Author
Topic: GPM28 Misc. typos  (Read 3135 times)
Al
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
« on: October 10, 2015, 09:30:58 pm »

There is an error on page 366 under BC69aA. Macklem Carney 5 dollar bill replacement note. It states there are 9000 printed yet the span is 1009000. I believe this is just a typo that there is only 9000 printed. Beware buyers.
Al
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2015, 09:42:41 pm »

Now that I am in again to the serial number data base  I see that the error is in the 2503 which should say3503xxx-3512xxx
BWJM
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,956
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2015, 10:18:08 pm »

I've made a note and will see that it is corrected in the next edition.
regent
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2015, 08:33:01 pm »

page 366,
line BC-69bA $5 2013 macklem-poloz; HBM(8.028-8.037) 9000  $5 $5 $20 $60 $85 $100 is missing
GPM september 2014,
 
this will be in the next edition ,discussed with Gilles

Regent  CPMS Life Member 59

walktothewater
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,100
  • Join the Journey
« Reply #4 on: November 02, 2015, 05:55:55 pm »

P355 (this typo was missed in 2015 27th Ed too)

BC-64bA-i $20 2009  should be 2010 Jenkins-Carney AUB (9.000M-9.040M)
JB-2007
  • Forum Moderators
  • *
  • Posts: 1,843
« Reply #5 on: November 03, 2015, 10:23:11 am »

p.341 note on HOH notes:
Evidently most were not released for circulation. Highest number reported is HOH 0187763.

There is an HOH 2004 note listed in serial number db listed... HOH 5950855. Was this ever verified and confirmed?
kobecurrency
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 639
« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2015, 10:07:47 pm »

p.341 note on HOH notes:
Evidently most were not released for circulation. Highest number reported is HOH 0187763.

There is an HOH 2004 note listed in serial number db listed... HOH 5950855. Was this ever verified and confirmed?

On August 26/2014, under the thread "Polymer Series/RE: Signatures changeover on polymer fives", I posted the following reply on Manada's question:-

Quote from: Manada on August 26, 2014, 06:22:45 AM
Kobecurrency do you have a photo of the 2004 HOH5950855?
................................................................

Unfortunately I don't.

I do remember when I input it last Oct., it showed that the previous high was something may be in the  0.2 range.  I did double check the print date was right and if my posting was correct.  I held it out for a while to see if anyone would mention it here, but nothing happened.

Later when we were all looking for HBG M/C, I believe I inadvertently turned it into the bank without thinking. Now I don't have anything to prove I did have that note. :'( :'(

JB-2007
  • Forum Moderators
  • *
  • Posts: 1,843
« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2015, 10:38:27 pm »

On August 26/2014, under the thread "Polymer Series/RE: Signatures changeover on polymer fives", I posted the following reply on Manada's question:-

Quote from: Manada on August 26, 2014, 06:22:45 AM
Kobecurrency do you have a photo of the 2004 HOH5950855?
................................................................

Unfortunately I don't.

I do remember when I input it last Oct., it showed that the previous high was something may be in the  0.2 range.  I did double check the print date was right and if my posting was correct.  I held it out for a while to see if anyone would mention it here, but nothing happened.

Later when we were all looking for HBG M/C, I believe I inadvertently turned it into the bank without thinking. Now I don't have anything to prove I did have that note. :'( :'(

That's where the question comes in now... should the next edition catalog be updated or would it stay as is seeing no proof is available?
Manada
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2015, 05:04:41 pm »

That's where the question comes in now... should the next edition catalog be updated or would it stay as is seeing no proof is available?

Without any proof the catalogue cannot be updated. Everything always needs to be confirmed.

But always, there remained the discipline of steel. - Conan the Barbarian
Manada
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
« Reply #9 on: November 19, 2015, 04:22:34 pm »

I just noticed that the serial # database has "FMS 0.400M-0.440M    Confirmed Sheet Rep'l Range (GP-Jan2015)", but it is missing from or no longer confirmed on the 28th edition of Charlton. Does anyone know?

But always, there remained the discipline of steel. - Conan the Barbarian
regent
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
« Reply #10 on: November 19, 2015, 06:34:33 pm »

I just noticed that the serial # database has "FMS 0.400M-0.440M    Confirmed Sheet Rep'l Range (GP-Jan2015)", but it is missing from or no longer confirmed on the 28th edition of Charlton. Does anyone know?
you are right gilles found out ,after the fact , that this replacement was a regular note
regent

Regent  CPMS Life Member 59

Manada
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
« Reply #11 on: November 19, 2015, 07:37:57 pm »

Thanks regent!

But always, there remained the discipline of steel. - Conan the Barbarian
 

Login with username, password and session length