Doubled Die on currency?? :)

Daggarjon · 03-06-2009, 09:37 PM

ok, so the easy answer is no, not at all lol but i recieved this note the other day, it is a note that was issued by one country, and the during times of war, was re-issued by another country with a handstamp on it.

Unlike my other thread about what country issed the note, i know Yugoslavia first issued the note, and Bosnia re-issued the note with a handstamp. Check out De Orcs thread to see his note, and then take a look at mine

The stamp on mine is doubled. Im not thinking that liek coins, the note is now worth more, but rather, since the stamp is doubled, i am worried the note is not real.... I have looked at other P-2b's on the internet, and all the stamps are correct, or not doubled.

Anyone else seen this sort of thing? is it real, and the person doing the stamping was either cold or was coming down with a slight case of Parkinsons.. or is it fake?

Thanks for looking

lettow · 03-07-2009, 08:32 AM

"Doubling" on handstamps is not that uncommon. It would not flag it as counterfeit to me.

kidromeo · 03-07-2009, 08:53 AM

The note does look genuine DJ

And hey if machines can unintentionally double die coins why not humans.lol

I still hand stamp dates in my shop's bills and lotsa my stampings resemble the stamping on your note.

So stop worrying

Daggarjon · 03-07-2009, 11:37 AM

Thanks for the reassurance

Daggarjon · 03-07-2009, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lettow

"Doubling" on handstamps is not that uncommon. It would not flag it as counterfeit to me.

looking at the notes when i went to attribute them with Pick #'s, and something else jumped out at me. Bosnia P-1, 500 Dinara note says it is an overprint on Yugoslavia P-109. P-109 says the note is 'brown, dark brown and orange on tan underprint'. The note i have shown is blue an purple like yugoslavia P-106. Also P-109 says it is year dated only with 1991 as the year, where on my note, the reverse clearly shows 1-3-1990.

the same thing with the P-2 note i have shown above... It does not appear to be on a Yugoslavic P-110 as the krause book notates, but instead a P-107, with the same differences as the note described above.....

Is the Krause book wrong, or are these differences somethign that would flag the note as counterfeit??

**De Orc** · 03-07-2009, 05:44 PM

One thing to remember here DJ is that this was a country that was basicly on a war footing so it is quite possible that they were not too choosey about the correct notes that they stamped, it is also possible that they were stamped in more than one location (I think they could stretch to a few handstamps LOL) so the people in one location might have been a bit more lax than in others.
I dont know how much of what I have just said is fact but it is plausible. I would treat it as real until you have proof otherwise.

RickieB · 03-07-2009, 06:49 PM

I have actually stamped items where I was not sure if the inking was proper on the stamp and had already slight;y pressed it on the paper then lifted it, reinked and tried to put it in the same place....haha odds of that are slim to none...

RickieB

kuhli · 03-07-2009, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daggarjon

looking at the notes when i went to attribute them with Pick #'s, and something else jumped out at me. Bosnia P-1, 500 Dinara note says it is an overprint on Yugoslavia P-109. P-109 says the note is 'brown, dark brown and orange on tan underprint'. The note i have shown is blue an purple like yugoslavia P-106. Also P-109 says it is year dated only with 1991 as the year, where on my note, the reverse clearly shows 1-3-1990.

the same thing with the P-2 note i have shown above... It does not appear to be on a Yugoslavic P-110 as the krause book notates, but instead a P-107, with the same differences as the note described above.....

Is the Krause book wrong, or are these differences somethign that would flag the note as counterfeit??

Yes, the Pick catalog is wrong. The overprints are on P-106 & P-107, not P-109 & P-110.

If want something to keep you guessing, tell me if you think this is real or fake.

overprint on 100 dinara, P-105.

