I have a one dollar bill that has a very thin serial number. I have never come across one, though I am new to collecting. I don't typically keep paper money unless it's worth more than face value. I would rather put that money towards something that is. Is this something that is worth keeping?
Would be nice to see pictures of the complete bills. The numbering meters, some are not all the same at each sight. To ID, must see the bills.
Numbered on the old conventional presses, before COPE came along. Everything through Series 1969A is like this. Series 1969B to 1977 come both ways, while the new equipment was being phased in and the old equipment was being phased out. (Most of the uncut sheets sold by the BEP continued to use the thinner conventional-style numbers as late as Series 1995.) At the time when both numbering styles were in regular use, there was a bit of a craze for collecting all the different COPE and conventional serial ranges in the $1 notes. Nowadays nobody much cares, but serial data is here if anyone wants it.
I think the same is going to happen with all of this 'short printed run' malarkey. If you have to look up a serial number within a given block in a list to see if you have a common or a rare note, it is just a way to part a fool and his money.
I wonder if someone also said something similar to this 80 years ago about collectors that were looking at the back of notes with a magnifying glass for back plate numbers looking for possible mules. Short print runs, and short star runs have been collected for over 30 years, and show no signs of diminished demand.
SteveInTampa, those are differences that can be detected by studying the individual notes themselves. Run length is only identifiable by studying internal BEP documentation, and was certainly promoted by dealers as a way to sell otherwise common notes for greatly increased prices. Short runs are not a different variety. Why should two notes of the same type, series, district, with similar serial numbers and even identical plate numbers have vastly different values because one was printed on Monday and one was printed on Thursday? Marketing.
Possibly because large run star notes printed on Monday, were distributed in packs of 100 and easily found, and short run star notes printed on the following Thursday, were inserted two at a time into packs of 100 non-star notes, and much harder to detect, and ultimately find. The short run star note collectors are definitely out there in mass, and will usually pay much more than what they spend on large run star notes. Look at the 2009 $1 Star notes on eBay. You can buy a pack of 100 common star notes for $160-$300, and ONE St.Louis Star note may go for the same amount, and ONE of the New York (run #3) Star note is even more money, and harder to find. Short run Star notes are not a different variety, granted, but they are much harder to find, and ultimately worth more....at least to me they are.
Whether they are printed on Monday or Thursday is all irrelevant to me! When I can find a very hard to find note in circulation it makes my day. Finding this '09 $1 St. Louis Star Note in the wild for face value is exciting. I can relate how it must of felt for a gold prospector panning for gold when finding a nugget in his sifter (with the exception the $1 is fiat money and the gold isn't but that's besides the point). The BEP doesn't print star notes for paper money dealers to promote and sell to make a living. They don't have to promote anything...star notes sell themselves along with every other type of currency I'd love to get my hands on. Until i can afford that uncirculated '09 St. Louis star note offered on ebay, I'll keep looking for more in circulation.
Point of information: this is not true in most cases. Depending on the serialling conventions in use at the time, run length can often be calculated, or at least estimated, by looking at the serial numbers and plate positions of just a few notes from the run. Being able to do this is useful in order to determine just how many star notes were printed for a given district (there are a *lot* of errors in the BEP production reports where star notes are concerned). Even if you collect by district rather than by run, it's good to know how long the runs are, so that you know the total number of notes printed for the district. Somewhat annoyingly, the serialling pattern used by the BEP's new LEPE overprinting lines makes it much harder to estimate run sizes based on observed notes. And in the short time that LEPE has been in use, there've already been two star runs (2009 $1 H..* run 1 and B..* run 5) where the run length isn't known from the BEP reports (because the H..* was never reported, and the B..* run was reported incorrectly). So all we've got are rather uncertain estimates of the number of notes printed in these runs. By the way, if anyone has a 2009 $1 note between B12800001* and B16000000*, please post the serial and plate position--we could use all the information we can get on these. The BEP reported printing just 160,000 notes from B12800001* to B12960000*, but observed serials reach as high as B1338xxxx*, and even higher serials might exist.
While we're on the subject, today i ironically found a $1 2009 New York star note from the 3rd run (B06400001*-B06432000*). Given the information above is it determined that this run is without a doubt only 32,000 notes in length? With all the surprises the BEP has a history of do you think this amount will be final? If it is then correct me if am wrong but doesn't that make it the shortest/rarest star note run of modern notes followed by the $1 1988 F*? I was told the total run of the 32,000 notes has not yet been know if they have all been released into pairs to complete a pack of $100 or released as straps. Do you have any information on this to conform or elaborate on that info?
The 2009 $1 B..* run 3 was a COPE run, so we can confirm from the plate positions that the run length of 32,000 notes (1,000 sheets) is correct. The BEP reported that the run was used as replacement sheets, so it should not exist in full-strap form; it should only appear mixed into regular straps (most commonly, as you say, in pairs replacing xxxx9999 and xxxx0000 serial numbers). Whether it's going to be rare as in valuable is hard to say. Most of the super-pricey $1 FRN stars don't have printages *that* low; they just have poor survival rates. The 1988 $1 F..* had 640,000 printed; there are quite a few other $1 stars with totals as low or lower, but none of them are as tough to find today. If you just look at the quantities printed, the rarest $1 FRN star, by district, should be the 2003 D..* with 320,000 printed. (The 2009 H..* will equal that figure, *if* our estimate is correct and *if* no additional runs are printed.) By run, the rarest $1 FRN stars should be the 2009 B..* run 3 and the 1981 H..* run 3, both at 32,000 notes (the latter having serials H01299001* to H01920000* with internal gaps, as was common back then). Across all denominations, the rarest modern FRN star by either district or run should be the 1981 $5 A..*, where the only run printed was a ridiculous 16,000 notes--though as far as I know, none are known, and I think some of the books have de-listed them. (Various non-circulation-issue printings are even smaller, like the 2004A $10 GF..* and the 1995 $2 Millennium stars, but those are different animals entirely.)
Man!!!! where do you get all that information? I get lots and lots of star notes since I handle cash a lot but I recently started collecting and selling them on eBay, I really should start checking these thoroughly.
