Just got this email today from www.xe.com.
When I emailed them 2 weeks ago they told me they were not considering it.
Now they have seen the news and their competitors listing Bitcoin :-)
Thanks for the info.
Given the increased interest in Bitcoin over the past couple of weeks we are considering it. Please note that even if we do list the curency, it's unlikely we'll be able to use the popular contraction BTC as there's a specific format to currency codes and this would contravene those properties.
An ISO 4217 currency code is generally built from the two digit ISO 3316 country code and a third letter for the currency. In this globally used format, BT would be the equivalent of the two letter country code. There are two problems caused by this:
a) Bitcoin is not a country
b) BT is already in use as an ISO3316 code for Bhutan
Since the ISO doesn't have a 4217 code for Bitcoin, but BTC would conflict with the existing global standards, it's unlikely that we would that 'code' if we were to list Bitcoins.
Thank you for your interest in our company and services.
Sincerely,
XE Currency Services Team
XE.com Inc. · 1145 Nicholson Rd · Suite 200 · Newmarket · Ontario · L3Y 9C3 · Canada
www.xe.com · +1 416 214-5606 · Fax +1 416 214-5607
Topic: [VOTE] ISO Currency Code bringing Bitcoin into the mainstream financial markets - page 2. (Read 8868 times)
April 04, 2013, 02:50:08 PM
March 27, 2013, 05:25:18 PM
Apparently XBC is a "basket of currencies":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Unit_of_Account
Hasn't been used since 1979, if the article is accurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Unit_of_Account
Hasn't been used since 1979, if the article is accurate.
March 27, 2013, 04:03:28 PM
http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/
OANDA already uses BTC in its currency conversion. Bhutan's symbol is BHN
OANDA already uses BTC in its currency conversion. Bhutan's symbol is BHN
Wow. When did that happen? I used to check regularly to see if they had added Bitcoin, but up until a couple weeks ago they still hadn't.
Nice! I watch them for other things lately but never noticed they've added BTC. Cool!
March 27, 2013, 03:11:30 PM
http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/
OANDA already uses BTC in its currency conversion. Bhutan's symbol is BHN
OANDA already uses BTC in its currency conversion. Bhutan's symbol is BHN
Wow. When did that happen? I used to check regularly to see if they had added Bitcoin, but up until a couple weeks ago they still hadn't.
March 27, 2013, 03:08:33 PM
http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/
OANDA already uses BTC in its currency conversion. Bhutan's symbol is BHN
OANDA already uses BTC in its currency conversion. Bhutan's symbol is BHN
March 27, 2013, 03:04:08 PM
I would propose these currency codes:
XBT for Bitcoin
XBM for milliBitcoin
XBN for microBitcoin
Some may get officially registered by ISO, some may not.
Using smaller denominations makes sense as it is common to use 2 fractional digits in amounts.
XBT for Bitcoin
XBM for milliBitcoin
XBN for microBitcoin
Some may get officially registered by ISO, some may not.
Using smaller denominations makes sense as it is common to use 2 fractional digits in amounts.
March 27, 2013, 09:16:15 AM
+1 to the suggestion to make XBT 1 millionth of a BTC... its unfortunately small right now, but we have the colloquial BTM (millibitcoin) to get us there (and I strongly recommend at 100USD/BTC people start switching over b/c psychologically nobody wants to own a tiny fraction of something)
what feels better? Spend a buck for 10 BTM or .01 BTC
what feels better? Spend a buck for 10 BTM or .01 BTC
March 17, 2013, 11:21:32 PM
grau, I understand the rationale of this suggestion, but here I think we have to agree to disagree.
You are discussing currency rankings for standardized cross-rate quoting, which has an interesting history.
The first properly quoted currency pair was GBPUSD, still known as cable, for which real-time quotes became possible in the 1800s when a telegraph cable was laid across the North Atlantic. Because sterling was the reserve currency at the time this rate was 1 GBP = n USD. Despite the USD becoming reserve currency the rate convention remained the same, and even the Australian and New Zealand dollars were ranked above the USD when they were invented and split off from sterling in the 1960s. GBP remained top ranked until Jan 1st 1999 when the euro became a currency (for financial transactions). The EU wanted EURXXX so that all currencies were quoted to 1 euro. Some banks in London rebelled, led by RBS, tried to make an exception for GBPEUR, but the market won out and they failed. So the euro elbowed sterling off the top rank.
Enter Bitcoin. In 2009 Bitcoin was first issued and the convention of BTCXXX has resulted, the market always quotes other currencies to 1 BTC. So Bitcoin has elbowed the euro off the top rank. I think this is how it should be as Bitcoin has gone from the world's weakest to strongest currency (per unit purchasing power) on its own merits!
This means that the XBTUSD rate would be .000047 at present, which is unwieldy today, but they may be 1:1 in 20 or 30 years time!
You are discussing currency rankings for standardized cross-rate quoting, which has an interesting history.
The first properly quoted currency pair was GBPUSD, still known as cable, for which real-time quotes became possible in the 1800s when a telegraph cable was laid across the North Atlantic. Because sterling was the reserve currency at the time this rate was 1 GBP = n USD. Despite the USD becoming reserve currency the rate convention remained the same, and even the Australian and New Zealand dollars were ranked above the USD when they were invented and split off from sterling in the 1960s. GBP remained top ranked until Jan 1st 1999 when the euro became a currency (for financial transactions). The EU wanted EURXXX so that all currencies were quoted to 1 euro. Some banks in London rebelled, led by RBS, tried to make an exception for GBPEUR, but the market won out and they failed. So the euro elbowed sterling off the top rank.
Enter Bitcoin. In 2009 Bitcoin was first issued and the convention of BTCXXX has resulted, the market always quotes other currencies to 1 BTC. So Bitcoin has elbowed the euro off the top rank. I think this is how it should be as Bitcoin has gone from the world's weakest to strongest currency (per unit purchasing power) on its own merits!
This means that the XBTUSD rate would be .000047 at present, which is unwieldy today, but they may be 1:1 in 20 or 30 years time!
You are right, that market conventions usually reflect views of the dominant player. Realistically, Bitcoin is not a dominant player in the area of mainstream finance that we want to enter, therefore XBTUSD would be exerted. It would also be problematic in magnitude as you already noted FX trading systems work with 4 decimals. Again, the goal is to not be unwieldy (as you put it), but accommodating to the rest of the world. We will arrive at 1:1 either way on the long run.
May I add an other psychological argument in favor of USDXBT (or YYYXBT if your fiat currency is YYY):
With YYYXBT you know how many XBTs you will get for 1 fiat YYY.
With XBTYYY you know how many fiat YYYs you will get for 1 XBT.
We likely want to help reading the quote those willing to buy XBT and not those who want to cash out to fiat.
March 17, 2013, 07:51:08 PM
..Bitcoin will get where it wants to go eventually no reason to force it at every chance you get and wind up with everything crushed by regulators and gigantic banks.
It's called beating them at their own game. You can't beat them if you just lurk in the sidelines.
..< MAKES YOU SUBJECT TO A WHOLE RAFT OF LAWS>>>>
We can't all live off-grid like you and John Connor.
March 17, 2013, 07:42:31 PM
YOUR CRAZY THEY LAST THING YOU WANT IT BTC RECONIZED AS AN OFFICAL CURRENCY< MAKES YOU SUBJECT TO A WHOLE RAFT OF LAWS>>>>
BITCOIN WILL SURVIVE AND THRIVE ON MERIT
YOU WANT TO MAKE IT GOV FIAT
BITCOIN WILL SURVIVE AND THRIVE ON MERIT
YOU WANT TO MAKE IT GOV FIAT
March 17, 2013, 03:46:10 PM
I vote for no 'mainstream acceptance' then we don't end up taken over by wallstreet speculators.
Bitcoin will get where it wants to go eventually no reason to force it at every chance you get and wind up with everything crushed by regulators and gigantic banks. There's also a copyright on "X coin" so XBT might have problems
Bitcoin will get where it wants to go eventually no reason to force it at every chance you get and wind up with everything crushed by regulators and gigantic banks. There's also a copyright on "X coin" so XBT might have problems
March 17, 2013, 03:40:57 PM
grau, I understand the rationale of this suggestion, but here I think we have to agree to disagree.
You are discussing currency rankings for standardized cross-rate quoting, which has an interesting history.
The first properly quoted currency pair was GBPUSD, still known as cable, for which real-time quotes became possible in the 1800s when a telegraph cable was laid across the North Atlantic. Because sterling was the reserve currency at the time this rate was 1 GBP = n USD. Despite the USD becoming reserve currency the rate convention remained the same, and even the Australian and New Zealand dollars were ranked above the USD when they were invented and split off from sterling in the 1960s. GBP remained top ranked until Jan 1st 1999 when the euro became a currency (for financial transactions). The EU wanted EURXXX so that all currencies were quoted to 1 euro. Some banks in London rebelled, led by RBS, tried to make an exception for GBPEUR, but the market won out and they failed. So the euro elbowed sterling off the top rank.
Enter Bitcoin. In 2009 Bitcoin was first issued and the convention of BTCXXX has resulted, the market always quotes other currencies to 1 BTC. So Bitcoin has elbowed the euro off the top rank. I think this is how it should be as Bitcoin has gone from the world's weakest to strongest currency (per unit purchasing power) on its own merits!
This means that the XBTUSD rate would be .000047 at present, which is unwieldy today, but they may be 1:1 in 20 or 30 years time!
You are discussing currency rankings for standardized cross-rate quoting, which has an interesting history.
The first properly quoted currency pair was GBPUSD, still known as cable, for which real-time quotes became possible in the 1800s when a telegraph cable was laid across the North Atlantic. Because sterling was the reserve currency at the time this rate was 1 GBP = n USD. Despite the USD becoming reserve currency the rate convention remained the same, and even the Australian and New Zealand dollars were ranked above the USD when they were invented and split off from sterling in the 1960s. GBP remained top ranked until Jan 1st 1999 when the euro became a currency (for financial transactions). The EU wanted EURXXX so that all currencies were quoted to 1 euro. Some banks in London rebelled, led by RBS, tried to make an exception for GBPEUR, but the market won out and they failed. So the euro elbowed sterling off the top rank.
Enter Bitcoin. In 2009 Bitcoin was first issued and the convention of BTCXXX has resulted, the market always quotes other currencies to 1 BTC. So Bitcoin has elbowed the euro off the top rank. I think this is how it should be as Bitcoin has gone from the world's weakest to strongest currency (per unit purchasing power) on its own merits!
This means that the XBTUSD rate would be .000047 at present, which is unwieldy today, but they may be 1:1 in 20 or 30 years time!
March 16, 2013, 03:02:53 PM
I am glad to have your support. I believe your proposal helps mainstream adoption.
May I add an other suggestion to bring XBT even closer to conventions of mainstream financial markets:
FX (foreign exchange) markets use the convention XXXYYY (where XXX and YYY are ISO currency codes) to refer to an FX cross. The direction is given by the order.
Example: USDCHF means 1 USD in CHFs - or how many CHF you get for 1 USD. similarly EURUSD is 1 EUR in USD or how many USD you get for 1 EUR.
Since you could either quote USDCHF (currently about 0.94) or CHFUSD (currently about 1.06) this would drive everybody nuts trying to figure what you mean.
Therefore there is a market convention for every currency pair a particular direction is preferred for quoting.
Nearly all currencies are quoted on mainstream markets as USDXXX (main exception is EURUSD and EURXXX crosses in Europe).
Aligning to that USDXXX majority, market standard quote would be USDXBT that is 1 USD in XBT currently about 20,000.
The beauty of this quote would be that if XBT strengthens it would sink. The message would be USD is falling and not BTC is getting ever more expensive.
Remark:
It would also be simpler for a customer to interpret a price in XBT, it would (currently) be roughly : forget the last 4 digits (likely 0s) and divide by 2 and you have dollars.
I also think that as XBT appreciates it gets cumbersome for customer to deal with prices in decimals below 0.01 but they will have no problems with ten thousands.
May I add an other suggestion to bring XBT even closer to conventions of mainstream financial markets:
FX (foreign exchange) markets use the convention XXXYYY (where XXX and YYY are ISO currency codes) to refer to an FX cross. The direction is given by the order.
Example: USDCHF means 1 USD in CHFs - or how many CHF you get for 1 USD. similarly EURUSD is 1 EUR in USD or how many USD you get for 1 EUR.
Since you could either quote USDCHF (currently about 0.94) or CHFUSD (currently about 1.06) this would drive everybody nuts trying to figure what you mean.
Therefore there is a market convention for every currency pair a particular direction is preferred for quoting.
Nearly all currencies are quoted on mainstream markets as USDXXX (main exception is EURUSD and EURXXX crosses in Europe).
Aligning to that USDXXX majority, market standard quote would be USDXBT that is 1 USD in XBT currently about 20,000.
The beauty of this quote would be that if XBT strengthens it would sink. The message would be USD is falling and not BTC is getting ever more expensive.
Remark:
It would also be simpler for a customer to interpret a price in XBT, it would (currently) be roughly : forget the last 4 digits (likely 0s) and divide by 2 and you have dollars.
I also think that as XBT appreciates it gets cumbersome for customer to deal with prices in decimals below 0.01 but they will have no problems with ten thousands.
March 16, 2013, 05:15:12 AM
Since you recognized that accounting systems require divisibility by not more than 100, it is straightforward that such unit should be the main unit carrying the only ISO code.
grau, your input has been invaluable, thanks!
You have the identified the crucial factor which prevents Bitcoin from becoming integrated into mainstream finance, and that is the 8 decimal places of precision required which is beyond 99.9% of the world's accounting systems.
The debate about numerical representation of dollar amounts is interesting reading:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/61872/use-float-or-decimal-for-accounting-application-dollar-amount
Further, because over 80% of the world's financial transactions are processed in COBOL systems the inertia of maximum 2dp currency amounts is impossible to overcome in the next 20 years, at least. This explains it well: http://www.itworldcanada.com/news/programmings-second-oldest-profession/144636
So, I concur, XBT alone would be sufficient as an ISO code for Bitcoin if it defines 100 satoshi or one millionth of a BTC. This means that Bitcoin amounts and transactions can be easily and quickly supported in the world's mainstream financial systems.
BTC is fine as an informal code for customer-facing usage, just as YEN is used instead of JPY. However, the extra step of multiplying/dividing by 10^6 will need doing as well for conversion to/from XBT by these systems for subsequent processing.
I believe this is the essential part of the next proposal to SIX to get Bitcoin its ISO recognition.
March 15, 2013, 06:27:30 AM
Yes, FX markets that usually have 1/10000 BUT the accounting and bookkeeping software of banks and others do not.
I guarantee you, since had been working in biggest banks for decades, that they mostly can not deal with money fraction below 1/100, they can however deal with billions.
Please read again, I suggested to use the iso code XBT to be equal 100 satoshi, that means satoshi is the "cent" that does not need a code. 1 BTC would be 1 million XBT
I guarantee you, since had been working in biggest banks for decades, that they mostly can not deal with money fraction below 1/100, they can however deal with billions.
Please read again, I suggested to use the iso code XBT to be equal 100 satoshi, that means satoshi is the "cent" that does not need a code. 1 BTC would be 1 million XBT
You are right that an ISO code is needed for accounting systems which only support 1/100, because precision cannot be lost through rounding on Bitcoin amounts. However, this needs yet another code, like XBH for 100 satoshi.
There is too much inertia in the marketplace for quoting the fx rate between Bitcoin and fiat currencies as 1:1 and I can't see people changing that. So front-office systems will need to translate the ISO code on executions for back-office accounting systems.
So for Bitcoin to be acceptable in all computer systems then it seems that these are needed:
XBT = 1 BTC
XBH = 100 satoshi
And IT teams just need to work with those depending on the systems they have. Sounds reasonable?
Since you recognized that accounting systems require divisibility by not more than 100, it is straightforward that such unit should be the main unit carrying the only ISO code.
It is however usual to prepare financial reports in thousand scale of the currency unit such as thousand USD or million USD.
In the Bitcoin economy that would be thousand XBT or million XBT, the later happens to equal BTC.
Honors to your initiative, that I believe fosters adoption. Please do not stop half-way, but define it in a way that makes adaption to existing systems and market conventions really easy. Remember it has to be easy for the rest of the world not us who are already used to Bitcoin's oddities.
March 15, 2013, 06:08:51 AM
Yes, FX markets that usually have 1/10000 BUT the accounting and bookkeeping software of banks and others do not.
I guarantee you, since had been working in biggest banks for decades, that they mostly can not deal with money fraction below 1/100, they can however deal with billions.
Please read again, I suggested to use the iso code XBT to be equal 100 satoshi, that means satoshi is the "cent" that does not need a code. 1 BTC would be 1 million XBT
I guarantee you, since had been working in biggest banks for decades, that they mostly can not deal with money fraction below 1/100, they can however deal with billions.
Please read again, I suggested to use the iso code XBT to be equal 100 satoshi, that means satoshi is the "cent" that does not need a code. 1 BTC would be 1 million XBT
You are right that an ISO code is needed for accounting systems which only support 1/100, because precision cannot be lost through rounding on Bitcoin amounts. However, this needs yet another code, like XBH for 100 satoshi.
There is too much inertia in the marketplace for quoting the fx rate between Bitcoin and fiat currencies as 1:1 and I can't see people changing that. So front-office systems will need to translate the ISO code on executions for back-office accounting systems.
So for Bitcoin to be acceptable in all computer systems then it seems that these are needed:
XBT = 1 BTC
XBH = 100 satoshi
And IT teams just need to work with those depending on the systems they have. Sounds reasonable?
March 15, 2013, 05:44:25 AM
Because Bitcoin is a world currency ideally it should have an X-code to reflect this.
Consider existing ones: XAG (Silver), XAU (Gold), XPD (Palladium) XPT (Platinum). If Bitcoin is "virtual gold" then it needs a code like the other precious metals.
Consider existing ones: XAG (Silver), XAU (Gold), XPD (Palladium) XPT (Platinum). If Bitcoin is "virtual gold" then it needs a code like the other precious metals.
Not sure, I'm thinking "is worldwide, isn't a metal".
But Bitcoins are made from bitium. That's a metal.
March 15, 2013, 05:42:59 AM
You have our support for BTC (if we can find someone to talk to in Bhutan) or XBT/XTC. Other names are not much representative of Bitcoin.
Neither is XTC. That is: it's only going to be understood by a small minorty.
March 15, 2013, 05:36:32 AM
XBS could be used for 1 satoshi, however XBT needs to equal 1 BTC.
I think the purpose of this initiative to open for mainstream.
I can tell from long experience with banking software, that dealing with fractions less than 1/100 for money is a challenge to them!
It is however not to deal with billions.
If we do this change to open for mainstream, then let us define XBT as 100 satoshi. This would fit perfectly with existing infrastructure and familiar to people.
USDXBT (again using FX market standard conventions) would be about 20,000 now and declining as XBT strengthens expressing nicely that USD falls.
I see where you are coming from. I too have long experience with banking software and I agree a lot of them are limited in this respect, but mostly the 3GL mainframe systems. Newer (21st century) systems are more flexible. In FX trading it is common to quote in pips to 5dp or 6dp, check out oanda.com for example: http://fxtrade.oanda.co.uk/?&stop-geo-ip=yes&country=united%20kingdom&division=fxtrade.oanda.co.uk
They should be able to cope with Bitcoin's decimals.
It would just be too weird to have an ISO code for a value (1/100) which did not equal either the major or minor currency unit.
As you are proposing to fit to a 20th century standard, therefore you have to accept its limits.
Yes, FX markets that usually have 1/10000 BUT the accounting and bookkeeping software of banks and others do not.
I guarantee you, since had been working in biggest banks for decades, that they mostly can not deal with money fraction below 1/100, they can however deal with billions.
Please read again, I suggested to use the iso code XBT to be equal 100 satoshi, that means satoshi is the "cent" that does not need a code. 1 BTC would be 1 million XBT.
March 15, 2013, 05:28:45 AM
XBS could be used for 1 satoshi, however XBT needs to equal 1 BTC.
I think the purpose of this initiative to open for mainstream.
I can tell from long experience with banking software, that dealing with fractions less than 1/100 for money is a challenge to them!
It is however not to deal with billions.
If we do this change to open for mainstream, then let us define XBT as 100 satoshi. This would fit perfectly with existing infrastructure and familiar to people.
USDXBT (again using FX market standard conventions) would be about 20,000 now and declining as XBT strengthens expressing nicely that USD falls.
I see where you are coming from. I too have long experience with banking software and I agree a lot of them are limited in this respect, but mostly the 3GL mainframe systems. Newer (21st century) systems are more flexible. In FX trading it is common to quote in pips to 5dp or 6dp, check out oanda.com for example: http://fxtrade.oanda.co.uk/?&stop-geo-ip=yes&country=united%20kingdom&division=fxtrade.oanda.co.uk
They should be able to cope with Bitcoin's decimals.
It would just be too weird to have an ISO code for a value (1/100) which did not equal either the major or minor currency unit.
Solex, compliments for your efforts! I believe that everything that will make Bitcoin more mainstream will significantly strengthen the project and improve the chance that we will be using it fifty years from now.
Thanks! I agree this is the way forward to help cement Bitcoin's future.
Jump to: