October 31, 2025, 03:26:34 AM

News

Medallions   

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Humpybong


Great article in one of our newspapers this morning:


   http://www.smh.com.au/money/on-the-money/holts-folly-one-royal-we-rejected-20130604-2nmoa.html


Glad someone had some common (cents)


Barry
Brisbane, Australia
Forum Administrator

"Experience enables you to recognise a mistake when you make it a again"
 


Offline Triggersmob

  • Master Collector
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member Knight
  • *****
  • Western Australian State Flag
Yes, I'm glad they went with dollar and not Royal.
Although some of those note designs are very nice.

Steve
(From Western Australia)

OFEC count 239
See my gallery here, now with over 15,000 images...
http://www.coincommunity.org/gallery/index.php?cat=10048
 


Offline Sap

  • Master Collector
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member Knight
  • *****
  • The Numismatichemist
I'd heard about the proposed "royal" name, and read articles in really old ACR mags about it - they also showed some of the mock-up artwork made with the name - but wasn't aware of the extent of the "controversy" about it at the time.

As divisive as the name might have been, "royal" would have had the advantage of being unique. The only other country in the 20th century to use that word for a coinage denomination was Gibraltar, and they didn't start using it until 1990.

My favourite alternative currency unit name, of the list of names proposed back then, is "austral". This, too, would have been unique, and much less... colonial. That name's been ruined now, of course: during their period of hyperinflation following the loss of the Falklands War, Argentina briefly used the "austral" currency name (1985-1991). Wikipedia.

KoCT #21

The early bird gets the worm, sure, but the second mouse gets the cheese.