Author
Topic: EGU  (Read 18926 times)
golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« on: July 16, 2015, 11:55:33 pm »

I have a 1986 $2 note  with the prefix letters EGU and the signatures of  Thiessen - Crow. The checklist of prefix letters shows EG denom. Letters and series letters from A-P and  EGR. EGU.  Is  shown but with Bonin- Thiessen signatures. Any information would be helpful.

So here are some pictures,  # on the note is EGU 6658246 with the signatures of Thiessen - Crow. The front of the note is out of register printing... when i put a second note with it you can see the signatures clearly.

« Last Edit: July 18, 2015, 07:37:30 pm by BWJM »
JB-2007
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,847
« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2015, 12:15:22 am »

I find it very strange that you have a Thiessen-Crow EGU note as there have been no anomaly (good-over) notes reported in that prefix. Yet there is a first for everything and there have been several good-over notes reported in the $2 and $5 bird series.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2015, 07:37:56 pm by BWJM »
venga50
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2015, 06:44:52 pm »

Would you be able to take a photo of the back of the note held up to a bright light source? This should allow us to see the signatures and confirm the photos below are the front and back of the same note.

EGU is one of the prefixes of the uncut sheets of $2 notes that were sold by the Bank of Canada to the public in 1995-96. Therefore it would have been possible for a bogus EGU cutting error to be made after the sheets left the BoC. However what's puzzling is that the uncut EGU sheets have the Bonin-Thiessen signatures, not Thiessen-Crow.

golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2015, 12:04:18 am »

golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2015, 12:05:47 am »

golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2015, 12:15:25 am »

I understand about the bogus cutting error, but the back of the note is centered and the face is off center with part of the other note showing. So i don't think it is a bogus cutting error.
venga50
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
« Reply #6 on: July 19, 2015, 02:05:57 pm »



Wow this is a fascinating note. So yes, it is clearly an out-of-register printing error.  My 25th (2013) edition of the Charlton catalogue values it at $200 in UNC condition.  However I wouldn't accept this value until we solve the mystery of why your EGU note has the Thiessen-Crow signatures. Maybe you should contact the Bank of Canada directly and e-mail them the last photo you uploaded here.  I think there are a few forum members here who might be able to give you a contact with the BoC.


golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« Reply #7 on: July 19, 2015, 02:53:55 pm »

Thank you, and if someone can give me the information i will contact the bank of Canada
mmars
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,352
  • money is gregarious
« Reply #8 on: July 19, 2015, 04:52:14 pm »

The note is worth $10,000+.  Let's not beat around the bush... if that note is what it appears to be, it would be the highlight of any major paper money auction, regardless of whether it's from sheet issue or circulation issue.

"Good overs" from the Bird series are not without precedence.  Five dollar sheets with Bonin-Thiessen signatures apparently found their way, years after being printed, into prefix HNB at the end of the series when notes carried the signatures of Knight-Dodge.  Given this precedence, it's not a huge stretch of the imagination to see the same thing happening to a misprinted $2 Thiessen-Crow sheet finding its way into the Bonin-Thiessen sheets at the end of the series.  Deliberate mistake or not, the note is what it is, and you should only entertain offers north of $10k.

    No hay banda  
golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« Reply #9 on: July 19, 2015, 10:03:31 pm »

Thanks for that news, but am a collector at heart, so it won't be for sale any time soon. But would like to  see it in a  book one day.
JB-2007
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,847
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2015, 10:48:53 pm »

Very interesting note indeed but like they say "if its too good to be true, it probably is". Have you checked the security features on this note? Keep in mind that many $2 notes were produced for collections back in 1996 when they changed over to the coin, its likely that many fake twos were also produced. My best advise is if the security features are there, have your note evaluated and confirmed by a professional grader.
golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2015, 11:25:22 pm »

What things should i look for.
Gary_T
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,082
  • CPMS radar member 1551
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2015, 08:33:04 am »

Looks real to me. I would say just bring it in to BCS to get graded. The only reason someone would fake a note like this is to make alot of money if you paid next to nothing for it it's real. Good for you.

Gary_T
golddigger
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2015, 09:33:58 am »

$150.00 is what i paid.
venga50
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2015, 11:58:48 am »

Looks real to me. I would say just bring it in to BCS to get graded. The only reason someone would fake a note like this is to make alot of money if you paid next to nothing for it it's real. Good for you.

Has BCS changed their policy about grading error notes? I thought they didn't accept error notes for grading.

 

Login with username, password and session length