Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Numbers, post: 766052, member: 11668&quot;]More precisely, the $50&#039;s that were printed at the time were Series 1950D.&nbsp; Remember that the transition from the 18-subject printings to the 32-subject printings was gradual, so Series 1950D and 1963 were in production at the same time, and then Series 1950E and 1963A were in production at the same time.&nbsp; The FRNs apparently made the switch to 32-subject printing in increasing order by denomination--the $5 and $10 had time to get quite a bit of production in Series 1963, the $20 had just a quite small 1963 printing before switching to 1963A, and the $50 and $100 were never printed as 1963 at all, going directly to 1963A.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>As to the original question, I&#039;ve wondered that myself, but I have no idea.&nbsp; It *does* look a little odd to see a Series 1963A without a Series 1963, so it makes sense that the book would include a small comment so that the reader wouldn&#039;t think a series had been left out by mistake.&nbsp; But the $10 and $20 went directly from Series 1985 to Series 1988A without a Series 1988, and I don&#039;t believe the catalog makes any comment on those....&nbsp; I dunno.&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie5" alt=":confused:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><br /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>(This one&#039;s actually a less minor mistake than it may appear: the gaps in the star note printings began in Series 1935D/1950A, not Series 1963.&nbsp; But for some reason all the catalogs clear back to O&#039;Donnell seem to ignore this fact....)[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in