test Note it [size=14]will stretch[/size][/b] slightly then resume its original shape. Paper Notes will ripple and/or tear. :-?
[size=14]6)[/size] The Test Notes [size=16]Burn[/size] at a slower rate than normal paper notes (About 1/2 the speed) :o
[size=14]7)[/size] The Test Notes [size=14]will not absorbe water drops[/size][/b] as quickly as Paper Notes (In fact the Test Notes left a small water drop on top of the note after reaching saturation on that spot. ;)
-
I have finally gotten a chance to do a rip test on a bunch of CBN Journey notes including the HOW08. Here are the results.
The following notes were rip tested, one after the other, using the same technique, in the same areas of the notes. The results surprised me.
SR# HOK0628876 - Ripped with medium force.
SR# HOL1064574 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK.
SR# HOM6294704 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK & HOL.
SR# HON2189660 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL & HOM.
SR# HOP3866660 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM & HON.
SR# HOP9385550 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM, HON, & HOP3.8.
SR# HOR8496762 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM, HON, HOP3.8 & HOP9.3.
SR# HOS3755707 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM, HON, HOP3.8, HOP9.3 & HOR
SR# HOT5257741 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM, HON, HOP3.8, HOP9.3, HOR & HOS.
SR# HOU4502422 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM, HON, HOP3.8, HOP9.3, HOR, HOS & HOT.
SR# HOW6558454 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM, HON, HOP3.8, HOP9.3, HOR, HOS, HOT & HOU.
SR# HOW0841039 - Ripped with medium force, same as HOK, HOL, HOM, HON, HOP3.8, HOP9.3, HOR, HOS, HOT, HOU & HOW6.5.
The low range HOW0.8 are limper than other notes, but they are definitely not Polymer in the sense of Australian Polymer notes.
They feel a little different, but rip just as easily as all the previous notes tested.
In my humble opinion, there is only a marginal difference in these low range HOWs and all other CBN Journey $5 notes.
These notes are available to anyone who might be interested in performing similar tests to verify the results.
All I ask is that you limit the length of the rip, similar to the rips I made, and return the notes so other interested parties can also have a rip at them.
I was very disappointed with the test results.
JWS
-
Well John,
Very Interesting.... :-?
I would like to know WHERE you were conducting the rip tests, as I found in the middle yes they rip the same. But on the very edge of the note there is a very large difference. ;) As Paul mentioned he has conducted this same test on the note and has stated there is a difference.
As far as the "Polymer" Yes, at no point has anyone claimed they are anything like Australian notes. In fact CBN in not dealing with "Polymer" but as Paul mentioned it is most likely Tyvec. They have been collaborating over the last few years on something. :-/
These notes are some form of Paper/Tyvec Combination. :)
Now as for ANY of the other tests. What are your results as the rip test is only 1 of several tests that can be conducted. :)
-
Here is what I have to say.
1. JWS, I appreciate your efforts on taking the time to investigate (we all do). It is all adding to the knowledge pool.
2. Regular CBN Paper doesn't stretch, and then return to shape. These ones do. I personally do not believe they are actually the same material as the other country's polymer notes, because the fact that they DO tear. But they are with absolute certainty NOT the same as regular CBN stock. It could be a while to figure this one out...
3. The bottom line, is that there is a find here that we have to deal with, that has basically blown away the community. Anyone who has any of these, is not budging. We have to be careful to not jump to any conclusions (this I am guilty of).
From what I have heard about the initial trading of these notes,
this is HUGE.
Until I get back from the CNA, I am not posting on this one anymore. (Yes I know no one is forcing me)
Later
Hudson
-
Here are a few interesting links where the use of Tyvec in bank notes is discussed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_banknotes
http://www.answers.com/topic/tyvek
http://www.polymernotes.org/resources/polymer.htm#The_beginning_and_the_end_of_Tyvek%AE_bank_notes
-
We still seem to have a problem with position number sets 16/49 and 19/49. This may indicate that the sheets were printed using different plates. One plate could have been used to print regular paper and the other a polymer or tyvec test material. An ink compatable with both materials could have been used for numbering the sheets consecutively. A comparison rip test of notes with position number sets 16/49 and 19/49 should be done.
I have seen one note ( 0536110 ) and found it no different than other recent prefixes. John now has rip tested his notes ( 0841039 ) and found no difference. Paul couldn't rip the note he tested. Tom said his note was different but hasn't yet had a chance to let us know the results of his tests. I'm left wondering if only a portion of the notes are from a different material.
Hoping everyone who has some of these notes will check them carefully for an identifier of some sort. The BoC needs to be able to identify these notes out of the millions that are returned for destruction.
Hudson be sure to bring a stretchy one to the CNA.
Gary
-
I will see if I have any notes with those Plate Numbers and compare them. ;)
-
Look carefully, the BP is 48, not 49. :P
-
WOW!!!
You are right, it is 48. I had to look under 12X Magnification to see it was a 48. It kept looking like 49.
I am sorry. I will go back and change my notes. the 49's are actually 48's on the Back Plate Number.
I can understand how this could be confusing. :-[
So the notes I looked at are 16/48.
-
Hoping everyone who has some of these notes will check them carefully for an identifier of some sort. The BoC needs to be able to identify these notes out of the millions that are returned for destruction.
Has anyone compared these notes under ultraviolet light?
-
I will check the notes under my black light tonight.
I will compare a note from both Test Ranges against an HOY. ;)
An idea that was thrown out was a possible chemical reaction that changes the color of the paper.... :-/
-
Has anyone compared these notes under ultraviolet light?
The notes are the same under UV and IR light.
-
Very Interesting....
So, Possibly a chemical marker???
-
Solvents like benzene, varsol or nail polish remover would cause damage to a plastic but might not affect paper.
