Deletion of Zeros 0.00 not 000.

[colbyco]

Perhaps it is you that does not "get it".

So if you hold old ones, isn't it rather obvious that you will need to exchange them for new ones to retain your value? Many articles have specifcally mentioned the "exchange rate" of 1000:1 between old and new.

You don't think that the IMF/UN/US-fed and others have already been looking at the CBI's books? The CBI is likely the most heavily scrutinized central bank that has ever existed.

Sorry that you don't get it because perhaps your mind is bent on believing the smoke the Cbi creates! wake up dude !!! if my theory of removing only one zero as stated many times here comes to fruition i would be cashing out! thus no need for exchanging notes.The notes we cash in then will be retired.The Cbi does not have to open their books to anyone while in the chapter.

[dvforumuser]

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=iz&v=65

So you are saying my GDP figure is low by 50% or so (i.e. 120B instead of 70B), ok. Doesn't change anything in the basic argument.

[colbyco]

So you are saying my GDP figure is low by 50% or so (i.e. 120B instead of 70B), ok. Doesn't change anything in the basic argument.

just food for thought

[dvforumuser]

Sorry that you don't get it because perhaps your mind is bent on believing the smoke the Cbi creates! wake up dude !!! if my theory of removing only one zero as stated many times here comes to fruition i would be cashing out! thus no need for exchanging notes.The notes we cash in then will be retired.The Cbi does not have to open their books to anyone while in the chapter.

Sure if our dinars become much more valuable we will cash out. It is those who want to continue to use dinars, like Iraqi's, that will exchange. If you think the CBi has somehow manage to conceal all this from the IMF, UN, US, and its auditors, I think it is you who is doing something with smoke! Also there has never been a RD of only 10:1 . Its just not worth the effort. That would make a 25,000 IQD note equal to 2,500 new dinars, yet ALL the articles talk about a 25,000 IQD note being equal to a new 25 dinar note. So, alas, your theory is false.

[colbyco]

Sure if our dinars become much more valuable we will cash out. It is those who want to continue to use dinars, like Iraqi's, that will exchange. If you think the CBi has somehow manage to conceal all this from the IMF, UN, US, and its auditors, I think it is you who is doing something with smoke! Also there has never been a RD of only 10:1 . Its just not worth the effort. That would make a 25,000 IQD note equal to 2,500 new dinars, yet ALL the articles talk about a 25,000 IQD note being equal to a new 25 dinar note. So, alas, your theory is false.

its hard to talk to a driver who is looking at only the rear view mirror .

[dvforumuser]

its hard to talk to a driver who is looking at only the rear view mirror .

Its hard to have a rational debate with someone who only can insult the other party rather than making a supported argument.

[HopefulTxn]

Sorry that you don't get it because perhaps your mind is bent on believing the smoke the Cbi creates! wake up dude !!! if my theory of removing only one zero as stated many times here comes to fruition i would be cashing out! thus no need for exchanging notes.The notes we cash in then will be retired.The Cbi does not have to open their books to anyone while in the chapter.

Can you supply a link to any article that 'only one zero as stated many times' would fall under?

Like others, I have been watching this situation for years. I have seen many articles in that time that talked about a 25,000 becoming a 25, but never once do I remember even one article stating a 50 would become a 5. Any link to such an article would be greatly appreciated.

In regards to the CBI opening their books, we do have to look at them with some skepticism as they are a central bank. But considering they do have to open their books to the IMF when asking for a loan, we can look at those documents for substantiation of currency levels. The last request for a loan via Letter of Intent from the CBI was early last year, and unfortunately the currency they stated was in circulation matched that which the CBI financials stated on their website was in circulation. Could they have reduced that amount in the year since that document was provided to the IMF? Sure. Is it possible that the IMF is putting false CBI financial data on their website for us to view? Possible. There is just no evidence of either happening.

[Joe P]

Cbi 's smoke! current denominations can only work by deleting only 1 zero.

Wow...trolls everywhere.

[colbyco]

Bottom line is that my theory of deleting only one zero makes total economic sense for the situation Iraq faces.Dropping more than one zero matematically makes no sense at all as far as the money supply and denomination categories.Money supply after dropping the 3 zeros will be too low especially for a country who's GDP is expected to increase significantly .Denomination categories with 3 zeros removed would cause confusion as the lower denoms will overlap others and some denomination (paper) will be valued ln cents.Total Confusion for the average Iraq person,remember the Cbi will have to educate them on this before they allow the removal of these zeros, well good luck! My theory works perfectly as far as the money supply of less that one trillion dinars(not too big not too small)remembering that the GDP will grow significantly in the years to come and oil production is expected to grow to another 3 million barrels per day within the next two years.Other factors will contribute to the rise as well.Denominations removing only one zero will appear easy and will not overlap other categories of dinars (just look at the notes minus one zero) and all they have to introduce is the coin 1 and 2 dinar which is said they have already.

[Darin]

So here you agree that there is a relationship between GDP and the value of the money supply. That ratio works for Iraq's economy right now with GDP at something like $70B and the value of M2 around $52B (a ratio in the same ballpark as the US, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and many if not most other functioning economies). But if you propose a 1000:1 RV you are also saying that that ratio can be blow to pieces by increasing the value of the money supply by 1000x. You can't have it both ways.

Certainly as GDP goes up so to will the value of the money supply. Perhaps both by increasing its size, and the exchange rate. Since an RD does not alter the value of the money supply, if the economy is working now, it will work after an RD as well, with the added benefit of not having to deal with such huge amounts.

The CBI will never have a shortage of dinars, they can print all they want. The problem during Sadam's era was that he printed trillions of dinars expanding the size of the money supply by 3000x or so, yet GDP was if anything going down thus you get hyperinflation (the same or lower value divided among 3000 times the number of dinars thus each one is worth 3000x less). There is no problem in adding cash to the money supply or by increasing the exchange rate as long as that increase in the value of the money supply is matched by increases in GDP.

Well, I was not entirely advocating a R/V, just expressiong opinions of the flaws on the R/D and how it only fixes the issues at the given moment. It doesn't prepare successfully for the future and with the amount of time that they are taking, they seem to be preparing for a long-term issue so they won't have to do this again.

CBI does not print IQD, they receive them in from having a 3rd party print for them. (De La Rue did the initial print). I'm not sure if De La Rue is still contracted with them, since when I checked out their site a few months ago I never saw anything indicating that. But, it could be that they don't necessarily advertise what they do.

Very true.....but in a way Darin is right....they haven't had enough currency which is why the amount goes up by trillions every year.....according to the sources anyways.....but I do fail to see how redenominating would hurt the growth because as they are doing right now, they can always just keep printing more which will happen regardless as iraqs economy grows....

Which is a method I will never truly understand... The purchasing power was lost over years due to the excessive printing of currency, so why not put that in reverse? If the economy grows, add value to the currency.

What the central bank intends or is saying they're going to do is basically just get back to where they "wish" to be and when the opportunity arises they'll continue to print currency to maintain the same value.

Why didn't they just take the additional foreign reserves they were receiving and add the value of the reserves into the existing money supply? They had the room to appreciate the value, and it would have been a great opportunity.

No, but instead, they printed more notes to meet the demand and hold a stable rate.

It goes up as GDP is going up. So its a little misleading to say "they haven't had enough" as at any point in time they have about the right amount and right value. Also inflation is in the low single digits at least if not a bit higher so in fact the money supply has been going up a little too fast.

Yes, but why print more? Why not take the value that they have received that allows them to print more & expand the supply by simply appreciating the value of what is already in circulation?

Perhaps it is you that does not "get it".

So if you hold old ones, isn't it rather obvious that you will need to exchange them for new ones to retain your value? Many articles have specifcally mentioned the "exchange rate" of 1000:1 between old and new.

You don't think that the IMF/UN/US-fed and others have already been looking at the CBI's books? The CBI is likely the most heavily scrutinized central bank that has ever existed.

If they were to truly R/V, wouldn't it be obvious that even the old notes may work and function in the economy? Imagine going to a dealership and using cash to buy a car. I bet a true R/V would drive people to the banks to deposit their money. Hey, I bet it would help great in gaining faith in the banking industry. Oh, and people may desire to have cash/debit cards to use in a market place.

I agree, you would think that they're likely heavily scrutinized due to their high levels of corruption. But, the difference from in the past and present is now that the banks are no longer nationalized, the central bank is owned and operated by the Fed. Different situation, different ball game.

Sorry that you don't get it because perhaps your mind is bent on believing the smoke the Cbi creates! wake up dude !!! if my theory of removing only one zero as stated many times here comes to fruition i would be cashing out! thus no need for exchanging notes.The notes we cash in then will be retired.The Cbi does not have to open their books to anyone while in the chapter.

No kidding, right? Why is it always about the 3 zeros? Guess what! Not all current notes in circulation have 3 zeros (i.e., 500, 250, 50)

Why not remove one or two zeros and appreciate the from there? Maybe slowly over time, or in one fell swoop.

Didn't the marshal plan work like this?

I think over time it worked out in a unique way

The faster you exchanged, the more you profited, as time progressed it changed.

1000:1, 100:1, 10:1 R/V so to speak.

The one or two zero theory is rarely ever spoken about on this forum, yet it seems like a feasible possibility.

Sure if our dinars become much more valuable we will cash out. It is those who want to continue to use dinars, like Iraqi's, that will exchange. If you think the CBi has somehow manage to conceal all this from the IMF, UN, US, and its auditors, I think it is you who is doing something with smoke! Also there has never been a RD of only 10:1 . Its just not worth the effort. That would make a 25,000 IQD note equal to 2,500 new dinars, yet ALL the articles talk about a 25,000 IQD note being equal to a new 25 dinar note. So, alas, your theory is false.

There have been on accounts of notes where 2 zeros were removed. Three zeros seems to be the common practice, which is why we see so many examples.

But hey, guess what! There is always a first time for anything... Maybe this will be the first, as we see a hybrid scenario.

Can you supply a link to any article that 'only one zero as stated many times' would fall under?

Like others, I have been watching this situation for years. I have seen many articles in that time that talked about a 25,000 becoming a 25, but never once do I remember even one article stating a 50 would become a 5. Any link to such an article would be greatly appreciated.

In regards to the CBI opening their books, we do have to look at them with some skepticism as they are a central bank. But considering they do have to open their books to the IMF when asking for a loan, we can look at those documents for substantiation of currency levels. The last request for a loan via Letter of Intent from the CBI was early last year, and unfortunately the currency they stated was in circulation matched that which the CBI financials stated on their website was in circulation. Could they have reduced that amount in the year since that document was provided to the IMF? Sure. Is it possible that the IMF is putting false CBI financial data on their website for us to view? Possible. There is just no evidence of either happening.

I recall mention of this on two separate topics in relating to the articles posted. If you frequent the DV forum, you may find it. I would suggest searching for it, but I think the search function on this forum does a poor job on finding results.

[dvforumuser]

Well, I was not entirely advocating a R/V, just expressiong opinions of the flaws on the R/D and how it only fixes the issues at the given moment. It doesn't prepare successfully for the future and with the amount of time that they are taking, they seem to be preparing for a long-term issue so they won't have to do this again.

An RD only fixes the issue of too large a money supply from past hyperinflation. Nothing else. I think it does prepare for the future as it brings the money supply back to a reasonable size and thus the exchange rate also to a reasonable level (around a buck).

CBI does not print IQD, they receive them in from having a 3rd party print for them. (De La Rue did the initial print). I'm not sure if De La Rue is still contracted with them, since when I checked out their site a few months ago I never saw anything indicating that. But, it could be that they don't necessarily advertise what they do.

Right, I didn't mean the CBI owns the presses, but they can have more printed or maybe they have a adequate supply. Dinars wear out pretty fast so somehow they are injecting new ones into the system to replace the worn out ones.

Which is a method I will never truly understand... The purchasing power was lost over years due to the excessive printing of currency, so why not put that in reverse? If the economy grows, add value to the currency.

What the central bank intends or is saying they're going to do is basically just get back to where they "wish" to be and when the opportunity arises they'll continue to print currency to maintain the same value.

Why didn't they just take the additional foreign reserves they were receiving and add the value of the reserves into the existing money supply? They had the room to appreciate the value, and it would have been a great opportunity.

No, but instead, they printed more notes to meet the demand and hold a stable rate.

The purchasing power of a single dinar went into the dumper but the value or purchasing power of the entire money supply remains the same. Individuals get screwed since they can't really keep up. As to why they have not let the exchange rate drift up, I don't know either. I agree that it seems like they could have done so. Maybe they really are trying to avoid the impact of speculators, maybe they want to RD first. But I agree that letting the rate go up a bit would have worked as well. Though you do have to be a bit careful as you really only want to RD by a power of ten, so if you are set on 1000:1 then you can't let the current exchange rate go to high or the rate for the post RD currency will then be higher than you want.

If they were to truly R/V, wouldn't it be obvious that even the old notes may work and function in the economy? Imagine going to a dealership and using cash to buy a car. I bet a true R/V would drive people to the banks to deposit their money. Hey, I bet it would help great in gaining faith in the banking industry. Oh, and people may desire to have cash/debit cards to use in a market place.

If they did a 1000:1 RV, then the current notes would NOT work in the economy as there is no way to make change. No one walks around with a few 100,000 USD worth in their pockets.

No kidding, right? Why is it always about the 3 zeros? Guess what! Not all current notes in circulation have 3 zeros (i.e., 500, 250, 50)

Why not remove one or two zeros and appreciate the from there? Maybe slowly over time, or in one fell swoop.

Didn't the marshal plan work like this?

I think over time it worked out in a unique way

The faster you exchanged, the more you profited, as time progressed it changed.

1000:1, 100:1, 10:1 R/V so to speak.

The one or two zero theory is rarely ever spoken about on this forum, yet it seems like a feasible possibility.

France did a 100:1 RV, so two zeros, in 1960. But they are the only ones. Most have been 1000:1 but a few are much bigger.

[Darin]

An RD only fixes the issue of too large a money supply from past hyperinflation. Nothing else. I think it does prepare for the future as it brings the money supply back to a reasonable size and thus the exchange rate also to a reasonable level (around a buck).

Right, I didn't mean the CBI owns the presses, but they can have more printed or maybe they have a adequate supply. Dinars wear out pretty fast so somehow they are injecting new ones into the system to replace the worn out ones.

The purchasing power of a single dinar went into the dumper but the value or purchasing power of the entire money supply remains the same. Individuals get screwed since they can't really keep up. As to why they have not let the exchange rate drift up, I don't know either. I agree that it seems like they could have done so. Maybe they really are trying to avoid the impact of speculators, maybe they want to RD first. But I agree that letting the rate go up a bit would have worked as well. Though you do have to be a bit careful as you really only want to RD by a power of ten, so if you are set on 1000:1 then you can't let the current exchange rate go to high or the rate for the post RD currency will then be higher than you want.

If they did a 1000:1 RV, then the current notes would NOT work in the economy as there is no way to make change. No one walks around with a few 100,000 USD worth in their pockets.

France did a 100:1 RV, so two zeros, in 1960. But they are the only ones. Most have been 1000:1 but a few are much bigger.

Going off of memory, I believe an Asian country and a south American country did a removal of two zeros. One was successful, the other had to quickly revert back to where they were because they saw it was not going to work out.

I'm skeptical of a 1,000:1 R/V, but thinking as if they were to actually accomplish it, it would require 1 of 2 things initially. The ability to use electronic payment via check cards, cash cards, etc & also lower denominations to make change.

Individuals get the shaft because the market doesn't adjust fast enough to account for the lost value. In the U.S., we encounter inflation every year, but our jobs give us raises for duration of employment & also account for costs of living increases, etc. Just imagine how wealthy you would feel if the prices of goods & services dropped to what they were in the beginning of the 1900s and your account balance with the bank remained the same.

Since the CBI appears to continuously have currency printed, I also find it interesting how we can't manage to find the exact details of the company that does it & the amount. We know that De La Rue was the initial printing and distribution, but their site does not give much more information than simply making the statement that they acquired the contract.

They've converted their currency in the past, so why did they not R/D back in 2004? Great time to do it, since new money was being distributed. The money supply was expanded from the former regime. A lot of that currency was spread around the region. I would imagine a majority of it ended up in Kuwait. A lot of surrounding countries had businesses who held large sums of the money. But the interesting part is how all foreign held currency became useless after the exchange in 2004. That means, if you were from another country holding the old regime notes, you suddenly got to sit back and watch the currency you held basically become worthless paper. Now, if a LOT of currency was outside of the country, this means that the expiration of notes outside of the country led to a reduction of liabilities to the central bank. As for those that exchanged in-country, the notes were tested to ensure they were not counterfeit. The counterfeit expectation was high, but in reality the percentage that were indeed counterfeit were low. This was done during 2004, during a period of high stress & threat throughout the nation. It would stand to reason that many citizens feared being near large groups of people and stayed home. What this may have led to is an additional amount of old regime notes that never got exchanged. It would withstand to reason that is a distinct possibility. (This is an opinion added to two separate articles, 1) about how the exchange process went down with the interview with the guy who from Washington who was retired and brought back to oversee it & another about how some Jordan business owners felt shafted that their notes became worthless because the country shut down borders during the exchange period).

The initial print & distribution was 6.38 Trillion. 2 Trillion was allocated to reserves. The exchange was initially 1:1 for old to new, and 150:1 for Swiss. USD was not allowed to be exchanged until later on. Also, the initial print did not include the 250 note, which was later added to the mix. Each year, they've printed to a point they expanded by an additional 3 trillion. Could it stand to reason that the 3 trillion consistency is simply based upon replacing soiled note for new? Or would we be able to conclude that their economy is growing nearly 75% each year? Well, I'm not 100% sure which route you would desire to find, but in 2006/2007 it increased by 6 trillion. The economy doubled during a time of civil war breaking out? Odd...

Has their economy grown since than? It would be hard to argue it hasn't. But why the consistent 3T expansion w/ the exception of 2007 or 2008 (not sure on year) where they expanded by 6T? Who knows, but it would make complete sense that they're printing to exchange soiled notes because the life expectancy is rather short. It is basically a reasonable theory because if 27 trillion truly did exist the costs of printing new to replace old would be high! The initial print/release was $150 million... Take that by 4 times and your looking at about $600 million a year.

On a side note: A re-denomination only reduces the total money supply based upon their face value. It doesn't change the number of notes in circulation, as if all notes were exchanged at 1000:1 (R/D) the same # of notes exist, but the sum of the face value is divided by 1,000. (I.e., if we held 40 notes @ 25,000, a 1000:1 R/D would equal 40 notes @ 25). The replacements costs still exist... It would not reduce the amount to be paid to replace the soiled as that cost would be projected the same.

1. Would it increase faith in banks? Undetermined

2. Would it increase demand in the IQD? Undetermined

3. Would it make accounting easier? Many would agree

4. Would it make cash transactions easier? Probably

1 & 2 could work out good or bad. 3 & 4 are the reasons they claim for the R/D. Is the benefits of that worth all this trouble? It may make it easier, but it may have no significant impact on demand. Heck, if it doesn't become internationally tradeable, demand may drop because of the additional currency in the market. Who wants to remember numerous exchange rates, right? They already have a high demand for USD, it may just continue to be a trend.

What are they lacking? Motivation and incentive to use IQD over USD. I don't think that can be found in a value-neutral event. Negative reinforcement by making USD difficult to use or become more taxed is only going to leave a bitter taste in people's mouths about how the CBI or GOI functions.

Other factors many may not consider:

Speculation dumping holdings... What kind of problems would this cause? Neighboring regions, neighboring speculators, state side speculators, withdrawing from warka, withdrawing from the ISX, etc.

Can their reserves & economy handle this?

I'm not advocating a 1000:1 R/V, but I think their best solution is to basically put how they got to a highly inflated economy and turn back the clock and take the steps back. Increasing the value slowly over time is likey the reasonable solution. But in recent years, we have seen that does not seem to be their desire or intent with the stable exchange rate and R/D talk.

[caz1104]

Its hard to have a rational debate with someone who only can insult the other party rather than making a supported argument.

I know you had ur dinar up 4 sale,did u rid urself of them?

[dvforumuser]

As to why they did not do the RD in 2004, I of course don't know either. I'd guess that they just didn't have time to explain it. If you're getting 1:1 or for the Swiss dinar 150:1, most will accept that. But if you getting 1 for 1000, without a big media campaign that's likely to upset folks. Also I'm not so sure I believe the "ver little counterfeiting" claim for the 2004 exchange as the big problem with the Saddam era dinars is that they had so few anti-counterfeiting features that it was quite possible to print bills that would pass full inspection.

Also an RD can, and in this case will, reduce the number of notes as it not a note for note exchange. e.g. they will have a 100 and 200 dinar bill in the new currency so 8 25,000s can exchange for a single 200.

I agree that most of the new bills have to be for replacement, other wise inflation would be much higher than 5%-10%.

I also agree that an RD is not essential or critical but just a good thing. it only is very likely to fix your points 3 and 4 so that is perhaps why they are not in a huge hurry (to say the least!).

I know you had ur dinar up 4 sale,did u rid urself of them?

Not yet. One buyer wanted a lower price (its already 200 bucks below the dealers), and one wanted me to ship to a US military base which is forbidden. Neither wanted the whole pile of course. Oh then there was the guy that decided after chatting about it that he should save his money for an upcoming vacation! :-) Edited March 1, 2012 by dvforumuser

[Darin]

As to why they did not do the RD in 2004, I of course don't know either. I'd guess that they just didn't have time to explain it. If you're getting 1:1 or for the Swiss dinar 150:1, most will accept that. But if you getting 1 for 1000, without a big media campaign that's likely to upset folks. Also I'm not so sure I believe the "ver little counterfeiting" claim for the 2004 exchange as the big problem with the Saddam era dinars is that they had so few anti-counterfeiting features that it was quite possible to print bills that would pass full inspection.

Also an RD can, and in this case will, reduce the number of notes as it not a note for note exchange. e.g. they will have a 100 and 200 dinar bill in the new currency so 8 25,000s can exchange for a single 200.

I agree that most of the new bills have to be for replacement, other wise inflation would be much higher than 5%-10%.

I also agree that an RD is not essential or critical but just a good thing. it only is very likely to fix your points 3 and 4 so that is perhaps why they are not in a huge hurry (to say the least!).

Not yet. One buyer wanted a lower price (its already 200 bucks below the dealers), and one wanted me to ship to a US military base which is forbidden. Neither wanted the whole pile of course. Oh then there was the guy that decided after chatting about it that he should save his money for an upcoming vacation! :-)

If 25,000s were replaced with 25s, 10,000s replace with 10s, 5,000s replaces with 5s, and so forth. The same number of bills exist. If they felt they needed larger notes to accomodate larger purchases, they would have introduced a 50,000 note & 100,000 note as the articles at one time pointed out as a possibility. The counterfitting claim was a legit issue, but in reality it was less than predicted during the exchange period. Maybe the locals were more familiar in how to avoid counterfit bills and they mostly resided in neighboring countries.

On another note, they did this exchange in 2004, and within 3-4 years were already noting that a re-denomination may be a likely outcome. Printing, distributing, etc for 3-4 years and already talking about replacing it all together!?! I find that odd for some reason. To put it in perspective, they've talked about it longer while the new currency has been out than not talking about it since it has been out.

2004-2007 (3 years w/o much reference)

2007-2012 (5 years regarding it & talking about it)

But all we can do is just talk about our speculative opinions and remain optimistic.

[keepmwlknfny]

If 25,000s were replaced with 25s, 10,000s replace with 10s, 5,000s replaces with 5s, and so forth. The same number of bills exist.

Dont forget though that not all the bills would be replaced with other bills.....there was a few articles mentioning coins/fils so I guess technically there would be a reduction in BILLS....which could also be why some of the numbers given in some of these articles do not line up exactly with a 3 zero lop......

[dvforumuser]

If 25,000s were replaced with 25s, 10,000s replace with 10s, 5,000s replaces with 5s, and so forth. The same number of bills exist. If they felt they needed larger notes to accomodate larger purchases, they would have introduced a 50,000 note & 100,000 note as the articles at one time pointed out as a possibility.

Right, several articles have said they will have 50s, 100s, and 200s in the new currency. I think the latest one said "5 or 6" denominations or "6 or 7" was it, i.e. I'm not sure they have decided. Even without 100s or 200s (or even 50s) you still might want to get a 25 from five 5,000s.

[Darin]

Dont forget though that not all the bills would be replaced with other bills.....there was a few articles mentioning coins/fils so I guess technically there would be a reduction in BILLS....which could also be why some of the numbers given in some of these articles do not line up exactly with a 3 zero lop......

I'm going off of memory here, but, if I recall that the people don't care to work with coinage. And one way to prove that is how they've had monetary units at a value of less than 1 on paper.

Like a 1/2 dinar note or a 1/4 dinar note, etc. etc.

Right, several articles have said they will have 50s, 100s, and 200s in the new currency. I think the latest one said "5 or 6" denominations or "6 or 7" was it, i.e. I'm not sure they have decided. Even without 100s or 200s (or even 50s) you still might want to get a 25 from five 5,000s.

It depends on what is useable in the market. Travelers & big businesses may prefer the larger bills while the younger merchant/consumer may want smaller bills. Remember, they like to negotiate over there and to do so effectively requires smaller units of currency.

[one2one]

sure, they can bring out new currency without 3 zeroes :

and the old notes will co-exist along with the new ones :

they are not going to say that our 25k notes are bogus

[keepmwlknfny]

I'm going off of memory here, but, if I recall that the people don't care to work with coinage. And one way to prove that is how they've had monetary units at a value of less than 1 on paper.

Yea your right, when the first couple of coins came out they turned out to be pointless because of the low purchasing power....but if they actually had value I dont see why they wouldnt be used....and I believe they specifically mentioned a 1 and 2 dinar coin...or maybe that was a 100 and 200 dinar coin....one or the other....

[Darin]

Yea your right, when the first couple of coins came out they turned out to be pointless because of the low purchasing power....but if they actually had value I dont see why they wouldnt be used....and I believe they specifically mentioned a 1 and 2 dinar coin...or maybe that was a 100 and 200 dinar coin....one or the other....

Well the coins were a 25 IQD coin & a 100 IQD coin.

But, they have a 50 note... (Basically a nickle)

So if they couldn't get the 100 IQD coin to work, but the 50 note to work out, the people may not prefer to use change.

Who here uses change in the U.S.? other than moments after using cash to use the left over change on a vending machine.

It wouldn't surprise me to see them do a 1/2 dinar or 1/4 dinar note. (We've seen it in the past...)

I think it was BIW that jokingly stated, where would they put it if they don't have pocket?

[keepmwlknfny]

Well the coins were a 25 IQD coin & a 100 IQD coin.

But, they have a 50 note... (Basically a nickle)

So if they couldn't get the 100 IQD coin to work, but the 50 note to work out, the people may not prefer to use change.

Who here uses change in the U.S.? other than moments after using cash to use the left over change on a vending machine.

It wouldn't surprise me to see them do a 1/2 dinar or 1/4 dinar note. (We've seen it in the past...)

I think it was BIW that jokingly stated, where would they put it if they don't have pocket?

Ultimately it will be up to the CBI, but if they are talking about introducing coins, then that right there will reduce the amount of notes in circulation as well as the value....

[pocono]

Ultimately it will be up to the CBI, but if they are talking about introducing coins, then that right there will reduce the amount of notes in circulation as well as the value....

You're right...they announced a 1 and 2 dinar coin as part of the new currency...Kurdish Globe 2/25..

[Luigi1]

We can speculate and guess all we want to...it don't mean a thing untill the final rate comes out after RV.

Shabibi is king flip flopper. His story changes every day. Who knows what he will have to say tomorrow.

Raising one zero makes more sense. This buys more time to allow the economy to rebuild and pay for the other two zeros later on.

[keepmwlknfny]

You're right...they announced a 1 and 2 dinar coin as part of the new currency...Kurdish Globe 2/25..

Thats what I thought it was! LOL.....so you can take your 1000 dinar note and trade for a 1 dinar coin if they RD.....