This may be a basic questions, but I'm curious why new Series was not issued when the design of the Series 2006 $5 FRN was changed? The prefix before the Federal Reserve District code in the serial number was changed from "H" to "I', but the Series didn't change. Old Design: New Design:
This didn't make a lot of sense to anyone, I'm afraid. But if they'd changed it, that wouldn't have made sense either, because then the Kodachrome $5 with Cabral-Paulson signatures would've had a different series designation than all the other notes of the Kodachrome generation with those signatures. Basically, the BEP got itself into trouble by using the Series 2006 designation for all of the Cabral-Paulson notes, even through there was a redesign in progress when those signatures first started to be used. In the past, they'd been more careful about this. The earliest Withrow-Rubin notes were called either Series 1995 or Series 1996, depending on design generation, so there was no problem when the $20 was printed in both generations with those signatures--it just switched from 1995 to 1996. Not until the redesign was over did everything have the same series date again, beginning with Series 1999. The Kodachrome redesign started out this way too, with the Marin-Snow signatures appearing on notes designated either Series 2004 (for Kodachrome) or Series 2003 (for everything else). Indeed, the former date was fudged just to create this distinction--the notes called Series 2004 went into circulation in the fall of 2003. So the redesign of the $10 caused no problems, as it switched from the 2003 date to the 2004 date. When the Paulson signature came along, the resulting notes really should've been called something like Series 2006 (for the H's) and Series 2007 (for the I's), since both design generations were still in use on different denominations at the time. But the BEP wasn't thinking that far ahead; they just called everything Series 2006. And so when the $5 was redesigned, they were between a rock and a hard place. So we ended up with two different $5 series that are both called Series 2006, which will drive all the cataloguers nuts for the forseeable future. Sigh.... Depending on the scheduling, the same thing *might* happen with the Kodachrome $100. If it goes to press before Obama's nominee for Treasurer is put into office, then it'll start out carrying the Cabral-Paulson signatures too.... Of course, if the Senate's quick with the confirmation then the signature change and the design change might well coincide, avoiding the difficulty. (There's also a possibility that the super-high-tech security features on the new $100 will cause the BEP to classify it as part of the *next* design generation, rather than as part of the Kodachrome generation. In that case, it might get a series date all to itself. Rumor has it that these notes will be the first to be printed in the 50-subject-sheet format, which would go along with that idea....) It should also be pointed out that the BEP's never been in the habit of letting anyone know when the series-dating rules are changing. Back in 1974, all the collectors were eagerly watching for the new Series 1969E $1's to appear in circulation...and what they got was Series 1974. This is the same thing all over again, it seems. Eh well, we'll manage somehow.
Thanks for the information - There's some quote about "consistency" and "hobgoblins" that comes to mind.
Nice infor there Numbers! Thanks! And you are right! the inconsistencies will drive catalogers crazy lol