Who wants to try it?
-
Hummm...... :-/
I thought Burning the note was crazy but this sounds REALLY interesting..... :D
-
X-Savior, I copied this from a post I made in another thread. Try the following torture test on your HOT notes:
What are cup marks?
I admit I don't use bundles of notes as doilies :)
LOL...that one's cute, had to laugh! Apparently "cup marks" are found only on the Journey series, because of the security thread that runs down the righthand side of the note. The security thread is metallic and thus the note is a bit harder to cut through at that spot and a little half-moon shaped indentation is left during the cutting process, either at the top or bottom of the note at the security thread.
OK X-Savior, now you have your next test for your HOW notes...set them around the house and use them as doilies, coasters, placemats, etc. and see how they stand up. Plastic also shrivels up under extreme heat and we're in the middle of a heat wave - have you tried leaving one under the windshield of your car?
Just remember to stay IN your car...some desperate soul might break into it to steal your $5.
-
The two HOW's I got are HOW 0842582 and 83 FP is 42 and BP is 44 on both notes. I honestly can't tell if there is any difference .... the paper feels thinner but since I paid extra for these I haven't tried any fancy tests. I also have HOW 6132331 FP 11 BP 27 and the paper feels thicker than the 0.84 notes.
On Saturday at CNA I will bring a surgical caliper. If someone can bring a bundle of 50 test HOW's and a regular bundle of 50 notes, I can measure the thickness of the bundles and compute a paper thickness.
-
Received note HOW 0536110 today. I see and feel nothing different than any other recent prefix of fives.
As I mentioned in my original post, on this subject, the paper seems to be somewhat thinner in the last few prefixes. Temperature and humidity do play a role in the " feel " of journey notes.
Hopefully someone will show me more of these notes at the CNA this weekend. Until I'm convinced otherwise HOWs are just another regular prefix.
Gary
-
The H0WO524163 that i got a few days ago is indeed slightly different than other HOWs that i have seen. Today i got HOW3291901, HOW3422628, HOW8806630. These 3 notes appear to have a different paper composition than that of HOW0524163, that same note was very hard to rip. I did try but didn't tear it. On the other hand the three HOWs found today ripped easily with little effort, so yes indeed i will agree that HOW notes in the 0.52-0.54 range are different!
-
Eyevet, I am not sure if that will have enough difference to be noticed, I think a more accurate test would be by weight. a full bundle of regular, vs HOW test. Do you have a small medical scale of some sort?
See you at the CNA.
Huds
-
I have a digital postal scale that weighs in grams. We would need a pretty fancy biochemistry scale to weigh in milligrams.
-
I'd just like to say that the "test" notes that I received appeared no different from regular notes of other prefixes (specifically an HOJ). The tested note was numbered HOW 0842576.
-
Based on a majority of the senior members - seems that these are just regular notes. Unless otherwise.
-
Well....This is getting more and more interesting with every post.....
Kinda like a Roller Coaster.... :-/
I am going to compair these notes to every single Journey Series $5 Prefix as I own every one of them (ANU and up).
I have yet to see a single other note that was ANYTHING like these "Test" notes. I would also like to see an HOW note BELOW 0.52 and BETWEEN the two ranges to compair with...
After I check all the notes and compair with some certian HOU that have come to my attention I am going to put my results in my FINAL post on this issue... :-/
Thank You! :-/
-
Jeez, I didn't know that paper money collectors could be so weird - the ideas about how to test these notes have been hilarious at times! I'll bet any Bank of Canada employee reading the forum is having a good laugh on how we're torturing the HOW notes.
OK - here's another test. Staple a regular note to the sole of your left shoe and a HOW note to the sole of your right. Walk around for a day or two and see which note holds up better :D
-
HOW 0526653 feel softer, smoother and possibly thinner than regular $5 notes. From reading the comments on these test notes, it appeared to be limited to the HOW 0.52 - 0.54 range and not to the HOW 0.83 - 0.85 range.
-
HOW 0526653 feel softer, smoother and possibly thinner than regular $5 notes. From reading the comments on these test notes, it appeared to be limited to the HOW 0.52 - 0.54 range and not to the HOW 0.83 - 0.85 range.
Paul and Tom, in what range are the note you got?
Martin
-
HOW 0526653 feel softer, smoother and possibly thinner than regular $5 notes. From reading the comments on these test notes, it appeared to be limited to the HOW 0.52 - 0.54 range and not to the HOW 0.83 - 0.85 range.
I have sat down several individuals who knew NOTHING about money and had them look at, feel and smell the notes. 8-)
Results were that they noticed BOTH ranges felt the same (And Different). They all said the same thing it felt softer, very limp. The Surface seemed much smoother. I lined up a HOW 0.52, HOW 0.83, HOW 2.71, HOW 8.50, HOV 7.72, HOY 0.53 for the test. They picked out the "Test" notes right away as the notes that were "Different". :D
-
I got my note from X-savior. Nice note, whose serial number is HOW0841056, in the middle of one of the suspected ranges of "test" notes.
My observations are not conclusive.
The note seems a bit limper that another HOW I took as comparision, but not strikingly. It's only by holding by one side and let the note hanging horizontally that I observe the "test" bends more downward than the ordinary note.
On the thickness, I measured each note with a caliper (0.001") and found no measurable difference (both note having a thickness of 0.004 in.) Would need a caliper able to measure down to 0.0001 ".
On the odour, the difference is not striking (for me). If there is a difference, I would say that the odour is more like putty or some linseed oil-based printing ink that old rubber...
The feeling is maybe a bit smoother that the ordinary note, I'm not sure.
