• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Fenntucky Mike

Member: Seasoned Veteran
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,538

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    134

 Content Type 

Journal Entries posted by Fenntucky Mike

  1. Fenntucky Mike
    I sent off a second submission of specimen notes to PMG and I have to say that the team at PMG did a fantastic job as the notes arrived just prior to hurricane Ian and were sent back shortly after Ian passed. Even though PMG had to shut down due to Ian, the submission was processed well under the stated turnaround time. Amazing job! 
    Unlike my first submission, in which all the notes straight graded, it seems that I had a few problem notes in my second, one I knew of and two I didn't. In addition to the low points there were also some "high notes" which are worthy of celebrating. I'll go through all the notes in the submission with some short comments on each, and a dedicated Journal entry on one note to be forthcoming. 
    Right off the bat the first note in the submission was body-bagged.  It was labeled as QA (Questionable Authenticity).  I have a request into PMG to see if there were any graders notes for this one and I'm also waiting for two more of these notes to arrive from sellers in the U.K. and the Czech Republic which I recently picked up. If you haven't already guessed I'll be writing about this one later once I have more info, for now it's a note that PMG won't encapsulate. Ouch! I was not charged the grading fee for this note. 


    Next up was a note that finished out the Control Coupon registry set that PMG has. It's always a good feeling to finish out a set!  I'll have more on these notes later and what I think constitutes a complete set, including varieties. Hopefully I'll get PMG to agree to adding a few, unlisted at the moment, varieties and expand that set even further. The back of the note is of the same design as the note above but in green ink and with the numerical denomination 50.

    Notes 3-5 were all additions to my 1991-'95 specimen set, specifically the 2nd through 5 series coupons, all three received numerical grades in the range I expected with two being towards the high end and one being graded 68 EPQ! Sweet!  There was one slight disappointment in this group though, the 1994 100,000 Karbovantsiv note came up short and did not receive the EPQ designation.  It's a tough note to find and the condition wasn't on par with the others, but I was hoping to squeeze out an EPQ designation on this one. It's the only note in the set without exceptional paper quality, I'll be keeping my eye out for another example, but it will probably be a long while before this note pops up again. 


    Pick # 97s2 has the same back design as the note above, 96s3.

    Now this is one sweet note, one of the very few Ukrainian specimen notes with the specimen overprint on only one side. Pick 98s2 in my set is also graded 68 EPQ making a matching set, quality wise, for me.


    The rest of the specimen notes are denominated in Hryvnia and are the first such notes I've submitted. Again, there is some highs and lows in here but nothing as dramatic as the first five notes above. All in all not bad, but I need to pay more attention to what I send in for grading. Gotta hone my skills a bit more.
    Not a great result on this one but more are easily had and are relatively inexpensive.


    Note #7, not too bad. 


    Notes 8 & 9 are duplicates, the note with the "Tears" annotation was a little disappointing but I should have caught that one. Serves me right for being in a hurry and not examining the notes further prior to submitting. Live and learn.



    Notes 10 & 11 are of the same series but different signature varieties. The grades are on par with the rest of the Hryvnia denominations.



    Finally a couple of 20 Hryven notes from the same series with signature/date varieties.



    All in all, not bad results and it'll be interesting to see what PMG says about the first note, that is if they say anything, but if I could change one grade it would be to give P97s2 an EPQ designation. It really bugs me to see all the EPQ notes in that set and then run into this one none EPQ note, it makes the set feel unbalanced.  I'll just have to live with it for now. On another note, I managed to find a 100 Karbovantsiv specimen note to bring me closer to finishing out the 2nd - 5th coupon series notes and I'm contemplating sending in some of my older Ukrainian notes to fill out the front half of my type set. We'll see when I get around to that though as I'd like to see some changes made and I'm not sure PMG is going to agree with me on them, probably not. 
  2. Fenntucky Mike

    [Notes] Without A Face (Part 1)

    By Fenntucky Mike,


    Control Coupons
    On my last submission I mentioned that one note came back as QA "Questionable Authenticity" (1991, 5 Karbovanstiv, Pick # 83x), while not completely shocking I was a little surprised and disappointed. Not so much in that it was not authenticated but that there wasn't a cut and dry decision made, if it had come back as a not genuine, counterfeit or altered note, no problem, but now the note is hanging out in limbo with no clear designation. While the Questionable Authenticity tag does give me a path to go down, meaning I need to try and validate the note, there were no additional comments made which means I'm starting off with pretty much what I had prior to submitting the note which is not much.   After the note was returned from PMG I did reach out in hopes of there being some graders notes or other information that they may have logged in their system during evaluation/grading, but no such luck there either. So, what's a collector to do? Well Obviously, acquire more examples of the same note of course.  