Daggarjon · 03-07-2009, 10:24 PM

thanks kuhli, i corrected my krause pages

ads for the fake/real note test - lol, thats not fair

first, i didnt know there was an overprint for that note. second are you talking if the note is fake or the overprint? the image is kind of small to tell, at leats for me since i dont know what i am lookign for... but i saw 2 things on the note that caught my eye ...

the first is on the last word of the 3rd line of the header... and the second is the numeral in the hand stamp.

So my findings:
Since i overly rely on boks to help me detemine 'stuff', and 1/2 the time the books are wrong ... and because this note is not listed -- i will say its fake.

RickieB · 03-08-2009, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daggarjon

So my findings:
Since i overly rely on boks to help me detemine 'stuff', and 1/2 the time the books are wrong ... and because this note is not listed -- i will say its fake.

Daggarjon....

Please help me understand what you are looking at? When I look at your note is that a security thread on the left center side? If so, usually that is the one of the toughest things to overcome?
Help me see the light please.

RickieB

Daggarjon · 03-08-2009, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickieB

Daggarjon....

Please help me understand what you are looking at? When I look at your note is that a security thread on the left center side? If so, usually that is the one of the toughest things to overcome?
Help me see the light please.

RickieB

with that, i was reffering to the note kuhli posted. My note does have the security thread. At first i was concerned abotu the doubled stamp. With the reassurance that was somewhat common, i let it go. Then i was concerned it was on a different note then what was published. With the acknowledgement that the published info was wrong, i feel alot better that my note is real.

On the note kuhli posted, im not sure. The scan of his note does look to have a security thread as well. But along with the reasons i posted above, im not sure if his note is fake or real, but with a 50-50 chance, im calling it a fake

kuhli · 03-09-2009, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daggarjon

first, i didnt know there was an overprint for that note. second are you talking if the note is fake or the overprint? the image is kind of small to tell, at leats for me since i dont know what i am lookign for... but i saw 2 things on the note that caught my eye ...

the first is on the last word of the 3rd line of the header... and the second is the numeral in the hand stamp.

So my findings:
Since i overly rely on boks to help me detemine 'stuff', and 1/2 the time the books are wrong ... and because this note is not listed -- i will say its fake.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daggarjon

On the note kuhli posted, im not sure. The scan of his note does look to have a security thread as well. But along with the reasons i posted above, im not sure if his note is fake or real, but with a 50-50 chance, im calling it a fake

I am pretty confident the note is genuine. Security thread, watermark, everything matches the real thing (P#105). The stamp is also pretty accurate with the known stamp on the 100 dinara (P#2b).

As I delve deeper into the Bosnian notes from the war period, I have begun identifying several variations that I can find no other reference for. I am too skeptical to call them "fake", "forgery" or "counterfeit"; so I have decided to label them as "questionable origins." There are several other notes from this time frame that I have given this label, which I will get into detail later.

Daggarjon · 03-09-2009, 06:18 PM

For the same reasons you listed, i didnt believe the note itself is fake, only the overprint.

But on the same token, i do overly rely on published material to help me out in areas i am less then fully informed on lol. While i do love collecting world notes, i dont know a ton about any 1 specific area. So when the books are wrong or missing info, it can really throw a curve ball on me. SO when the note isnt listed, well, all too often i jump in the wrong direction as to its authenticity lol

As i fully realize that the books i use are just as often wrong as they are missing information, i am coming to the same conclusion as you... that just maybe the note isnt fake, but just queastionable, as you put it.
I posted a note last night, where the pick catlog listed the note as having 1 type of seal, where in my opinion was wrong, and the seal was a different type. The big jump for me, was realizing the note wasnt fake, or otherwise not the issued note, but that the book was wrong. I have only been collecting world notes for a year, maybe 2

so i still have a whole lot to learn

and boy is there alot out there!!!

I appreciate your posting the note and the little quiz

I marked the note in my pick catalog as a note that may come up, and if it does, for me not to think its a fake lol

Welcome to Coin Talk! Register Now, it's easy and FREE!