Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Numbers, post: 1348040, member: 11668&quot;]The $5 used &quot;Series 2006&quot; twice because the BEP painted themselves into a corner, basically....</p><p><br /></p><p>When the Kodachrome redesign began, during the Marin-Snow signature combination, the colorized bills were Series 2004 while the denominations that hadn&#039;t been colorized yet were Series 2003.&nbsp; The 2004 date was entirely fictitious--the 2004 $20 was both printed and issued in 2003!--but the BEP chose different series dates in order to distinguish the two designs.</p><p><br /></p><p>Moving on to the Cabral-Snow signatures, the two designs became Series 2003A and Series 2004A.&nbsp; The $10 was redesigned at the same time the signatures changed, so it went directly from 2003 to 2004A.&nbsp; Notice that these first Kodachrome $10&#039;s weren&#039;t Series 2005, for the year they came out; they were Series 2004A, the same series designation used for the other Kodachrome denominations that shared the same signatures.</p><p><br /></p><p>So then the Cabral-Paulson signatures came along, and due to the new Secretary&#039;s signature, the BEP designated all denominations with those signatures as Series 2006.&nbsp; That was a bad idea; they should&#039;ve used (say) Series 2006 for the old-style designs and Series 2007 for the denominations that were Kodachrome, fudging one of the dates the same way they did with 2003/2004.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Because the redesign of the $5 happened several months after that signature change, and then the BEP was in trouble.&nbsp; The old-style $5 with the Cabral-Paulson signatures was called Series 2006; the redesigned $5 should, according to precedent, have gotten the same series designation as the other Kodachrome designs...which was *also* Series 2006.&nbsp; Oops.&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />&nbsp; (Note that it&#039;s definitely *not* Series 2008, for the same reason the $10 wasn&#039;t Series 2005.)</p><p><br /></p><p>So we ended up with two successive $5 series that are both called Series 2006.&nbsp; This is likely to confuse currency collectors and cataloguers for approximately forever, I&#039;m afraid....</p><p><br /></p><p>On the other hand, the reason why the current $100&#039;s are Series 2006A is less clear.&nbsp; The BEP issued an explanation for that one, seen <a href="http://www.uspapermoney.info/serials/f2006ah.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.uspapermoney.info/serials/f2006ah.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>, but it doesn&#039;t make a lot of sense to anyone.&nbsp; (It appears that they&#039;re being consistent in applying this new rule, at least: People touring the Fort Worth BEP have reported that it&#039;s now finally printing Kodachrome $100&#039;s again, and their serial numbers begin with L.&nbsp; Sounds like they&#039;re probably Series 2009A, for the same reason the old-style $100&#039;s are Series 2006A.)[/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