Hello everyone, I'm hoping that someone can give me some insight on this odd Series 1985 $20 bill that we received at my father's laundromat many years ago in one of his coin changers. I think it is counterfeit but he thinks it's "real". What makes this bill unusual is that it has an incomplete, yet matching, serial number but with no letters and the treasury seal is missing. The coin changer representative looked at the bill with a magnifying glass and says it is "real", but I cannot find any references to partial serial numbers or misprints like this. The bill is worn, but still a little crisp, and has a fold mark so it's not like "hot off the presses". It says it was minted in Boston. Any thoughts? Thanks for your time and expertise!
I don't know that much about paper money but it looks like it could be real and looks like it's an insufficient inking error on the 3rd overprint. Or that's my guess at least. But it looks like the green ink was almost completely missing as there should be another seal over the 'TWENTY' along with the serial number which is mostly missing except the '89'. Kind of curious that there was enough ink for just both '89's' to show up though. We have some very knowledgeable paper money guys that will probably show up eventually and provide better information for you. Here's a site that has some info http://papermoneyguide.com/currency_errors.html This bill below is missing the third overprint and is very similar to what you have but yours looks to have had enough ink for the '89's to get printed.
Very cool and an usual error. Appears genuine and would be a great candidate for authentication and grading. I may be wrong, but I believe the 3rd print was partially inked or obstructed (rare).
First instinct is to suggest that the numbers were removed, but then the Treasury seal under "TWENTY" would have also had to have been removed which would be near impossible without taking "TWENTY" with it. So an improperly inked third print has to be what happened.
@Aludra, should you choose to send it off for authentication, please share your results with us. Steve
This is a cool $20.00. My thoughts were insufficient inking as well. It's very peculiar that just the 89 on both serial numbers would remain. I would certainly send it in to get authenticated.
It looks bleached to me. You can make out the seal under the twenty. Is there history on two digit serial number errors? Equal obstruction on both sides seems a little far fetched.
Looks like obstruction error , there is no possibility of insufficient ink , because it would have been impossible not to print any third print green ink except the last two digits ! , so it's either a rare obstruction error ( very cool ) or very skillfully bleached . Both of these are possible , so please send it for authentication, if genuine, it would certainly be worth authenticating.
The 89 has me suspicious. Both serial numbers are obscured (in different areas) except for the 89? If this was genuine it would be SUPER rare. Until proven otherwise, I think it's a fake. Send it in for authentication. It would be interesting to know what it is.
It can happen. Think about how the numbering heads work: the last digit changes for every sheet, the second-to-last changes for every tenth sheet, and so on. So if the ink runs out in the middle of a run, so that the numbering heads aren't getting re-inked between successive sheets any more, then it only takes a couple of sheets before all the ink is gone from most of the digits of the serial--but the last digit will still have traces of ink for at least ten sheets, because a new previously-inked digit rotates into place each time. In this case, the last two digits of the numbering head both rolled over for this sheet (remember the serialling counts *downward*, so xxxxxx89 comes after xxxxxx90). So the 89 still had traces of ink on them from the last time they were inked, but all the other digits used up their last bits of ink on sheet 90 or 91 or so. Of course, from an image on the internet, I have no way to tell whether this note is a genuine error or a fake of some kind. But it's definitely a plausible error, and worth getting authenticated by the experts.
I see the seal under $20. The dynamics of having an insufficient ink error combined with an obstruction that manages to somehow contort itself to block everything but those two digits of the serial number seems like seeing a Leprechaun riding a Unicorn over a double rainbow. I put the chance of this being real as about the chance of Stevie Wonder solving a Rubik's Cube while tightrope walking.
Actually.. He could probably solve the cube! I want to share this webpage with you - http://www.yankodesign.com/2006/02/17/rubik-cube-for-blind-by-zhiliang-chen/
Hello everyone! Thanks so much reviewing the pictures and for all of your comments. Since we're new at this, what do you mean by "authentication"? Is there somewhere we can we take this bill for authentication and grading?
