AOS sheet replacements become SNR's

News: Welcome to the Canadian Paper Money Forum.

After 4 months of reported finds, it has now been determined that the AOS sheet replacement notes are actually SNRs.  The AOS (4.840M - 4.880M) sheet replacement range has been changed to the AOS (4.845M - 4.850M) SNR
range.

My understanding is that the once confirmed AOS sheet replacement range of 40K was 4840000-4880000.
Now this range has changed to a 5K 4845000-4850000 range

So what happens to the supposedly original confirmed notes that were in the range of 4840000-4845000 (5,000 notes) and 4850000-4880000 (30,000 notes).

Do we assume that these once confirmed 35,000 notes are no longer replacement notes?

And how does a once confirmed range become unconfirmed?

I assume that in order to have originally confirmed the original 40 K range there had to be the suposedly 2-3 confirmations from reliable sources.  This has me somewhat confused!

This brick data was reported to Gilles Pomerleau the same day.  Based on multiple independant reports of
similar findings the following replacement ranges have been confirmed.

2006 $5 Jenkins-Dodge, AOS (4.840M - 4.880M)         40K     Sheet Replacement Range

2006 $5 Jenkins-Dodge, AOS (4.893M - 4.894M)           1K     Single Note Replacement Range

AOS 4863311 75/79 found in place of AOS 6463999 75/79

So then the replacement that was found by Punkys' Dad is no longer a valid replacement note?

Or am I just  interpreting this incorrectly

All the AOS finds that were used to originally confirm this range as sheet replacements were in the
AOS (4.845M - 4.850M) range.  The range was originally set as 4.840M - 4.880M to account for the
40K ream that would be allocated as sheet replacements.  I am not aware of any reports of AOS
replacements that are outside of the 4.845M to 4.850M range, except one report of a single 4.863M
replacement.

The confusion arose because the original 4.845M and 4.846M AOS replacements that were found, had the
same front and back position numbers as the rest of the brick.  As such it was assumed they were sheet
replacements.  Since then 4.848M and 4.849M replacements were found with different front and back position
numbers then the rest of the notes in the brick.  These are definately SNRs.

Gilles will be including in his September 1st newsletter a technical explanation as to how the AOS 4.845M and
AOS 4.846M SNRs could have the same FP / BP as the rest of the brick.

If you have known AOS replacements that fall outside the two AOS SNR ranges please provide me with the
data for submission to Gilles.  All AOS replacement finds that I am aware of are within the two SNR ranges,
with the exception of the single AOS 4.863M.

Mike, if you would like a detailed clarification from Gilles personally, please give him a call.  As usual he will be
more than willing to spend time with a collector to explain any technical matters.

AOS 4863311 75/79 found in place of AOS 6463999 75/79

The replacement found by PD is a SNR.  The range has not yet been confirmed as his was the only find
to date.  It is not uncommon for a find to remain unconfirmed for many months or never be confirmed.

I found AOR 2642467 ( 88/67 ) replacing AOR 95555146 ( 69/57 ) but no one else has made a similar find. 
As such, there is a very good chance that this range will never be confirmed.

There are recent reports of AOV 4.880M SNRs being found in two adjoining bricks of AOZ.  This is the only
reported find of this range and is waiting on an additional find for confirmation.  With less than 1% of $5
bricks being searched, and many more SNRs being used, there is a very good chance that ranges will go
unfound and that some found ranges will never be confirmed.

You just need to ask Gary (sudzee) about how many replacement note ranges he has found, that have never
been confirmed, and you will see how the odds are against many brick searchers.

Another question is that if AOS notes were found in the original 40K range (and not found as replacements) and are  NOT now part of that original confirmed range collectors could literally have notes that were purchased as sheet replacements, but now are worth no more than face value. AT what point or lapse of time must occur until one can assume that the range established is truly valid?
Why would one automatically assume that the notes should be in a 40 K range and not just keep it to a range where the actual notes were found and confirmed.

It seems that the AOH replacements which are now at 23 different ranges from 1K-120K ranges are bound to sooner or later combine at some point.
It will be interesting to see when they combine, how many people have lost money by purchasing 1K SNR and later find that they were not.

It has been accepted for sometime that AOH SNR ranges could combine.  It is for this reason that many
Journey note collectors have stayed on the sidelines with respect to SNRs to wait and see how the AOH
ranges shake out.  The number of AOH replacements used is directly related to the early production
problems with the new security upgraded $5 notes.  It is obvious from  the limited number of replacement
note ranges that exist after AOS that these production problems have been resolved.

The AOS replacements were only seen in AOS bricks after 4M and were not seen at all in AOT forward.  The
total number of AOS replacements found is very small, probably under 100.  There have been no eBay
sales of AOS replacements and very few private sales.

If you have read the extensive research provided by Hudson you would understand why sheet
replacement ranges of BAI $5 notes are allocated in blocks of 40K.  It is only SNR ranges that are stated
in increments of 1K.

There is an acknowledged disclaimer that replacement note ranges may expand, combine or change.  This
incident with the AOS is quite unique in that it is the first time that SNRs have been found with the same
front and back position numbers as the rest of the brick.