    I had actually found another example of this note while the first note was at PMG and as luck would have it I found a third example shortly after the submission was returned, so let's do some side-by-side comparison of the three notes and of the three notes to an authenticated note with face printing.  The first four images are scans of the face and back of each note with a black background, #1 is the control note, #2 is the note returned by PMG, #3 is my second example and #4 is the third. 
    Control note, authenticated by PMG, with face printing. Light blue face, dark blue back variety. (Not currently recognized)

    The first note, returned as QA, has some smudging/staining, possibly ink, on the face. The parquet watermark is clearly visible on both sides and the back printing seems authentic. The note has an overall dingier appearance than the other two but not as much as the below scan makes it seem.

    The second note, while overall a cleaner example, is very similar in appearance to the first. There is no smudging/staining on the face but beyond that an almost identical note. Some of the color variances in the images are due to variation from scanning, in hand there is not a noticeable color variation on the back printing and the watermarks are just as visible as the first note under normal lighting. 

    The third note is much the same as the second with no discernable differences between the two.

    I think one of the issues with these notes is that for the face printing to be completely missing the sheet would have had to miss two printings. I'm assuming that the back of the note was printed first, followed by the face printing and finally the third printing with UV ink. For these notes to be true errors I would expect that they would have been released into circulation and missing two printings doesn't seem very possible, add to the mix that the notes seem to be normally found in uncirculated condition. It seems more likely that these could have been printer's proofs or scraps. 
    I can't fit all the images that I would like into one Journal entry so I will be posting two more entries on these notes shortly. The next entry will include images under UV lighting. 
    If anyone notices any differences in the notes let me know, I'm hoping we can crack this. 
     
  3. Fenntucky Mike

    [Notes] Without A Face (Part 2)

    By Fenntucky Mike,


    Control Coupons
    As previously mentioned in Part 1 we're comparing three different Ukrainian P # 83x notes with one another, hopefully they are authentic, and with a control note. We previously examined scans of the four notes now let's take a look at all of the notes under UV. 
    The control note displays all the typical UV features that are to be expected, UV security fibers, background on the face and latent imprint to the left of the depiction of Lybid. There are varieties of notes with and without the latent imprint and the reddish ting in the image, particularly at the top, is due to the UV light reflecting on the PMG holder. Also, unique to the control note is the mix of gold and blue security fibers that are visible on the face, I (literally just now) viewed several other 5 Karbovantsiv notes under UV, including two other certified notes, and the two different colored security fibers seems to be unique with the light face, dark back ink variety. At this point I'm not going to ignore the fact that the missing face print notes do not have the two different colored security fibers that are visible on the control note, and am wondering if I haven't stumbled across an new variety or a way to identify it. 

    The note returned as QA displays the fibers but is missing all of the UV ink on the face, including the latent imprint. The smudge at the top left-center of the face is still visible and on the righthand side, where the UV visible background would be, is a little streak or blotches of what looks like a match to the gold color UV background, or it could be possible contamination, but the gold-color makes me think not.

    The second missing face print note appears similar to the first, with the only noticeable variance being a smudge at the bottom center on the back of the note. It's lighter in color and is only visible under UV, possibly a UV ink smear or something else that is on or touched the note. It's typical to see smudges that appear under UV at the edges of these notes, possibly from handling but this smudge does not appear to be consistent with handling. 

    The third note does not appear to have any unusual smudges, smears, or otherwise curious marks under UV.

    I'm not a big fan of the visible smudges and ink in central locations of some of the notes but I wouldn't call any of these deal breakers. I am however very excited at noticing the gold-colored security fibers in the control note, and am looking forward to further investigating that. I love when a new lead turns up while investigating something completely unrelated. 
    Next, I'll backlight the notes and we can check out the watermarks.
     
     
  4. Fenntucky Mike
    A group of 42 Ukrainian specimen banknotes graded by PMG were listed individually and put up for auction on ebay last week, all starting at $0.99 and all ending within an hour of each other this afternoon. While listing all of the notes at the same time with auctions starting at $0.99 is fair and honest, I just wonder if the seller is leaving money on the table? These notes were not previously listed on ebay and I have to believe that higher prices could have been achieved for most of the notes if listed with a Buy It Now price. Not to mention that it makes it real hard for me to acquire all the notes I would like to get when a large group like this is auctioned off all at once.   Regardless, I was able to pick up five of the twelve or so notes I was really keen on, one of them being somewhat of a rarity.   The stars are next to the notes I won.

