Reading the ny times this morning,I <BR>noticed that they are still posting <BR>the value of the dollar vs. the mark,<BR>franc, etc......WHY?

I don't know for the Mark, but the Franc is still official for a few weeks yet, alongside the Euro. I know the Franc is fixed to the Euro, so the Times only NEEDS to put in one, but this presumably makes it easier for anyone who is working in Francs till they are gone?<BR><BR>Kavey

Two possible answers come to mind - - 1) those currencies ARE still legal tender - - and 2) even beyond that - - in the case of the Deutsch mark, there are a few countries (for example, Slovakia and/or Croatia, I think?) that adopted the mark officially as the standard for their own currency. I believe that there is still some indecision as to what will happen in those countries. They can't trade in their marks for Euros in their own countries. Many don't believe in their own country's banking system and don't want to trade in their horded marks for their own currency either.<BR><BR>Not to mention the tax implications of "fessing up" to what's been hiding in the mattress.<BR><BR>In the twelve official countries, the mental process will linger quite a while. At official banks, they can trade in their own currencies for a year or more, I think - - maybe several years - - even if they can't be used in commerce beyond the first few months of this year.<BR><BR>Best wishes,<BR><BR>Rex<BR>

Rex: the countries that had adapted the DMark as their currency are Montenegro and Kosovo. They are changing to the euro, too. Millions of euros were shipped to those countries and banks are changing the Dmarks to euros now. In Montenegro, the government even ran a campaign saying "the euro, our money", similar to the official European Central Bank campaign. <BR>

Hi JKD,<BR><BR>check out www.euro.ecb.int/en.html

It helps for people who are trying to convert these currencies to non-Euro currencies (franc to dollars, for example) or French francs to Swiss francs; certain currencies are so well known it gives people a reference while they get used to the euro.<BR>FYI, I tried to change some USD into British &pound; tonight at the Brussels train station. The guy at the change counter asked I was going to the UK, I said yes, and he said to wait and change my money in London, otherwise I'd get charged two fees, one to change the dollars to euros and another to change the euros to pounds. Nice of him to tell me that in advance. <BR>BTilke

Question to BTilke:<BR><BR>This has nothing to do with the euro, does it? Hasn't it always been true that to buy the currency of country A using currency from country B, while you are in country C - - involves two transactions, and thus two fees?<BR><BR>Was it any less true when Belgian francs were the only legal currency in Brussels?<BR><BR>Not trying to be a smart aleck - - I am asking, seriously.<BR>

You are correct Rex. <BR>BEF or EUR makes no difference in this case. It is a double transaction involving 2x exchange fee.

No, Rex and Myriam, it doesn't. I routinely changed dollars to other non-bef currencies at the same "wissel" at the Gare du Midi and only paid one transaction fee. Ditto for the money change on the Ave. de la Toison d'Or. This double fee is a post-euro charge, according to the guy at the wissel.<BR>