Until we have a collector inside the printers, we will never know exactly how replacements are being used
or how notes are assembled for shipping.  At the moment we have the best system in place that can be
expected when you have no disclosure by the BoC or the printers.

No one can control the price a collector pays for a note, except the collector himself.  Only time will tell
whether a note appreciates or declines in value.  I had the opportunity to purchase FEP replacements
at $100 sometime ago and turned down the offer.  The same held true for HOG 9.920M when they were
being flogged at $250 each.  Now you can't find one for under $650.

The collectors who are sitting on the sidelines watching the SNR ranges settle out may be astute or they
may end up missing the boat.

Thanks for the additional information.
FRIEDSQUID

I have confirmed AOS 4.86 and will provide the information to Gilles. 

Maybe people should post all of their findings ( as soon as they can ) whether they feel it is important or not. At least this way all of the information will be there for collectors to view and to make their own conclusions 

BTW, I too have been guilty of not posting all of my information while brick searching. This I am going to change………

Scott

Scott,

You make a very good point about brick searchers posting their finds on the forum.  I think in general most
of the brick searchers who are members on the forum do post their findings.  If you do a quick review of
the Insert & Replacement and Journey Highs & Lows section you will see postings for replacement finds made
by myself, Hudson, friedsquid, polarbear, sudzee, viauauto, Roberto, Manada, Punkys Dad, yourself and
others.

Unfortunately there are several other members, who will go unnamed, who feel no need to report their finds.
I suspect the motivation for this is financial, as it benefits them personally if the general collecting community
does not know the true number of replacements being found.

This is compounded by the fact that a large number of brick searchers do not use the forum as a medium for
communicating their finds, and instead relay the information to Gilles directly.

I have tried to improve the dissemination of information about new finds through my bi-weekly email distribution
list.  In the past this information was disseminated every two months.  This left the opportunity for brick
searchers and others with intimate knowledge to capitalize financially while the average collector waited for
information.

There will be no perfect system for collecting and distributing this information.  There will also be no way to
determine the true scarcity of many replacement note ranges while brick searchers continue to practice a
policy of non-disclosure.

As you have stated, only time will tell the true value and scarcity of a note.

...Arthur

I agree that posting and sharing information is good. When it comes to rarer notes this is great but as has been my luck I will not bore people with a few AOK 2.06 Finds or things like that. For those of us who has gone several months without a single find it is nice to know at least a few others are finding Replacements.

Yesterday I found 2 AOS notes (AOS 4864048 and AOS 4864049) in a Brick of AOM.

I will pass on the details of this information to Gilles myself. 

Well considering in problem we have here...I'll try and order another brick or better yet two from the same branch again that I acquired the AOS 4863311 and hope that I could land a sister brick from the same ream. Cross your fingers cause I didn't really want to go back to this branch so soon. I just don't want them to shut me down, but in hopes I could find another that may provide some critcal data for us.

PD

PS. From now on, I should get two bricks instead of one.

It sounds like you gambled on AOS and lost

Actually I didn't and that is not the problem at all. So if this is why anyone assumes that this post was started that is not the case.
And even if I had lost on this or any other note it was my choice to buy it.

Friedsquid, if you're waiting for someone to admit fault and apologize for making a mistake about AOS inserts... good luck.

I am not by any means waiting for anything. I understand that there is a lot of work that goes into the process and research. All I would like is to see a little more information available in the forum whether it turns out to be worthwhile or not in the end, but atleast it gives people information at the time.  Everyone can base their decisions on that information.  It doesn't matter what we are talking about..... it is up to each individual to make their own decisions on the information available to them.

I obviously worded my original post in a way that people are reading things into it that are not what I intended to say, or imply.

FRIEDSQUID

Breaking News...Have been blessed by Numismatica, the Angel of da Bricks.

http://www.cdnpapermoney.com/forum/index.php?topic=4813.0

AOS 4862311

Dei Gratia mons,
PD

I know this topic has been left alone for awhile, and, at risk of beating a dead hoarse....

about a month ago, my boss received with his weekly withdraw from the bank, 2 crisp bricks of 5's, one was quite mixed up, although all AOT's, it consited of 3 or 4 different consecitive lots.  I assumed that it must have gotten mixed with other bricks at the bank.  The other brick was AOS, I don't recall the numbers, other than about half way through, I found AOS4850416, assuming it an insert, I checked my list, and found it listed as such in a 40k range.  I promptly gave my boss $5, and bought the note for my collection.

I realize there is a possiability that this note was mixed in the brick, as I did not get the brick from a complete block.  and although I don't remember the other serial #'s in the brick, I do rember noticing that it had the same fn, bn as the rest of the brick.

Hello NN,

From reading your posting, I get the sense that when you mention "brick", you are actually talking about a bundle of 100 notes, and when you mention "block" you are actually talking about a brick of 1000 notes.
A block is a BoC sealed packet of 4 bricks, 4000 notes.
If I am correct, the data can not be used to confirm an insert range, as only finds from BoC sealed bricks (1000 notes) are acceptable for that purpose.
Hopefully, your note will turn out to be a replacement.
JWS