The weight: I weighted each note on an analytical scale (which can weight an hair ). I found no significant difference. The "test" note weighted 1,0099 grams whereas the ordinary note weigths 0,9785 g. With this precision, I can detect the variation in the humidity of the paper, or the thickness or quantity of ink. Too much parameters plays to say something really useful.
I look them with a magnifying glass and saw nothing really different. The look under UV light is the same on both notes.
I tried to stretch the note along a side, and it seemed to stretch a bit, as a very stiff rubber. The ordinary note didn't gave the same feeling.
I didn't tried to tear the note (at the price I paid for, I want not to do any damage on it until I'm absolutely sure that an very ordinary paper note).
I plan to take infrared spectra of these notes (plus others paper and polymer notes as comparision). The infrared spectra tells about the nature of a material. I hope to detect polymer, if there is any. The test is non-destructive, so it leaves the notes intact. But I won't be able to do such tests before two weeks.
I also want to show this note to some friends without telling them which note is the test note. I will give the forum the results when I'll have them.
So, until more informed, I keep my judgement...
-
Nice!!! We have a scientist in the forum! Finally, some real tests. I have also purchased a few of these, but have not tested them due to their new "value" to me. But since reading all these recent posts, I'm really itching to rip and stretch this note. So if I don't hear any results soon, one of my HOW notes are done for.
Big ups for copperpete!
-
Had a look at another note in the 0.84 range ( Tom's notes ) and about 7 or 8 of us checked it against a 0.54 HOW and a few other recent prefixes. Couldn't detect any noteworthy differences.
I will be at the CNA again tomorrow with a group of HOU's ( thanks John ) which are even more limp feeling than the HOW's. I'll get a few members to do the usual yanking, pulling, ripping, tearing, spitting and burning tests.
The different " feel " may just be due to the supply of paper stock coming from a different maunfacturer.
Gary
-
How ironic!
I picked up 2 mixed bricks of HOU today, and just grabbed a beer and started browsing through the first one, and guess what?
Found a few HOH inserts 970xxxx, and 978xxxx, and 979xxxx.
I noticed that these inserts felt a little different than the HOU's they were replacing, so I took my HOH9784390, and it stretches a little, were all notes usually tear, and did not tear my first try. Looking at the back of the note, I was able to tear above the large five in the top left hand corner, but is certainly very much more difficult to tear this note in the dead center, and most other areas of the note if it even tears. The areas that don't tear kind of wrinkle up, and slide through my fingers. It feels like the note has a layer of very thin saran wrap embedded in the note, when I do apply enough force to tear it. The HOU's rip normal.
HA! Now I'm gonna burn it!
P.S. I've been tearing up notes for almost two weeks now, and there definitely is a difference with this note.
-
I was just starting to get worried that I made a mistake by tearing up my HOH9784390, because it is the only one I have in that range. But I checked out the other ranges I have and noticed that the HOH9709699 feels like regular paper money, but my HOH979xxxx inserts(which I found 6 by the way) are on the same stretchy paper. These were found in the same HOU mixed brick 184xxxx,& 185xxxx. My other mixed brick HOU207xxxx had no inserts and rips and tears normally.
I will be bringing my test subject to the CNA tommorrow.
-
Here is a photo of part of the HOH insert note I have been testing. To the left is my first initial attempt at tearing this note. You can see how it has stretched, and not fully taken back its shape, though it has a bit. To the right is where I used force to tear. If you look closely at the tear, you will see a slight ripple in the paper where it was initially resisting my tear.
(http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/4220/hohtestpo8.th.jpg) (http://img226.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hohtestpo8.jpg)
-
Here is a photo of part of the HOH insert note I have been testing. To the left is my first initial attempt at tearing this note. You can see how it has stretched, and not fully taken back its shape, though it has a bit. To the right is where I used force to tear. If you look closely at the tear, you will see a slight ripple in the paper where it was initially resisting my tear.
That is how my HOW 0.52 note looked as well.
-
I owned HOW0390840 and HOW0994674 which are nearby the so called " TEST NOTE" range. Perhabs it would be interesting to compare...
-
I would just like to add that I have now seen notes from both of the ranges that X-Savior had, and [size=14]it is my opinion that neither are test notes[/size][/i][/b]. There may be some variation in the paper thickness, but the variations observed were within what I would think to be acceptable variance ranges.
While I remain open-minded to further testing, until I am convinced otherwise, I do not believe that these are test notes in any fashion. Any statements implying that I believe otherwise should be considered false and without my permission.
-
Thank You Brent! ;)
Your thoughts are greatly appreciated. I guess this mean MORE TESTING!!!! :D
Lets see....
Burning,Ripping,Streching,Stomping,Wearing,Toasting,Soaking,Weighing,Feeling,Rubbing,Smelling
::) What's next?
;D
-
I agree with BWJM, i have great doubts that these notes are test notes. Is there a difference within that HOW0.52-0.54 range? Yes i do think so but i dont think they will actually be worth anything special.
-
I guess I'm beginning to get a little uncomfortable with the way this HOW thing has panned out so far...
Outrageous hype was generated very quickly about a few notes, and names of influential people were used to help make it seem like there was really something strange going on. Prices quickly shot up to (as far as I heard) $250 per note :o and elaborate "no sale" agreements, or as I would call them, "monopoly" agreements, were set up with many of the buyers. Almost everyone so far has posted that while there may be some slight differences to the notes, they are similar, if not identical, to many other recent prefixes, and that such differences are very likely within the standard tolerance ranges.
