500 Euro notes are called Bin Ladens in Spain

Slime Lowlife wrote:

So, when I saw the news of Spain issuing a brand-new coin, in an odd
denomination, honoring the sailor, I thought that this might make for a
new denomination: ¤12 = 1 colon.

Hehe, in Spain they actually have extra names for certain denominations
of collector coins, but not for the ¤12 piece, I think. Of this year's
Columbus series,

the ¤10 silver coin is an "8 reales" piece,
the ¤50 silver coin is a "cincuentín",
the ¤400 gold coin is an "8 escudos" piece.

Those alternative names cannot be found on the coins but in the laws
that authorize the issues ...

Christian

Dik T. Winter wrote:

France would have a good 90 years to go.

Heh. And how long will the currency union last? I am all for the common
European currency, and don't really miss the DM. But the EU is kind of
deadlocked these days ...

I think the EUR 2 commem program has gotten out of hand. The Olympic
Games coins from Greece and Italy were (in my opinion) a good idea, really
international affairs. Germany could have done similar with the WC
football. But with the Finnish EU-enlargement issue it did go wrong
already.

Agreed with regard to some of the issues (especially those from BE, DE
and LU), even if some are nicely designed. But why should a topic of
European relevance - the 2004 enlargement - not be on a ¤2 commem which,
at least theoretically, circulates in all euro countries?

Much better would have been a commem issued by *all* countries
for that occasion (a truely European coin).

But then some member states would not have partipated anyway. Luxembourg
and the Netherlands, for example, need to have the head of state on
every coin. The same thing may apply to the Irish harp.

We will see what happens next year, when several countries will issue ¤2
coins commemorating the 1957 Treaty of Rome. Same design (the
Campidoglio and the Treaty) for all pieces, with a few country and
language specific "additions". From what I have read, five member states
have already agreed to participate.

Christian

gogu wrote:

Maybe this is one of those (rare) cases where the national law was faster
than the EU directives:-)

Quite possibly so. :-) Of course that EU directive was also "pushed" as
part of the fight against terrorism, but even without (and before) that,
requiring some kind of ID for cash transactions beyond a certian limit
makes sense to me ...

This is the text of the directive, by the way:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...l_30920051125e
n00150036.pdf
(or) http://tinylink.com/?nUHUvU8bXs

Christian

In article writes:
Dik T. Winter wrote:

France would have a good 90 years to go.

Heh. And how long will the currency union last? I am all for the common
European currency, and don't really miss the DM. But the EU is kind of
deadlocked these days ...

Indeed.

But with the Finnish EU-enlargement issue it did go wrong
already.

But why should a topic of
European relevance - the 2004 enlargement - not be on a ¤2 commem which,
at least theoretically, circulates in all euro countries?

My problem is not with the issue of such a coin, but that it is issued by
a single country. Yes, and again it is the "theoretically" that hurts me.
If the event is important enough, when you wish to issue commems about it,
you should issue coins that widely circulate. Otherwise it comes pretty
close to NCLT.

Much better would have been a commem issued by *all* countries
for that occasion (a truely European coin).

But then some member states would not have partipated anyway. Luxembourg
and the Netherlands, for example, need to have the head of state on
every coin. The same thing may apply to the Irish harp.

That would not have been a problem if the issuance of EUR 2 commems had been
thought out properly. As far as the Netherlands is concerned, it has those
requirements only for coins issued *by* the Dutch government, not for coins
issued *on behalf* of the Dutch government. The EU could have reserved some
amount for the issuance of commems for central issue. I think it has been
rushed by the (in my opinion rightful) wish of Greece to issue circulating
coins on occasion of the Olympics. And the rush has lead to a regulation
that is (again in my opinion) undesirable.

We will see what happens next year, when several countries will issue ¤2
coins commemorating the 1957 Treaty of Rome. Same design (the
Campidoglio and the Treaty) for all pieces, with a few country and
language specific "additions". From what I have read, five member states
have already agreed to participate.

And what bothers me again is those "country and language specific additions".
This again will lead to a plethora of new coins. At the end you will have
hundreds of different EUR 2 coins where only one side will help showing it
is not a falsification. But perhaps this all makes too much sense for the
EU.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/

Ï "Dik T. Winter" Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
...
In article
writes:
Dik T. Winter wrote:
But then some member states would not have partipated anyway. Luxembourg
and the Netherlands, for example, need to have the head of state on
every coin. The same thing may apply to the Irish harp.

That would not have been a problem if the issuance of EUR 2 commems had
been
thought out properly. As far as the Netherlands is concerned, it has
those
requirements only for coins issued *by* the Dutch government, not for
coins
issued *on behalf* of the Dutch government. The EU could have reserved
some
amount for the issuance of commems for central issue. I think it has been
rushed by the (in my opinion rightful) wish of Greece to issue circulating
coins on occasion of the Olympics. And the rush has lead to a regulation
that is (again in my opinion) undesirable.

Probably it should be a limit to the special 2 euro coins a country can
issue, let's say one every two years...

--

E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure
in codesto reame debban risolversi tutte con grandi
puttane! F.d.A

Coins, travels and mo http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/golanule/my_photos
http://gogu.enosi.org/index.html

In article "gogu" writes:
Ï "Dik T. Winter" Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
...
....
issued *on behalf* of the Dutch government. The EU could have reserved
some
amount for the issuance of commems for central issue. I think it has been
rushed by the (in my opinion rightful) wish of Greece to issue circulating
coins on occasion of the Olympics. And the rush has lead to a regulation
that is (again in my opinion) undesirable.

Probably it should be a limit to the special 2 euro coins a country can
issue, let's say one every two years...

No. Currently the limit is one each year. Limiting it to one every two
years does not make it much better. I think that things that are not
interesting Europe-wide, or international, should have commems in the
national issues above 2 Euro. The 2 Euro coin special issues should have
been reserved for either specific international events (Olympic games,
World Championship football) or EU specific events. Of course Belgium
would have liked to mark the re-opening of the Atomium as an international
event, but it just is not.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/

Dik T. Winter wrote:

But why should a topic of European relevance - the 2004 enlargement -
not be on a ¤2 commem which, at least theoretically, circulates in all
euro countries?

My problem is not with the issue of such a coin, but that it is issued by
a single country. Yes, and again it is the "theoretically" that hurts me.
If the event is important enough, when you wish to issue commems about it,
you should issue coins that widely circulate. Otherwise it comes pretty
close to NCLT.

Not really. The regular coins from Finland or Greece do not show up in
my wallet very often either. So what? As long as they are issued
"normally", I don't mind. (Normally means IMO that they can be obtained
at face value from banks. That rules the pieces from San Marino and the
Vatican out ...)

The EU could have reserved some amount for the issuance of
commems for central issue.

Would have been very difficult, I think. In the European currency union,
all coins are issued by the member states only, and no other
institutions. Can you imagine the outcry in certain member states if the
"EU level" (Commission, Council ...) said that some pieces should now
come without any country specific features?

We will see what happens next year, when several countries will issue ¤2
coins commemorating the 1957 Treaty of Rome. Same design (the
Campidoglio and the Treaty) for all pieces, with a few country and
language specific "additions". From what I have read, five member states
have already agreed to participate.

And what bothers me again is those "country and language specific additions".
This again will lead to a plethora of new coins.

To a few new types, yes. But euro coins designed after mid-2005 have to
include the country name anyway. And of course these coins will have the
term "Treaty of Rome" in the language/s of the issuing country. Latin
may be more neutral but less practical. ;-)

At the end you will have hundreds of different EUR 2 coins where only one
side will help showing it is not a falsification. But perhaps this all
makes too much sense for the EU.

And if the member states had actually agreed on such a "euroland-wide"
commem (seigniorage issues aside), some people would have complained
that "Brussels" once again wants to make things uniform etc. etc. ...

Christian

Dik T. Winter wrote:

I think that things that are not interesting Europe-wide, or
international, should have commems in the national issues above 2 Euro.

Except that such collector coins do not circulate at all. They may be
used (but hardly ever show up) in the issuing country, and beyond that
they are "worthless". For example, I came across the Belgian
commemorative piece featuring Albert and Henri (and a few, but not many,
other ¤2 commems) in circulation in Germany. But a Belgian, Dutch, etc.
¤10 coin, for example, is not even legal tender here ...

The 2 Euro coin special issues should have been reserved for either
specific international events (Olympic games, World Championship football)
or EU specific events.

Oh great, yet another football coin? g

Christian