Author
Topic: ELU 9.720-9.990  (Read 3330 times)
mmars
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,352
  • money is gregarious
« on: July 16, 2010, 12:09:10 am »

Did anyone else notice that insert range ELU 9.720-9.990 is not included in the latest Charlton catalogue?

[insert]p=elu&s=9.720&e=9.990[/insert]

    No hay banda  
Mortgage Guy
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2010, 12:24:12 am »

Did anyone else notice that insert range ELU 9.720-9.990 is not included in the latest Charlton catalogue?

[insert]p=elu&s=9.720&e=9.990[/insert]


Yes, I spoke to Gilles about it. He will make mention of this in his September letter/.

MG

Always Buying Any Replacements and Special Serial Numbered Notes In C.Unc+ Condition
mmars
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,352
  • money is gregarious
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2011, 02:46:57 pm »

There seems to be conflicting information.  I was told that this $20 sheet insert range was pulled from Charlton specifically because there is ample evidence of entire bundles of these ELU notes that were found.  Specifically, someone found a number of bundles, some containing special serial numbered notes (including at least one rotator) that were sold on eBay at least a year ago.

{http://www.give-a-buck.com/special/ELU-bundles.jpg}

Now, I am being told that Gilles Pomerleau still considers ELU 9.72-9.99 an insert range and that the range was simply omitted from Charlton?...
http://www.cdnpapermoney.com/forum/index.php?topic=12083.msg53270

Someone knows the truth out there.  So what is it?  I know what I think is the truth, but I am not responsible for the range being omitted from Charlton.

    No hay banda  
Mortgage Guy
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2011, 03:37:43 pm »

I really hope that the idea that if bundles of replacements are found this automatically eliminates them as replacements. There have been not only entire bundles of replacements found but also entire bricks of replacements found. Before everybody jumps all over this and states that clearly entire bricks of replacements are impossible the fact that examples exist of entire bricks of “X” replacements makes it impossible to dismiss. What's interesting about the ELU is that this range was already confirmed before these notes surfaced, and yes I am very aware of this find as I was sent info from the person that found these. I do believe that the idea of entire bundles of replacements found sounds very radical to most but the information gathered by Brick searching can be drastically different then that of a Bundle searcher and even more so a circulated note searcher.
I would suggest you give Gilles a call, He's always happy to discuss bank notes.

Keep us posted, please.

Regards,
MG

Always Buying Any Replacements and Special Serial Numbered Notes In C.Unc+ Condition
abyss
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 78
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2011, 03:56:14 pm »

Personally, the only concern I would have is that if these are replacements which it seems that are, since they have been confirmed as such...I would only hope that the price in the catalogue reflect this large amount of replacements being found..
It would seem that if they are priced accordingly, it would not be an issue...
The fact is that you still want replacement notes to be recognized for what they really are..no matter how many have been found....and of course priced accordingly..
mmars
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,352
  • money is gregarious
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2011, 06:58:01 pm »

ELU 9.720-9.990 was confirmed as an insert range because notes were (presumably) found inserted and replacing regular notes.  The size of the range corresponds to a ream of notes, and the number of sheets in the ream is equal to the skip interval on each sheet.  So for ELU 9.720-9.990, that's 6000 sheets.  Finding a handful of inserts from this range does not prove that all 6000 sheets were used as inserts.  In fact, when the printers cut up sheets, it is 100 at a time.  We know this from patterns of cup marks through every 100 note bundle.

The elephant in the room is the fact that not every note from an insert range is a true insert note.  That's a fact that no insert collector or brick hunter wants to hear because it is a threat to the viability of collecting inserts.  That this has been happening even as far back as asterisk and X notes is proven, and yet the essential truth of what is happening is largely ignored, deliberately or otherwise.  Many people don't want to accept that inserts and regular notes are printed the same way.  The only difference is the order in which notes are issued.  It's akin to taking two stacks of sheets and mixing them together like playing cards.

So what is happening is the printers are grabbing a few sheets, using them as inserts in reams of regular notes, and then cutting up the leftovers and making them into bricks just like they are regular notes.  I seriously doubt they are keeping track of the serial numbers of replacement sheets because each sheet represents 45 smaller ranges.  Anyone who thinks there's a "master list" of inserts is just fooling themselves.

I agree with the comments of abyss that pricing based on population is what matters most.  This is why smaller ranges tend to cost more, but for every range, there exists the possibility that at least a portion of the notes are not true inserts.  Collectors and time will determine what the value of these notes will be.  But if the information is being incorporated selectively into the catalogue, and there is conflicting information about insert ranges between the catalogue, Gilles' lists and the SNDB, then I think collectors are being done a huge disservice.

    No hay banda  
JB-2007
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,845
« Reply #6 on: May 01, 2011, 08:57:41 pm »

but for every range, there exists the possibility that at least a portion of the notes are not true inserts. 
This is quite possible. One of the reasons why many collectors choose not to collect these new insert replacement notes.
It was so much better when we had the * and the X !
 

Login with username, password and session length