Before I finish this post, I just want to specifically raise a concern I touched on in the last paragraph. Emails, PMs and posts promoting these HOW notes included such phrases as (example): "I have been having big talkes with many of the big players...Paul Wallis, Brent Mackie, Gary Fedora & Rob Graham (Editor of Charlton)." The placement of these names, while being factual, causes strong implications that we support the allegation that these are test notes. I, for one, DO NOT believe that these notes are anything special. Paul made some confusing remarks, Gary is firmly against them being test notes, and I cannot recall at this moment what Mr. Graham thinks, although I don't think he was impressed either. My big concern is that my name is being used to promote the extravagant sale of alleged test notes that are nothing special at all once seen in-person.
I do not want to see people paying $250 for these notes when they are worth only $7. You are paying for the hype, and nothing else. I'm sorry, X-Savior, but I think that this has gotten too out of hand. I've held off making such a strong statement for a while now, but having seen, felt, torn, spit on, burned, etc several of these notes myself, and from several ranges of HOW, HOU, HOT, HOJ, etc including both that you are selling, I cannot support any allegations that these notes are anything but regular notes.
Please remove my name from any promotional messages, unless specifically used to say that I believe that these notes are nothing special. I would recommend the same for the others, or at least that you ask for their permission before using their influential names to promote these notes.
For everyone else, I hope you didn't pay too much for your acre of swampland in Florida... :-/
-
AT LAST!
COMMON SENSE PREVAILS
A reliable source thought that outside testing is quite unlikely-- only internal tests were done (and seldom at that).
The practice of experimenting with note composition/resins/etc does not coincide with today's printing technology. There's simply no need for it. Printers seem content with the shelf life of a note since any one given Issue will only last for so long for security reasons. Note quality means little. Security is all that matters. They've done the cost analysis, and are content with the results.
(edited: 07/24/06)
Now that we've gone through this little costly "melodrama" will there be any kind of rules in place to prevent a repeat performance?
-
I spoke to a BOC official at the CNA show & he said that only internal tests were done (and seldom at that).
The practice of experimenting with note composition/resins/etc does not coincide with today's printing technology. There's simply no need for it. The BOC seem content with the shelf life of a note since any one given Issue will only last for so long anyway (security reasons). Note quality means little. Security is all that matters. They've done the cost analysis, and are content with the results.
Note that the above is NOT an official response from the Bank of Canada, merely another perspective on the matter from someone who happens to have a much broader knowledge of such things than most of us do, myself included. That personal also happens to be a senior employee within the Bank of Canada Currency Museum. Please avoid considering this information as fact simply because of the source.
Now that we've gone through this little costly "melodrama" will there be any kind of rules in place to prevent a repeat performance?
Anyone who would like to discuss this may start a new thread on that subject.
-
You should take the time to get your notes confirmed as " high value test notes " before you market them as such on this site. I wouldn't want to see any financial loses if your notes don't turn out to be what you claim.
The paper used on the journey series reacts with humidity and temperature. The hotter and more humid it is the limper notes feel. This may in fact be the case with your notes. We have had a few posts already on $5 paper that is somewhat thinner or thicker than is usually seen. This could also be the case.
The scarcity of prefix HOW is due to it only being issued for a few weeks. I have some notes in the 5million range so I'm sure HOW was fully printed.
I would rely on the expertise of members of this site, and the CPMS, before I would take the word of a dealer as gospel when it comes down to recent issues not currently in Charlton. Most dealers are only as up to date as the last Charlton. Dealers buy and sell notes and coins and generally don't have the time to " study " current issues.
With approx 1 billion modified journey notes alreay issued I'm sure the BoC would have already done any paper test it deemed necessary.
Better to be safe than sorry.
Gary
These notes didn't turn out to be what you claimed and I do see some members suffering financial losses so maybe some sort a refund is warranted.
-
Hi,
Got today HOW 0867240 in VF condition.I asked to my wife to feel the paper with her fingers the HOW and the HOP 622.. to compare and she's tell me the HOW looks like a little more thick and ''stong'' than the HOPpaper,and the two notes are about the same condition.I do not suppose it's a test note! The front plate number is 48 and the back plate number is 13. I just comunicate what I found.I'll keep it,maybe.....???
Claude
-
Hi There,
Very Interesting. It is just outside of the range I have. We think we have seen someone who had a 0.6? and it was also from normal paper compaired to the usual 2 ranges we have discussed. :)
I am not sure what to say so far. Pretty much everything has been beaten to death on this...something seems different about the notes and what that is, everyone is still trying to figure out. :-/
I am going to conduct tactile testing with about a dozen different tests with a handful of non-collectors with both HOW Ranges, a couple HOU ranges and then a range of prefixes going back to the beginning to see if there are any OVERALL differences. :-?
Only time will tell what is with these and possibly some other notes is different. ::)
-
:)
-
Hi,
My older boy did baby sitting and when he entered,he show me his money,and he got a HOW 0616622(FP 37,BP 11) in EF condition.The paper is more thin than the HOW 0867240 I found yesterday.Like I told you the paper of the 0867.. is thick and I check the corners with magnifying-glass(6x) and I sew the fiber of the paper and all it got stain like a regular one.But the other HOW 0616.. the paper is thin and I check with magnafying-glass all around the note and do not sew paper fiber and it still sharp and without stain for a EF cond!!When I manipulate the both notes the noise is different. For my part the HOW 0867.. got a regular paper more easy to stain and the HOW 0616.. is different??Is this possible to let me know what is the characteristic of the ''test note''paper?What do you think about my notes??
Thanks
Claude
-
Hi,
When I manipulate the both notes the noise is different.
This I pointed out to some members.
the paper is thin and I check with magnafying-glass all around the note and do not sew paper fiber and it still sharp and without stain for a EF cond!!
This may be much more important than analyzing Crisp UNC banknotes. If you put some lower grades side by side, how would they measure up?
This could be indicative of the switching of paper/material at the least.
PERHAPS this has to do with the switchover to a Canadian paper supplier (moving from the German supplied paper). This may have been a poilitical move, but a change nonetheless.
I think that in the next few months it will be valuable to analyse used and worn $5s, to see how different prefixes and ranges handle the wear. That may be the only way we can surely identify what is what with these things. I am referring to simply the change of paper type at this time.
-
PERHAPS this has to do with the switchover to a Canadian paper supplier (moving from the German supplied paper).
I agree. It apprears we have caught up to the transition. :-/
I think members should keep looking from HOU forward to watch wear and durability in reference to older prefixes. We may find a difference in durability and the lifespan of a Bank Note. :-?
But the other HOW 0616.. the paper is thin and I check with magnafying-glass all around the note and do not sew paper fiber and it still sharp
I Will compair the HOW's and HOU's in question with HOT,HOV, HOY and several older prefixes in UNC condition to see if under even stronger magnification there is any visual difference.
Does anyone have access to any really high power microscopes to have a detailed look at extreme magnification to see actual fibre differences. This is may assist it determining a change in paper composition. :)
-
I actually think this would be a good suggestion to fire off to a grad student as a project- at any University. They could get some credit for it, and then also would be under proper guidance for carrying out tests.
Anyway, come Sept and Oct, I will be searching thru LOADS of circulated $5s and will be pulling notes that seem to be in much better shape materially that is, than they should be for their circuation. As Claude mentioned...
I mean boatloads of notes. I think it would be valuable to have more eyes on this than just mine. Anyone else want to help volunteer with this project?
-
Count me in! ;)
Also, I have a connection in Epcore. I am going to be able to have them look at the notes in their Lab at extreme magnification. They might even be able to print of pictures of the notes and see the differences. They look at Microbes in water samples and stuff like that so I think it will look close enough to tell if there is a difference to paper composition. We should see a difference in paper fibres or such. :D
I am going to supply about 10 - 12 different notes of varying prefixes for examination. I may need assistance in aquiring a broad spectrum of prefixes for testing purposes. I have only so many extra notes that can be sacrificed for testing.
So what I think it would be is if as a community we decide what prefixes/serial ranges should be tested. :-?
Then assemble the notes for testing... What does everyone think?
-
So.....
Anyone want to venture forward to make any Prefix suggestions for testing? :-/
No one seems to say much of anything about the idea.... :(
-
I'm so glad that you have decided to have these note scientifically tested. A noble act that I'm sure you will pay for out of the proceeds from your sale of HOW notes.
Firstly you need to select a methodology. I understand that the THE NITRITE TECHNIQUE OF PAPER COMPOSITION ANALYSIS is well regarded by scientists. You can read more of this technique in the following paper:
http://www.asu.ru/science/journal/chemwood/volume5/2001_02/0102_039.pdf
I'm not sure if Epcore specializes in this type of analysis, but I would suggest that you use a lab that will produce results that will withstand scrutiny.
Finally, I would suggest that you test HOP, HOU <6.5, HOU> 6.5, HOW 0.6, HOW 0.8, HOW >5.0, AN*, HOA, a 1986 $5 and a 1972 $5. Once you have your results, along with appropriate statistical analysis including Chi Square and Poisson distribution (sounds fishy!), you can then present your results - perhaps at next year's CNA.
Good luck!
-
[size=14]Thank you everyone for your comments, concerns and suggestions. Over the last few months we have found a great deal of information about the Journey $5 notes. But, there have also been many questions asked and lots of theories produced. To date no one has been able to provide irrefutable and conclusive information regarding several different notes in question.
As for the testing, this offer has been made by another member who does not want to get involved in the Discussions to remain un-biased. I have decided to take this one step further and politely declined the gracious offer.
I will take a visit to the Chemistry Department at the University of Alberta and see if they will conduct all the experiments and oversee it from start to finish as they are the professionals, not us. I will also give them detailed information as to why the experiments are being conducted and what information we will require to answer all of our questions.
When the time comes, I will need help acquiring some of the test subject notes for testing purposes. I will pay face value for the notes and take care of all the work getting the tests conducted and getting the information together. I will be publishing an article for presentation on the results under the supervision of the professional chemists at the University.
I will also have another Forum member assisting me, also under the supervision of the chemistry department, with this project to ensure authenticity and make sure all Protocols are followed to the letter. The final findings will be authenticated by the Chemistry Department at the U of A.
Eyevet brings up great suggestions for prefixes to be tested. We will also include some notes from circulation when possible. We should test notes that we have seen noticeable changes or variations.
I will be reporting all the details in a complete and detailed article at a further date in time. I will not be divulging any information regarding the testing and progress until the article is complete. Then at that point, everyone can make their own decisions regarding the notes in question.
Thank You.
[/size]
-
As I stated almost three weeks ago, I've done some tests on the so-called HOW "test notes". I took some infrared spectra fron a HOW "test" (0,84 M range), a regular HOW (1,10 M), a australian polymer note (made of Guardian polymer) and a Isle de Man Bradvek-made note.
I easily identified that the Bradvek note is polyethylene (as it supposed to be) andthat the Guardian note is polypropylene (which is also correctly found). I took the measurements on blanks areas, since the inked ones shows distinctive bands of absorption.
When I took the spectra on both HOW notes, also on blank areas, I found NO DiFFERENCE at all. Both are truly made of paper and I found no traces of any polymer on the HOW 0,84 M.
So, all I can say for sure is that these notes doesn't contain any polymer in the paper.
But I cannot rule out that they are made with a new paper composition (I cannot tell which one because I'm not a specialist of paper).
However, I presented to the technician both notes (he doesn't know anything about paper money and he closed his eyes for the test) and by touching both notes, he easily found the "test" note, telling me that the "test" was thinner than the other. Since the weight is almost identical (we verifyied it on an analytical digital scale) to about 1 mg, the "test" paper must be more dense than the normal one.
I also examined both notes under magnification with a stereomicroscope but I didn't saw anything different (The maximum enlargment I used was 70X). Maybe under a electronic microscope, we can see a difference, but I don't have this equipment.
I cannot draw a definitive conclusion, but I'm not helpless since I know somebody in a research center specialized in pulp and paper. Maybe he could do some very specific tests to see if the paper composition is different. I will try to contact him in the next few days to see if he can do these tests...
-
I have something I would like to say about these "test" notes.
The more bricks and bricks I go through, the more I am convinced that there is something different.
Yes, there is a thinner paper- but it is a paper.
But, there is a different feel, and sound, and the way the notes behave together I can only describe as this:
They seem to bond together. Leave them flat and in the heat for a while and they will be stuck together. Not "peel" stuck, but like the bundle as a whole will be all stuck together, only to be broken by bending the paper, and even then it is in "chunks".
Bonding: Also, when you fan through the notes, instead of them slapping hard against eachother like paper does, they appear (and sound like) they "come together" through static elec. attraction. It is very smooth and soft as they fall onto one another.
This "Bonding" factor can perhaps be explained by this: (a hypothesis at this stage)
They are paper: True
They are a different source of paper: Maybe true or false, not what I am getting at in this hypothesis
There is: some strength compound coating that has been applied somehow at some stage of the printing process, I would think after they are printed, before they are cut. Possibly during transport from final print to serial numbering. All they would have to do is insert a spray mechanism of some sort to have something applied to them at any given stage of the process.
As a result of the compounds of the coating, the electric charge given by the notes from friction would have to be different that the electric charge created by regular notes. This difference in charge would be the reason why they bond together in the different way. The application of a coating may also account for the near exact same weight, despite a thinner paper being used.
I believe that this is the case. Different paper: yes. Some agent applied to the notes for extra strength. At this point I want to mention again that in the Edmonton area, where they were discovered, I see them come through at work, all crumpled and what not, but they still have sharp edges and there is no fuzzing on hard crease lines. That is not the normal wear for paper.
Now, why then do most of the remaining notes of the $5 series come on the regular paper again? I don't know. BUT consider this--
IF you had a 2002 Journey $10 that was printed on cotton like they were at the start of the series, you would have a significant anomaly. In fact, having a cotton note that is "supposed to be" paper would be like having the 1859 1 cent struck on brass (very valuable). Or a 1944 Tombac nickel for that matter.
With that said, I leave it open for discussion about what the heck could be going on.
I disagree with many members on this subject because I believe that they are different. Despite the manner in which this whole subject came up (which has upset many people) I feel it is still in the best interest of the hobby that we try to figure this one out and find out more about them. It would be a disservice to blackball this situation just because of frustrating situations that may have arisen. (And hey I am staying away from that)
Just my five bucks-
Huds
-
It's not necessary to have a layer of something invisible put on the paper during the firsts printing stages to have the properties observed.
You just to have a different paper composition or process. The person to whom I spoke (paper specialist) told me that the paper used for note have a very specific composition (which is highly confidential). But, generally, the paper contains non only cellulose from various sources (cotton, kraft, flax....) but contains also varous compounds collectively called "adjuvents". These compounds can be strengteners, densifiers, opacifiers, whiteners, depending of the exact use of the paper. In the case of security paper, a very small quantity of colored (visible and UV) fibres (or something else) is added.
For example, titanium dioxide is sometimes added to renders the paper more opaque (less transparent) and whiter. The quantity of these adjuvents and the ratio of different fibers matters. Even the making process by itself is important, when the sheet pass between the rolls of paper machine where the paper is more or less pressed, rolled and dried, you will get a different paper.
So making paper is complex, particularly the one used for printing notes. And it maybe not enough to look at it with a microscope to have an exact idea of it's composition, let alone the making process...
I still hope to have the possibility to get the "test" note examined and compared to an "ordinary" note...
-
It would be a disservice to blackball this situation just because of frustrating situations that may have arisen
I don't think misinformation is a service to the hobby. It would be a much greater disservice to turn a blind eye to the hyperbole that caused so much frustration. A label was attached to a bundle of notes and then they were marketed as a rare earth shattering discovery in the world of Canadian paper money. A lot of collectors scrambled to buy these notes at inflated prices. The only pitty is that there were no checks in place to prevent this from happening.
I disagree with many members on this subject because I believe that they are different
That is fine. You are entitled to your opinion. But then lets stick to calling them "different $5.00" or "HOW's in question" rather than TEST NOTES! They are not test notes or even "test notes" unless they've been declared that by BOC. All the speculation and bantying around of the term "test" or "experimental" to a note that has had no verification is simply wrong. Even if your experiments conclude that the notes were made of different paper, or they have had adjuvents applied, then you still need BOC to verify that these notes were intended for public testing to be dubbed "test notes."
Despite the manner in which this whole subject came up (which has upset many people)
If it upset people well then there is good reason. People don't get upset for no reason. The manner in which the subject was brought about has definitely opened a "can of worms." Now it is important for collectors/dealers to understand that before claims are made, some verification is needed. This may take time, but that is the only way to keep dealers/collectors honest and buyers from being "upset," "burned" or turned off the hobby.
-
There is one thing we know forsure.. They are NOT test notes! The bank of Canada has no need to issue test notes anymore, instead they may issue an internal test note (like JHS, JPH) but would not be available to the public. Of course, there is no harm to keep the discussion open on HOW notes but perhaps this topic should be moved to a new location perhaps in the bank of Canada section and the title should be changed to "HOW discussion"
-
Just to clarify, when I wrote "test notes" IN Quotations, I wrote that to refer to these notes which were erroneously reported as being test notes- but were originally referred to as "test notes". Thus the quotations. Test notes out of quotations would have been me claiming that they are in fact test notes.