    Overall, most of the winning bids were in line with what one would expect to pay for similar examples being offered for sale with a BIN price tag hanging from it. The group of 42 realized $3,708.00 with a per note average of $88.29, average grade of the notes 65.57 with a high of 68 and low of 55, six notes did not receive EPQ designation. Two notes sold for over $200, eleven over $100, twenty-two for over $50 and eight sold for under $50. What does that all mean? Nothing really. 
    Two two highest prices realized were for a P# 107As (67 EPQ) that sold for $238.00, which is not a bad price, that is typically under what you could buy those for raw. Just under. I imagine that the price could go up for these once the P#'s are sorted out and it's better known that these are the rarer of the two varieties. That was a good pick up by someone, there could be value there. The other $200+ note that sold was P#127as, the sell price was a little high considering the grade (66 EPQ) and that the variety with English language "SPECIMEN" in red-overprint is the rarer of the two, this note being the Ukrainian language variety. PMG does not currently differentiate between the two.   Best deal, $48 for P#109as (66 EPQ), $40 for P# 109bs (65 EPQ), and $26 for P# 108as (58 EPQ), you can't buy those note raw for those prices. 
    My wins, P# 85s(2), 95s1, 117as, 116as & 126(a)s, I feel like I got a good deal on the P# 85s1, as it is extremely difficult to find one, the first I've seen that wasn't in a book. My other pickups were fair deals ticking towards overpaying, but not significantly so. Sellers pictures below.
    P# 85s2 (red-overprint), label is missing the "2". Five years in and I now have specimens with red-overprint for four of the seven denominations from the first series coupons. Love this note. 


    P# 95s1 was an upgrade purchase, 64 to 67


    P# 117as filled a slot.


    P#116as, also an upgrade. Replaces a 63 no EPQ note, I hate when a note doesn't have EPQ.


    P# 126(a)s, missing "a". This note also fills a slot and looks great based on the pics. 


    Now the wait, the seller usually ships notes out right away and I wouldn't be surprised if they were delivered by the end of the week but there's always a little apprehension until they arrive. 
    Also, as I sit here writing this, I realized that I didn't enter the serial numbers on the PMG submission forms that I just sent out.  I'm probably going to be charged a $10 fee for that one. 
  5. Fenntucky Mike

    Write Me Up For 125

    By Fenntucky Mike,


    Signatures
    On October 24th the NBU released into circulation 20 Hryven notes dated 2023 with the signature of the current NBU Chairman, Andrii Pyshnyi. The new notes are the third date and signature variety in the current series and will undoubtedly be assigned Pick # A126c. The current 20 Hryven design has also been used on two separate occasions for commemorative issues, once in 2016 and again in 2021, the 2016 notes having different security features but the same artistic design as the others. According to a recent study, 20 Hryven notes of the current design account for 6.3% of all notes currently in circulation in Ukraine, that's 169,200,000 notes worth approximately ₴3,384,000,000 Hryvnia or $93,935,000.88 USD.  With the release of the new 20 Hryven notes the only other denominations not bearing the current Chairman's signature are the 50 & 200, and I expect those to be printed very soon.

  6. Fenntucky Mike

    Hey, Now It's 'Bout Time To Set Things Straight

    By Fenntucky Mike,


    1992, First Series Hryvnia
    I have never seen a set of notes and Pick #'s be so mismanaged in all my years as the 100 & 50 Hryven notes of 1992. I recently viewed a 1992, 100 Hryven note up for auction and I was surprised to see the labeling on the note. It was a cancelled note with perforation and listed as Pick # 107B on the label which I agree with for the most part. The reason the labeling was a surprise to me is that TPG's have been calling perforated notes specimens for years now and this was the first time I had viewed a perforated note having not been labeled as a specimen. 'Bout time!

    I have tracked at a minimum five notes of both denominations having been incorrectly labeled IMO, either as a specimen or specimen with the notation "unissued".


    These are the facts as I see them.
    The last edition of the SCWPM only lists Pick #'s 107A & B for these denominations in this series, no specimen P#'s are listed. The SCWPM uses images of specimen notes with red overprint for P#'s 107A & B, this may or may not have lead to some confusion. Especially when showing an image of a specimen but not listing a P# for one. Notes with ЗРАЗОК (SPECIMEN) in red overprint on both sides of the note are specimens and should be labeled as Pick #'s 107As & 107Bs respectively, which they typically are. Notes perforated with "НЕПЛАТІЖНА" (NOT PAYABLE/NON-PAYMENT) are unissued notes that were canceled and sold in commemorative sets. These should be labeled Pick #'s 107A & 107B respectively and should be noted as being "CANCELLED" on the label.  Notes that are not perforated and not a specimen are unissued notes that were not cancelled and somehow made it out of the NBU's vaults. These also should be labeled as Pick #'s 107A & 107B respectively.  The TPG's are so close to getting the labeling correct, the last piece of the puzzle is for them to label the perforated notes as being Unissued - Canceled or Unissued - Perforated - Canceled, something along those lines, and the labeling would finally be correct IMO. Not much can be done about the notes currently out in the world with bad labels but I have probably one or two of each denomination and I think I'll see if PMG will agree to changing the labels due to a "Mechanical Error", if not I may just cut them out and resubmit. 
    I've previously written about the 50 & 100 Hryven notes of 1992 here: