Author
Topic: Birth Notes - Year Notes - Did anyone know how BoC treated the years?  (Read 86 times)
Rupiah
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 803

The GPMC catalog uses the term birth year serial numbered notes. In the 30th edition 2018 on page 395 it refers to serial numbers 1900 to 2013 (I hope that this has been updated in the 2019 edition)

I find the use of the term birth year rather limiting because people may have any reason to collect such notes (anniversaries, graduation etc.) But that's not what this post is about.

Its about what the Governor of Bank of Canada considers a "year" note.

I don't know if anyone watched the video of events when the vertical Viola Desmond $10 was put into circulation.

The Governor of the Bank of Canada Stephen Poloz presented a plaque to Viola Desmond's sister Wanda Robson and another to John Young, President and CEO of the Museum of Human Rights. The plaque consisted of two notes and an engraving of Viola Desmond (for Wanda Robson) and the museum (for John Young).


Governor Poloz said that the two notes on each of the plaques had years as serial numbers:


For Wanda Robson - 1946 and 2010

For John Young - 2014 and 2018 (2014 date the Museum opened and 2018 date when Museum was put on the note)


Now to get to the point.


I thought that Governor Poloz was following the interpretation in the GPMC and that the notes would actually be the following serial numbers:


0001946

0002010

0002014

0002018


I was curious about the prefix of the bank notes so I made an inquiry to the Bank of Canada. Although I found out that the prefix was FFB, to my surprise the serial number was not as per GPMC protocol. Here is the exact text of the response I got:

Quote
Good day,

 
Please find below the complete serial numbers of the framed bank notes presented by Governor Stephen S. Poloz to Wanda Robson, as well as the notes presented to the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.
 
•   Wanda Robson: FFB3842010, FFB3831946
•   The Canadian Museum for Human Rights: FFB3842018, FFB3842014


So if BoC can treat a note ending in 2010 without regard to the first three digits as a year note then should not the collecting community adopt it.

For those curious about the plaque presentation please see the link to the video and start from time stamp at approximately 36:50


https://youtu.be/7g2aU4wLRN0

Wonder what paper money would say if it could talk?
AZ
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2019, 09:00:20 am »

The GPMC catalog uses the term birth year serial numbered notes. In the 30th edition 2018 on page 395 it refers to serial numbers 1900 to 2013 (I hope that this has been updated in the 2019 edition)

I find the use of the term birth year rather limiting because people may have any reason to collect such notes (anniversaries, graduation etc.) But that's not what this post is about.

Its about what the Governor of Bank of Canada considers a "year" note.

I don't know if anyone watched the video of events when the vertical Viola Desmond $10 was put into circulation.

The Governor of the Bank of Canada Stephen Poloz presented a plaque to Viola Desmond's sister Wanda Robson and another to John Young, President and CEO of the Museum of Human Rights. The plaque consisted of two notes and an engraving of Viola Desmond (for Wanda Robson) and the museum (for John Young).

Governor Poloz said that the two notes on each of the plaques had years as serial numbers:

For Wanda Robson - 1946 and 2010

For John Young - 2014 and 2018 (2014 date the Museum opened and 2018 date when Museum was put on the note)

Now to get to the point.

I thought that Governor Poloz was following the interpretation in the GPMC and that the notes would actually be the following serial numbers:

0001946
0002010
0002014
0002018

I was curious about the prefix of the bank notes so I made an inquiry to the Bank of Canada. Although I found out that the prefix was FFB, to my surprise the serial number was not as per GPMC protocol. Here is the exact text of the response I got:

So if BoC can treat a note ending in 2010 without regard to the first three digits as a year note then should not the collecting community adopt it.

For those curious about the plaque presentation please see the link to the video and start from time stamp at approximately 36:50

https://youtu.be/7g2aU4wLRN0

No, we certainly should not treat such notes (where first 3 digits are arbitrary) as year notes. These notes were simply the easiest for the BOC to find given the request, and they never consulted the GPMC or were going to. I am sure that by presenting these notes the BOC did not mean to establish the new collecting standard!
walktothewater
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,071
  • Join the Journey
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2019, 08:24:34 pm »

Quote
No, we certainly should not treat such notes (where first 3 digits are arbitrary) as year notes.

- I agree. 
 

Login with username, password and session length