I make no claim that they are test notes. Enough energy wasted off topic from the original question I posed:
SO, to get back on topic, look past the first line (which I have explained now) and please tell me what your take is on the properties of the note.
I think copperpete knows more about this than alot of people, especially me. One of the reasons I invited discussions.
-
It would be a disservice to blackball this situation just because of frustrating situations that may have arisen
I don't think misinformation is a service to the hobby. It would be a much greater disservice to turn a blind eye to the hyperbole that caused so much frustration. A label was attached to a bundle of notes and then they were marketed as a rare earth shattering discovery in the world of Canadian paper money. A lot of collectors scrambled to buy these notes at inflated prices. The only pitty is that there were no checks in place to prevent this from happening.
I disagree with many members on this subject because I believe that they are different
That is fine. You are entitled to your opinion. But then lets stick to calling them "different $5.00" or "HOW's in question" rather than TEST NOTES! They are not test notes or even "test notes" unless they've been declared that by BOC. All the speculation and bantying around of the term "test" or "experimental" to a note that has had no verification is simply wrong. Even if your experiments conclude that the notes were made of different paper, or they have had adjuvents applied, then you still need BOC to verify that these notes were intended for public testing to be dubbed "test notes."
Despite the manner in which this whole subject came up (which has upset many people)
If it upset people well then there is good reason. People don't get upset for no reason. The manner in which the subject was brought about has definitely opened a "can of worms." Now it is important for collectors/dealers to understand that before claims are made, some verification is needed. This may take time, but that is the only way to keep dealers/collectors honest and buyers from being "upset," "burned" or turned off the hobby.
1. "I don't think misinformation is a service to the hobby." Nobody does. To assume that others believe it is (from other posts) is wrong. It was never stated or implied. Nor was it ever implied to turn a blind eye to the past. We know what happened, and now that is all just part of the drama of these HOW notes. What WAS implied is that we should get off our anger hang-up, and do something about it, instead of boarding it up and throwing away the situation. I too have to get over wasting money on these.
2. Read the post carefully and make sure to understand that I do not intend these to be considered test notes.
3. Yes people were upset about this, myself included. So, instead of putting it to bed and wanting to not be reminded that many of us bought in, which would be ego bruising (it is for me anyway) we could instead try to figure them out. I don't blame anyone for being royally ticked off about the situation. But instead of being angry about it and voicing it, why can't we pick up the other half of the job and voice a possible solution. THAT is what my post was about.
4. There are many other parts of the post that talk about the possibilities with the way the paper was treated and all that. For the progression of this topic please consider more than just a few elements of a post before giving a response that implies other that what I have stated. No offense taken, but it just steered the topic miles from where the focus was: finding out what the heck is different about them and to what degree.
Huds
-
Hi,
I can confirm I have a new range of this ''error'' in the paper or ''test note''.Tell it what you want but I got three of those in sequence(unc) and the paper is really,really,really different.I'm not perfect in english to find all the words to tell you how the paper is really different than the regular one.The serial number is:HOW 0471694-95-96.It's found near of Mtl.
Bye
Claude
-
Pleasantries removed, here is a pair of emails between myself and the Bank of Canada:
Is the Bank of Canada currently running any circulation trials of banknotes, specifically with Canadian Journey Series $5 notes numbered in the vicinity of HOW 0530000 through HOW 0849999? If so, what is being tested by these notes?
There have been notes found in circulation that are considerably different in composition, and by all reasonable logic, could not have been produced accidentally.
Are these notes polymer trial notes testing for durability?
The timing could not be better... Release the notes 6 months in advance of their swift recall when the upgraded notes come out. They get 6 months of circulation, then they are quickly culled with all the other $5 notes at the end of the year when they can be examined and measured for how well they stood up.
From time to time, the Bank of Canada does conduct circulation trials of specific bank notes for research purposes. As you can appreciate, we cannot share the details pertaining to these circulation trials as it could compromise the research results.
With respect to your inquiry about Canadian Journey series $5 notes, the Bank can confirm that no circulation trials are taking place at this time. However, the Bank did change secure paper suppliers about two years ago. While the technical specification for the paper remained unchanged, the change in supplier may account for the subtle differences you may have noticed in the paper used in the production of the original Canadian Journey series $5 and $10 notes.
-
[highlight]With respect to your inquiry about Canadian Journey series $5 notes, the Bank can confirm that no circulation trials are taking place at this time[/highlight]
I read this and gather that they have done test on different notes. It may not be in the HOW but maybe before that. It is a very open ended answer to the question.
That is my thoughts.
Polarbear
-
I agree that this should be moved to another thread, maybe a stand alone thread.
I have found HOU with the same paper as the HOW's in question.
They are from an Untapped half brick that came to one of the banks I work with.
NOT ALL of the notes are like that strange type. With 5 bundles, it is easy to tell the differences when you line them up side by side.
Please see picture for reference on one of the bundles.
From feeling them first, (and knowing right away that they were not regular), I moved to the "trying to see it" step. I lined up the bundles on end (like in the pic) and the points were the paper changed corresponded exactly to the note changes (ie: from a range skip, or to an insert group).
There were some HOU inserts in here- regular paper. They show up as regular paper when comparing them. The bundle shown in the pic is one that has just a regular range skip in it. (Meaninng those are not all inserts - but I wish). Will continue next post...
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Continued.
This group should nail down exactly a changing point between the regular paper and the new paper.
The 1st bundle that is 76640xx is the "in question" paper, hands down, no question. The inserts, which appear after 7664068, fit between that note and 7664030. The inserts are from an unconfirmed portion of the range as of this moment ( HOU 6.904) and are of regular paper. The bundle resumes with the "in question" paper until it is finished.
