Fenntucky Mike

Up to 1,840 now

Yep, POP jumped from 1,821 (I think) to 1,837. That's a pretty good increase for these notes.

Lookout @Bonezdogg here I come, sorry @Revenant but there is a new head of the table.

Where'd they go? Oooh I know, in Bonezdog registry set! JK But seriously this is a good problem to have. I keep an eye on the population reports and Ukrainian banknotes have been making big strides. While the pace has slowed in recent weeks I fully expect a large increase in the near future, an expectation such as that wouldn't exist without multiple collectors out there acquiring these graded notes, it's a simple matter of supply and demand. With out the demand it would be just me sending in only the notes I needed or deemed worthy for grading and greedily hiding them away in my collection/s. Having multiple dedicated collectors looking for notes really helps to shake them loose from collections and sellers. Not just common notes but also higher quality notes and harder to find notes. In the last month I've watched two P #50's go up for auction, a note that is not often seen, multiple specimens became available along with unissued notes and quite a few of the early Pick #'s have started popping up. All good things. As far as my roll in this I hope to convince PMG to add some short sets to the Ukrainian registry, right now they only have two short sets along with two large sets comprising over 100 notes. A 100+ note set is a daunting task to take on, and typically contains a few unattainable notes for the average collector. I feel if a few short sets could be added (specifically for the modern Hryven issues) that would draw in even more collectors. Hopefully, if more collectors gravitate towards Ukrainian banknotes even more great notes will become available, I have a feeling they will. So Bonezdog, Perfect-70 and all you other Ukrainian banknote collectors out there, bring it on! I love seeing new collectors and especially passionate ones and you can bet your last dollar that I will be there when the last Ukrainian note is gone. Here's some of my latest additions, I got a really good offer/deal from one of the sellers of some of these. An offer I couldn't refuse. I'm sure glad nobody else seems to be going after the earlier notes or specimens, more for me.

