Below I am compiling a list of errors--typos capable of causing confusion, misclassifications, accidental omissions, etc.--in the Ecuadorian sections of the Standard Catalogs or other references for Ecuadorian materials that I have noticed or that people have pointed out to me. If you have an error to add to the report, see the bottom of the page. 

• 1988 1 Sucre coin (KM 89) inadvertently omitted

• There are two "1914 FG" KM 51.3 coins listed, with different values but no explanation. Presumably the first one is for the variety with no period after Lima, and the second is for the variety with a period after Lima.
• The 1981 1 Sucre coin (KM 78b) is listed in my copy of the 1996 catalog with a mintage of 70000 and a value of  0.10 in VF, 0.25 in XF, and 0.50 in UNC. However, it is omitted from the 1999 edition of the catalog, apparently accidentally. [I would like to thank DT for bringing this to my attention.] 

• p. 46 lists a 1972 50-centavos coin (EC 204) with a mintage of 5,000,000. This coin is not listed in the other catalogs and apparently should have been 1971.

• (p. 607) "The liberation of Ecuador from the Spaniards in October 1920" should read "The liberation of Ecuador from the Spaniards in October 1820".

 
• (p. 615) "Designs for the notes of the Banco del Azuay were adapted from those of the Banco Central del Ecuador" should read "Designs for the notes of the Banco del Azuay were adapted for those of the Banco Central del Ecuador".

 
• (p. 619) "Carbo, Luis Alberto. Historia Monetaria y Cambiara del Ecuador" should read "Carbo, Luis Alberto. Historia Monetaria y Cambiaria del Ecuador".

• S172--1sucre, Banco International. They say it is available as series B/A and G/A. I've seen a number of F/A and G/A but never any B/A. This was from the 1994 edition. Does anyone know if it's been fixed in the new edition that just came out?

• #99.b in the 8th edition of this catalog has two problems. First, its date is listed as "15.6.19566-27.4.1966". They apparently intended to write "15.6.1956-27.4.1966". They then claim that 99.c is from "24.5.1968-2.1.1974". I have compared numerous examples of notes that are clearly 99.b and found them to all have old timey ink and the series is directly to the right of the date; I have also looked at a number of 99.c notes and found them to have thinner modern looking ink and the series is raised up and to the right of the date. Well, my note from 1.1.1966 matches 99.c perfectly in both of these characteristics. Apparently 99.c starts earlier than they indicate.

 
• #113 in the 8th edition of this catalog is a 5 sucre note, but #113 is also used in their Vol. 3 (at least the 4th ed.) for a 1000 sucre note. I already emailed them to tell them about the overlap but never heard back from them.

 
• #116A in the 8th edition of this catalog is listed as being printed by Thomas de la Rue, but is actually printed by American Bank Note Company, as is shown in their photo and as is printed on all of the notes with these dates.

• #113 in the 4th edition of this catalog is a 1000 sucre note, but #113 is also used in their Vol. 2 (at least the 8th ed.) for a 5 sucre note. I already emailed them to tell them about the overlap but never heard back from them.

 
• #116 was used in the 7th edition of the catalog (1994) to refer to the 50 sucres note printed by Thomas de la Rue. When they divided the catalog to produce the next edition, apparently in error they gave the same number to two different notes. #116 in Volume II (General Issues to 1960, Eighth Edition) is still the 50 sucres TDLR note. #116 in Volume III (Modern Issues 1961-1998, Fourth Edition) is a 20 sucres ABNC (American Bank Note) note.

 
• #123A. In the 4th edition they attempt to define three subvarieties of the P123 100 sucres note based on the colors used in the serial #. However, they don't bother to mention the color in one of the three varieties, and mislabel it for the first two dates.


What they say:
a. Blue serial #. 8.6.1988; 21.6.1991; 11.10/1991.
b. 9.3.1992; 4.12.1992; 20.8.1993.
c. Black serial #. 21.2.1994.

What they should have said:
Blue-black serial #. 8.6.1988.
Black serial #. 21.6.1991.
Blue serial #. 11.10.1991; 9.3.1992; 4.12.1992; 20.8.1993
Black serial #. 21.2.1994; 3.4.1997


 
• #125. In the 7th edition (1994) they say the dates for Pick #125 are "5.9.1984" and "29.8.1986". Besides them leaving out the 8.6.1988 banknotes, the 29.8.1986 was a typo: it should read 29.9.1986. This error affects series IN through IT, and is already corrected in Volume 3 4th edition (1996).

• Four airmail stamps for the 1968 Summer Olympics (759B-E) are listed with regular issues

View/confirm reported but unconfirmed varieties or issues
View/report newly discovered varieties and new issues
View/report information on Ecuadorian coin mintages
Announcing two new varieties of the 1833 1 Real!