Side Q: Could it be that CBN is inserting notes exactly where damaged ones have been removed?
Or are they just switching up the insert spots. I have heard about this here and there, but have never witnessed it like how I have here. (Answer in another thread). For the record, I have had three cases now of CBN inserts being found in the exact spot. Happened with FEH, and HOW and now HOU here.
Next:
The next bundle crackles like regular paper and feels like regular paper and smells like regular paper. It is undoubtedly regular paper to feel it as well. And it looks different from the "in Q" paper (see above pic).
The numbers of this bundle are: HOU 7659781-750, followed by HOU 7659999-932 - all 12/22.
This leads me to believe that a logical changeover would be possibly at 7660000.
The next bundle is: 7664169-126 29/39 ("in Q" paper), followed by 7659388-333 32/43 (regular)
Next:
HOU 7662068 43/37 ("in Q" paper), followed by HOU inserts again 43/37 in an unconfirmed range as of this point, but are also regular paper (range HOU 6.902). Again, the inserts replace the exact notes missing - as in the sister bundle. After the inserts, it resumes with HOU 7662030-000, then 7662249-219 which are 43/37 as well.
The last bundle:
HOU 7664719-627 (in Q paper) 25/33, followed by 7659888-882 in regular paper.
-
new pic posted. please see!
-
HOU 7.90 - 8.21
Normal paper.
-
HOW 5$ made of very thin paper found in Val-Belair (Quebec City), #0432409, :) ::)which is near the number of the notes Cbeaulieu has found in MTL: HOW 0471694-95-96. ::)
-
HOU 7.90 - 8.21
Normal paper.
Need to refine this quoted range. This was an outline... More info to come on it.
Second,
HOW 0873100 found today.
"In question" paper. Knew it the instant it hit my hand.
-
BWJM,it would be good if the Bank of Canada began to issue polymer notes.We've had polymer notes over here in New Zealand since 1999.This has led to the coining (pun!) of the terms 'soft plastic money' (banknotes) & 'hard plastic money' (credit cards).
You argue that it would be good if the BoC issues polymer notes but you fail to elaborate. In your opinion, why should the BoC move to polymer?
-
Just picked up a very mixed brick of HOW 694xxxx, 695xxxx, all with the same paper in question. The notes all came in descending order. No inserts or radars.
HOW 6940482-450 6940362-264 FP 36 BP 48
HOW 6945481-451 6945362-263 FP 33 BP 28
HOW 6945999-951 6945913-813 FP 17 BP 18
HOW 6947950-914 6947812-750 FP 45 BP 14
HOW 6948881-863 FP 24 BP 47
HOW 6948450-414 6948312-250 FP 40 BP 17
HOW 6949999-952 6949914-814 FP 27 BP 33
HOW 6950499-483 6950449-363 6950263-250 FP 47 BP 15
P.S. Also picked up a mixed brick of HOV 615xxxx which was completely normal.
-
I was just starting to get worried that I made a mistake by tearing up my HOH9784390, because it is the only one I have in that range. But I checked out the other ranges I have and noticed that the HOH9709699 feels like regular paper money, but my HOH979xxxx inserts(which I found 6 by the way) are on the same stretchy paper. These were found in the same HOU mixed brick 184xxxx,& 185xxxx. My other mixed brick HOU207xxxx had no inserts and rips and tears normally.
For the record the HOU 1.84, 1.85 are the same paper in question, as the HOH replacements.
HOU 207xxxx was normal. Too many beers and unfortunately didn't note all the info.
-
It is possible that 9709699 (9700000- 9719999) may be regular.
And that the notes 979xxxx (9780000- 9799999) may be the "in question" paper.
The ranges
9720000- 9739999
9740000- 9759999
9760000- 9779999
are still left unaccounted for - although they have been recorded as inserts.
I had HOH 9.89 inserts that were regular paper. (Has been reported to Gilles after his list was sent out)
AS SOON AS THE JOURNEY $5s are done, the info we have yet to find will become lost forever. If you can order bricks, get them please (this is for anyone).
-
Regarding this varnish on the NEW $5s:
Maybe it is time to revisit what could have caused this on the HOU bundle: seen on a previous page of this thread.
Secondly, perhaps this is why my question regarding a specific chemial application to the notes was unanswered.
There is something important to remember. Paper thick/thin ness is secondary. Coating is the main issue.
-
Merry Christmas! One thread we can put to bed. Here is an email response from Sylvie Dionne from the Bank of Canada: Bold added for emphasis.
*******************
This is in response to your bank notes email inquiry. Please find our responses right after each of your questions.
a) Did the BOC ask the CBN to run through some of the new supplied paper (for the upgraded notes) as a test run on the durability of the coating?
We work with both printers from time to time on various tests. However, the bank notes referred to in your message were issued without coating on the regular bank note paper. It is always possible that notes are exposed to chemicals once in circulation which may affect how they feel or smell.
b) Then, once the CBN got sold, and then sold again to primarily US investors, did they get axed out of their contract? (or lose the contract to produce the new notes?)
For questions regarding ownership of CBN it would be best to contact them directly. They can be contacted by calling (613) 722-3421.
c) The apparant coating that I found on the CBN HOU and HOZ prefixed notes, is that the same coating as on the new upgraded $5s?
As mentioned above, the bank notes you are referring to were issued without coating on the regular bank note paper.
Thanks for your interest in Canadian bank notes.
Cordially,
Sylvie Dionne
Bank Note Communication and Compliance Team
Bank of Canada
1-888-513-8212
www.bankofcanada.ca
And with that, we can move forward. (I am sure most of us already have ;) )