For me, part of the fun of collecting world notes is trying to find information, sorting though it and then trying to put the pieces together.... Like most collectors (if you don't have this you should think about getting a copy) I have and use the Standard Catalog of World Paper Money (Modern Issues 1961 - Present), I'm currently working off of the 25th edition. The SCWPM assigns Pick #'s, is THE book for PMG (their go to for modern world notes) and where PMG gest a lot of the information they print on the labels. Having notes that line up with the SCWPM just makes things so much easier when it comes to getting your notes authenticated/graded. But if you think that there is an issue where a note just doesn't line up with the SCWPM, what do you do? You have to try and make your case. In the SCWPM at the end of the Ukrainian section is a small grouping of notes titled COLLECTOR SERIES, these will have Pick #'s starting with CS. The group is small but it should grow by at least two with the next edition, it currently consists of CS1(1 Hryvnia) and CS2 (100 Karbovantsiv). The CS2 is a no brainer, a commemorative note issued to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the 1917 - 1921 Ukrainian revolution, it has a depiction of Pick # 1b on it and PMG has already graded several examples, done deal. My question is with the first note listed, CS1. The SCWPM description is as follows "1Hryvnia, #103 and 2 Karbovantsiv 1996 Independence coins in a folder". The only problem is that I have never seen a set similar to what they are describing, not that I'm the be all end all on Ukrainian notes but I'm pretty familiar with them and I have not come across a set that fits the description given, either on line or in other references. What I have seen and do have is a 1996 set to commemorate the 5th anniversary of Ukraine's Independence, which consists of a P #108 and a KM #33 in a commemorative folder. See below. This commemorative set was released in 1996 and there are two variants, one containing the P #108 and the other a P #100 in the exact same folder with the same coin (KM #33). This set is listed in at least three other references and/or catalogs. So, is the SCWPM wrong or is there a commemorative set out there that fits their description? Let's take a look at the SCWPMs description, and the phrase "2 Karbovantsiv 1996 Independence coins". The word "Karbovantsiv" used in the sentence is plural and is used to describe five or more karbovanets (singular), with karbovantsi being used for 2-4 karbovanets. So the use of "Karbovantsiv" with the number "2" is not correct, "Karbovantsi" should have been used with a 2. Was this a typo or omission? Possibly, but I believe it more likely that either they were given bad information, or they missed the word "мільйони" (million/s). located on the reverse below the number 2 and above the word "КАРБОВАНЦІВ" (karbovantsiv). In any event the denomination listed for the coin in the SCWPM appears to be wrong no matter how you slice it. Next let's look at the P #103 that the SCWPM lists as being included with this commemorative set. While both would have been circulating and it is entirely possible that the P #103 was used I find it more plausible that the P #108 was the note used. The second issue P #108, 1 Hryvnia, was the first note printed of the new monetary unit, Hryvnia, at the Banknote Printing and Minting Works in Ukraine and what better way to show your independence by using a note of the newly adopted Hryvnia printed in Ukraine at the BPMW of the NBU. Other issues with the thought of using the P #103 is that the NBU was unhappy with the first series notes due to counterfeiting and the P #103 is physically larger than the P #108, meaning it would be less likely to fit in the holder (I'll get more in depth on that later). With the above mentioned, along with the physical evidence of there being a set containing a P #108 and all other references going against the SCWPM description, I can't help but believe the SCWPM is incorrect with their description. If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound? If the SCWPM is incorrect how do you change it? First of all I'm not really sure that this note deserves it's own Pick # (P #CS1), I find that a little absurd. It's a P #108 in a commemorative folder, does that really deserve a dedicated Pick #, the only way that I could even come close to justifying a dedicated Pick # for this note would be if the serial number prefix was unique to the commemorative set, I don't believe this to be the case. Regardless, let's say I did want to send this note to PMG to have it graded (assuming that they would even entertain that notion), how do I get them to recognize the note as a P #CS1? Well the best I can do is layout my case mentioned above along with a list of other references and images of the actual commemorative set, keep my fingers crossed and hope for the best. I've found it extremely difficult to convince PMG/NGC to go against the SCWPM or the SCWC (Standard Catalog of World Coins), in fact I've never been able to do it. Those books are their bibles when it comes to world coins/notes and rightfully so. Further more what about the variety containing the P #100? How does that play into this? Does another Pick # need to be assigned to it? The other option would be to contact the SCWPM and see if they will update the information on this set. They seem pretty open about accepting new info, they even say as much in the book. Only problem is that Krause Publications was sold off with the Standard Catalogs being sold off to Penguin Publishing. Is the SCWPM still a functioning wing of PP, was it shut down, will another edition ever be printed? I think this might be the route I take, reach out to the SCWPM and see if I can get the information updated. I guess my perfect scenario would be an updated description in the SCWPM, new Picks (CS1a and CS1b) and PMG agrees to grade the note as long as it is submitted in OGP. I'm still not sure I'll even bother with it, if I wanted to see one thing done it would be to update the SCWPM. We'll see....we all make mistakes. From the SCWPM Let's talk about the set its self, specifically the version containing the P #108. I feel that there is a strong possibility that the P #108 was a late addition to the set (or they goofed on the holder for the note), I believe it was originally intended to contain the P #100. If you were to closely examine the images you would notice that the left and right margins of the P #108 look very uneven, specifically the left margin (when viewing the front of the note) looks like it is short or cut off, there is a reason for that. The opening that the note is contained in is smaller than the note. The holder is approximately 130 x 67 while the note measures 133 x 66, meaning that the note is 3mm longer than the holder, as a result the note was placed over the opening and "folded" into the holder using the insert half of the holder its self. Conversely, the P #100 measuring in at comfortable 125 x 56 fits in the holder perfectly (left to right anyway). The size of the holder makes it very unlikely that the P #103 (which the SCWP includes in the commemorative set), was ever intended to be used in the commemorative set due to its size (135 x 70). If you were to be looking at acquiring a P #108 from this commemorative set be sure to verify that the left side of the front has a 3mm fold in it. Note not centered (view of the back of the note) Fold evident, fold to the back of the note Second view of fold from back Here's the KM #33 included with the set

Ooops, The P #121e auction ended. Final price with shipping, $45.50!

Oooooo.... There is a Ukraine P-121e listed on ebay starting bid $0.99 and it's a 70! To bad it's in a Legacy Holder, I'll still throw a few bid's it's way though. My only question is how low will it go... for? My guess is under $200

Did a little digging/remembering, I was probably thinking of mica flakes used in Continental Currency with the B.F. designs and printed by his former company Hall & Sellers ne Franklin & Hall. I wanted to find a more definitive source so I did some more digging and the LOC does credit Franklin with inventing the use of mica in paper and leaf imprints. And since his former company printed the Continental notes I'm going to make an assumption that they used the same paper supplier/type as when ole Ben was in charge, meaning they hade mica paper when they were printing the Penn, Del and NJ currencies. https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/franklin/franklin-printer.html Scroll down until you see Printed Currency, I'll see if I can find another reference later to back up my phony baloney story. So B.F. was shooting lightning bolts and igniting jugs of alcohol....ahhh, good times.

See my latest Journal entry for details on this note.

One of the things that draws me to world banknotes, lesser known and/or collected world banknotes, is that you can find and acquire "rarities" within a series or country and typically at a fraction of the cost for a similar U.S. note or similar heavily collected notes like China. In addition to the accessibility and price points another bonus is the variety or shear volume at times of the types of "rarities" you can acquire, and the volatility present in most newer countries just adds to the diversity of notes that are available. Lets use one of my latest additions as an example. I recently was able to pick up a 1992, 100 Hryven unissued note, it is from the 1st series Hryven banknotes released in 1996 (if you want a little bit of the back story for the delay from the time of printing 1992 to release 1996, see my previous journal entry "It's a long way to the top, if you wanna (good looking note)"). A really fun note, printed as part of the 1st series of modern Hryven banknotes of Independent Ukraine, which in addition to the 100 included denominations of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, & 50. The 100 Hryven was never released into circulation (along with the 50), at least not wide spread circulation. The first series notes did not last long, printed by the CBNC (Canadian Bank Note Company) in 1992 the first series was printed by dry offset method using low quality inks, this exposed the first series to massive counterfeiting problems as individuals would use chemical solutions to wash away the ink from 1 Hryvnia notes and print higher denominations on them. Between 1992 and 1996, the time from when the first series notes were printed to the time they were released, the BPMW (Banknote Printing and Minting Works) of the NBU (National Bank of Ukraine) was established and put into operation (late 1994), now Ukraine was capable of printing it's own currency and in fact did, printing the second series of Hryven banknotes (some of the second series notes were printed in England by TDLR (Thomas de la Rue)) in 1994. That always cracks me up, as they now had the first two series of Hryvnia banknotes printed and neither would be release for at least another two years as the Control Coupons were still circulating and being printed. With the establishment of the BPMW in addition to the counterfeiting issues the first series did not have a long run until the second series was released. Precisely one year to the date (September 2, 1996) the second series was rolled out and circulated with the first. The second series included denominations of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 & 200 (the 200 Hryven note was printed/added to the series in 2001) the third series would not be printed until 2003. My assumption is that the first series notes were so heavily counterfeited and the second series being already printed and ready to release, the government of Ukraine did not want or now need the first series 50 and 100 Hryven notes to circulate. Here is the first series 100 Hryven note. It is not known (by me anyway) how may were printed but based on the serial number and current availability of such notes I would wager a minimum of 1,000 notes were/are floating around out there. On the front of the note is a portrait of Taras Shevchenko with the word UKRAINE printed above and the denomination (One Hundred Hryven) as text below. On the back is printed a landscape with the building of the Verkhovna Rada (parliament of Ukraine or translated "Supreme Council of Ukraine") in the center, above is written National Bank of Ukraine below the denomination in text. The note has visible green security fibers along with UV visible fibers, the watermark is a trident or tryzub repeating. I'm not sure why the watermark was not included on the label or why the printer is sometimes omitted. (A Journal for another day) The note is perforated across the lower center, the perforations spell out НЕПЛАТІЖНА or NON-PAYMENT. This brings me to the point where I disagree with PMG on the use of the word "SPECIMEN" to describe this note, I tend to feel it was printed for circulation and then canceled. The perforations are perfectly aligned to the note so it does seem as if it was done by machine and not a manually operated or hand held punch, which (I think) goes against my opinion of not calling this note a specimen. I have no doubt that the holes were done after printing as I can see pieces of paper around the edges that did not cut cleanly and were dragged down into the perforations with ink still on them and where the punch made a clean cut, no ink on the walls of the perforation. I don't know, printed at the same time as the rest of the first series, perforated after printing, existing notes have varying serial #'s, no other (issued) first series specimen notes were perforated in this way and some un-canceled notes known to exist. There's just to many factors for me to call this a specimen, I would think "CANCELED" and/or "NOT ISSUED" would be more appropriate terms for this note. There is another specimen (I guess I'll call it a second specimen since PMG is calling the perforated note a specimen) with diagonal red overprint ЗРАЗОК (SAMPLE). There is a red overprinted number on the lower right corner of the back, presumably the number of the sample, the note below is numbered 0926. I have seen this number as high as 2489 on the first series 50 Hryven note and as these were printed at the same time I will assume the 100 Hryven is numbered at least that high as well (of course they (the uncut sheets) could have been run through sequentially, the 50 & 100 maybe even the rest of the series. Hmm.). The serial number of the specimen note below is 0000000000 which is typical of most modern Ukrainian specimens. There are also known proofs of this note, the proofs are stamped SPECIMEN on the front and back with black ink and may or may not contain handwritten notations on the bill. I recently thought I'd see if PMG would create a slot for this note in one of the registry sets, I received the anticipated response of "this is more suitable for a custom PMG set". Lol, looking back at the email PMG sent it's kind of funny, the title of the email is "Registry submission REJECTED" ha! When I first saw the email it kind of stunned me/scared me, all I saw was rejected in all caps, I thought one of my ongoing projects had been declined (better read the whole title next time). I do tend to agree with the decision to not allow the note into an existing registry set as it was presumably not issued to the public. I just thought I'd give it a try since there are I think five or so graded by PMG, sometimes the number graded will make the difference. So I'll eventually be creating a Signature set to house this note along with the 50 Hryven and the variants of each. So if you want to see this note again you'll either have to go back to this Journal entry or look in the signature set but don't worry, it's really not an issue. For reference here are the first and second series notes. First series, printed 1992 released 1996 Second series, printed 1994 released 1997 (missing the 200 Hryven note which was added/printed in 2001) UPDATE: I was rereading this journal entry and I noticed one additional item worth noting. The 50 and 100 Hryven 1st series notes (unissued notes) are the only two of that series to have a holographic patch on them, meaning they have an added anticounterfeiting device. It appears to have been applied prior to printing or at least the ink being applied as there are numerous reflective flakes around the patch but none appear to be on top, on the surface, of the ink. So they inked over the patch? I'm not quite sure of that, I'll have to do further research. That patch makes me wonder if those denominations weren't printed at a later date or possibly the patch added later. If the counterfeiting was as widespread as implied did they hold up the release of the 50 & 100 to add this patch or possibly scrap out notes printed in 1992 and reprint in 1996 to add the patch? I think my imagination maybe getting away from me. We'll see.....

Uh oh, Bonezdogg is taking no prisoners. She's about to kick both our butts in the new Zim dollar set and I noticed a new Ukrainian set popped up the other day.

Careful, you might get hooked on Zimbabwe fantasy notes. Uh oh! I dropped the ball on doing something similar but maybe there is still time. Do NGC credits expire? I was thinking about sending in a submission but the turn around times are pretty long right now, figure I'll wait a month or two until all the new releases calm down a bit.

Yes, natural leaf but I thought he also used mica flakes. Can't remember which was first or if they were used at the same time. I'll have to read up on it tonight. Couldn't have been anything good if Ben wasn't holding it. I'm pretty sure I could hold a kite in one hand and a jug in the other. Hmmm, I better make sure.......

I just find this stuff interesting as hell for some reason, anyway.... I picked up some more Ukrainian fantasy banknotes a few weeks back. After some haggling with the seller and discovering that there was a set of six, not just the three I was initially making offers on, I pulled the trigger on them. I had seen some of these before, selling in auctions (typically hammer for around $20 - $25 each) but I knew absolutely nothing about them. Once the notes arrived I gave them a quick onceover and notice the text "M. GABRIS FEC. 2003" printed at the bottom of the note, ok let's start with that. After a little research it appears that M. Gabris (Matej Gabris) is a graphic designer from Czechoslovakia and designing/creating and printing fantasy banknotes is one of many interests/hobbies. He has quite a portfolio of fantasy notes, if you like that sort of thing. Typically his notes will be inspired by a bit of history, myth or legend associated with the country. Using those topics he will create the artwork for the note, his vision of the country that the note is designed for whether that be in the form of a tribute or a touch of irony. If you're interested in this kind of thing just do an internet search of him (add the word banknote in the search) and you can check out his work. I'm pretty sure his banknotes are on ebay as well, just be sure to check "worldwide" in item location when searching. Banknotes like these always make we wonder if the person/s are crossing a line in regards to, are notes like these deceitful, forgeries, knock offs, works of art, something else or a little bit of everything. To me, notes like these fall solidly into the "Fantasy" category, imaginative fiction. They do not resemble, at all, any past or present Ukrainian banknotes in terms of design, subject or security features, the majority of the text is in Czech and for the lack of a better word whimsical. The only thing Ukrainian about these notes is the text ΓРИΒЕΗƄ (HYRVEN) for the denomination. I see a lot of Russian iconography including a two headed eagle and standing bear with stars and one of the portraits is a straight knock off of a 1912-1919 100 Kronen, Austria-Hungry note. All of which is interesting as both empires (Russia, Austria-Hungry) controlled parts of Ukraine during that time period (1912-19), and the artwork on the notes, to me, screams Art Deco which would also fit into that time period. Maybe that is what the artist was going for, that time period, that piece of history? Hmm, interesting. No doubt to me that these are just fantasy. This is the knock off of the 100 Kronen P.S. I bought some more fake or fantasy notes yesterday, I think I may have a problem here.

Thanks, That's neat. Always thought Ben was more of a mica guy. Why did mica flakes fall out of favor? So much more to learn. I told him not to touch that key.

Hmm. Oh yeah, I hadn't noticed. They typically started the clock about a month ahead of the cut off. I kind of liked the countdown clock, made it seem more urgent/exciting.

, Bonzdogg is still pumping notes into their sets. Looks like it is going to come down to wire.

This is a label error correct, should be P-48b?

If I was to go with a camera set up it would be with coins in mind as well. In fact that would be the main reason, notes would be a secondary operation but I would absolutely give it a try.

Scanning is absolutely the way to go, in my mind anyway. Who knows maybe in 5 - 10 years I'll revisit this and think about a camera set up but most likely copiers/scanners will have improved even more and I'll be scanning my notes into my registry sets. Again.

Good to know, yes mad props to PMG for arranging the sets the way they did. Oh yeah, I already forgot. I let my rage blind me. Third place here I come.

I spent the last 3 weeks scanning all of my banknotes and updating the images in my registry sets along with reorganizing my database where I have them all cataloged. Whew! The pictures I had taken early on had always bugged me, not taken straight on, dark and just blah. While using scanned images has limitations, especially on the modern notes with their moire patterns, grids and other anticounterfeiting printing techniques that are there to deter scanning. That said I didn't let the presence of these modern features stop me, even if they can/will make scanned images seem mushy with lack of detail and clean sharp lines sometimes, on older notes this is much less of an issue. At any rate it was the lesser of two evils for me, as my photography skills and equipment are pretty much nonexistent at this time. In the end I feel a high quality image with proper lighting, equipment and technique taken from straight on would net the absolute best results. But, new photography equipment and the time needed to learn is not anywhere in my near future, so I'll happily use scanned images for now. As far as the time and effort to scan everything???? Was so damn worth it! Here's some before and after. Terrible angle. Trash. Dark and out of focus. Weak! Dingy looking and the note crooked in the holder. Why? You can see how the anti-scanning features make the modern notes look mushy sometimes. What the hell? Why is this one pink? Pathetic. Well, two thing's are obvious now that I'm actually looking at these side by side. One, I put almost zero time and effort into taking pictures and two, yes, scanning all my notes was well worth the time.

No doubt, love to see increased participation. I think your writing absolutely helps to attract new collectors, getting the information out in the open helps a lot. In addition to your articles I think the organization of the Zimbabwe sets, which I hold you responsible, helps dramatically. Multiple short sets, I feel, helps to attract individuals. Something I hope to work on with PMG in the Ukrainian registry in the next year. I feel like the people who jump into a large set typically don't care and just need a place holder for one or two notes. It's easier to wrap your head around a short set then progress to a larger more encompassing set. Wait a minute... NOOOO! I got knocked out of fourth place in the Billiions set by Bonezdog, oh you just bought yourself a one way ticket on the pain train my friend, here I come. JK The Ukrainian registry/collector base did increase by one this past week.

I have little doubt that is case, or something very close to it. Always have to keep an eye out for the next collecting goal, that would be an interesting choice for a future set. Those WWII era notes can get expensive sometimes and can be hard to find but I don't know enough about those to say one way or the other.