Talk:Swiss franc/Archives/2012

Join the Euro

The article states that the swiss franc/euro rate is stable. Is this government policy or market driven? Is there any discussion of the franc joining the Euro? (Switzerland is not an EU member, however it has signed several EU treaties, such as the Schengen agreement on unified visa systems) Seabhcán 11:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

I have begun to answer my own question, but I haven't found much on the web. It sounds like it is Swiss Central Bank policy to maintain stable exchange rate with the euro [1] and there is some discussion of joining the euro [2]. Anyone got an opinion on this? Seabhcán 12:06, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know, it's not an official peg, but it's inofficial policy to have a stable rate to the euro. And if I know the Swiss, they won't join the euro in the next twenty years... ;) ナイトスタリオン ✉ 13:59, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Ya, there is that old joke about the Swiss; They're not neutral, just indecisive. Seabhcán 14:09, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

grins Didn't know that one, but it pretty much hits home, yeah. Anyway, I personally don't expect the Swiss to join either the Europe or just the € in at least the next decade, though I would welcome it. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 14:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Joining the EU would force them to submit to EU legislation, which would in turn undermine their bank secrecy among other things. In other words, it would be a terrible blow to their economy, and therefore I don't believe they will do so, ever. Staretsen 17:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Being Swiss myself, I would enjoy the fact that we would join the EU, but, I, like many of my compatriots, really dislike the idea of taking the €. The Swiss people likes to hang on to tradition. Booksworm 19:42, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

The reason Switzerland tries to have a stable EUR/CHF rate is that Switzerlands Economy is very much dependent on trade with the european union. Here are some statistics:

Swiss exports 2004: Germany 20,2% USA 10,5% France 8,7% Italy 8,3% UK 5,1% Spain 4%
Swiss imports 2004: Germany 32,8% Italy 11,3% France 9,9% USA 5,2% Netherlands 5% Austria 4,3%

As you can see, having a free EUR/CHF rate would expose a lot of businesses to a exchange rate risk, which is why the SNB manages the Float Rate and also communicates this. Now, whether Switzerland joins the EU is entirely another matter, but personally I don't see it happening. --Snakemike 10:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Is this the factuality dispute? Or why the template? I think the statement is just an US-centric observation: The franc is not tied in any way to the Euro, but both currencies being more or less stable, the franc and the Euro appear to be rising and falling in tandem with regard to the USD, when it is really the USD that is falling and rising. dab (ᛏ) 18:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

• In the case of the dollar recently, it's mostly falling.  :) Acutally, does the bow tighten the string, or does the string bend the bow? It would be potentially ethnocentric to treat any particular currency as the reference denomination against which all others rise and fall, and that observation also applies to other valuable items such as precious metals, commodities, baseball cards, comic books, and Rembrandts. Absent some verifiable way, endorsed by economists, of measuring which currencies are the most stable, identifying which currency is the sun and which is the earth orbiting around it, may be difficult. --EngineerScotty 20:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Just by geography, Switzerland's largest trading partners are going to be France, Germany, Austria and Italy. They are all part of the Euro. One of the major driving forces behind exchange rates are the countries trade flows. The Swiss franc will be highly correlated with the Euro as a result.

From the article:

Someone obviously cant deal with the fact there IS a de-facto peg of the Swiss Franc to the Euro! This can not be disputed, so what is the problem? It is SNB policy!

"However, even though the currency in international trading markets is worth in the range of 80 to 90 U.S. cents, it has surprisingly little actual purchasing power; items tend to cost about twice what they would in the United States (or Canada, whose dollar is worth about the same as the Swiss currency)."

I'm a little confused.

First interpretation: One dollar converted into francs buys half as much (in Switzerland) as it would if you spent it in the United States (purchasing power multiplied by one half).

Second interpretation: Two francs in Switzerland buy about what one dollar does in the United States (so converting dollars into francs multiplies your purchasing power by about ${\frac {0.5}{0.85}}\simeq 0.588$, assuming that the franc is trading for 0.85USD).

Which is it?

Quasicharacter 18:48, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

The correct answer is: "One dollar converted into francs buys half as much (in Switzerland) as it would if you spent it in the United States (purchasing power multiplied by one half).". For example, a Big Mac in Switzerland will cost close to 6 francs. UnHoly 18:01, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

The CHF and CAD haven't been worth the same amount in over 2 years, and therefore the sentence referenced above should be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.162.229 (talk) 16:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

What symbols do the Swiss use for the franc? It looks like they use "Fr." but are there other common forms? Hamster128 07:26, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

CHF (Helvetic confederation franc) is also used. UnHoly 18:01, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

"Fr." and "sFR." used to be common; with the introduction of "CHF" as official symbol, the popularity of "sFR." quickly decreased, whilst "Fr." is still quite often used, though "CHF" is now seen all over the place. Gestumblindi 00:11, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Can I delete the stub link? Because I think this article is now better. --Viperch 20:51, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

---

The above seems to imply that the Swiss Franc does not buy much. In fact the opposite is true. The Swiss Franc is one of the most valuable and stable currencies in the world. If spent in the United States, it will buy about twice as much as in Switzerland. This may imply that Swiss prices are high, or that American prices are low, or it may simply imply that the Swiss Franc is high (over-valued), or that the US Dollar is low (under-valued).Although 16:46, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

The Swiss Franc is indeed a stable currency, but it does buy very little, and is grossly over-valued. Dont believe me? Consult the Big Mac index in the Economist and see for yourself.

Don't confuse over-valued with purchasing power. For example, a bread might cost more to prepare in NY as in a midsized town due to higher wages / rent etc. The same is true for the Swiss franc. Compare the average wages USA / Switzerland for example. --Snakemike 09:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the reason for the disparity in price in Switzerland and the US has more to do with costs to manufacture, import and transport the goods than anything else. The US tends to be a more efficient market economy than elsewhere and that tends to keep prices lower. Also because the US has a huge domestic manufacturing sector, naturally things made in the US would be cheaper in the US than the same thing after it was shipped to Switzerland. The reverse would be true of Swiss products, but the sheer volume of goods produced in the US vs. Switzerland would tend to drive the average unit price lower in the US - Britcom 11:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with what you're saying, but this does not affect purchasing power. Since the median wages are higher in Switzerland, this means a typical swiss person with a typical salary will be able to afford more. As far as I can tell, few products manufactured in the US are sold in Switzerland (ignoring non-tangible products such as movies, software etc), which means shipping costs don't affect the final price very much. Compare Switzerland vs. US and US vs. China. In the first pair, the US has cheaper products however the wage difference offsets this. The same is true for the second pair. --Snakemike 11:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Change in coin design

I think this statement needs to be corrected: "the actual design of the coins has changed very little over their lifetime; for most of them (all except 5.- and 1/2 franc), their design has not changed since at least 1880." In fact, there are at least two changes in modern times.

The first one affects the 1/2, 1.-, and 2.- Fr. coins, which depict a ring of stars surrounding Helvetia on the obverse side. Those minted before 1979 displayed 22 stars, representing the 22 Swiss cantons. But since 1979, when Jura became the 23rd canton, these coins have been minted with 23 stars, as on the 1.- Fr. coin depicted twice in the article.

The second affects 5 cent coins. At some point, they stopped being minted in the same silver colour as all the other coins, and started being minted in a gold colour. I don't know when the change was made, but I have 5 cent coins from 1963 and 1981: the former is silver-coloured, the latter is old-coloured. So the change took place within that 18-year period.

Unless there's any objection to this, I'll make this correction in the article. Also, if anyone knows when the colour change of the 5 cent coin was made, that information would be appreciated. Emile 21:04, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

There was other changes. I'll check and report all changes, but I remember:

1. design changes between the first years and the actual coins (and IIRC another changes for 1/2, 1.- 2.- and 5.-)
2. Metal change in 1968-1970 (1/2, 1.-, 2.- and 5.-)
3. Metal (and color) change in 5cts coin from 1980 or 1981, to avoid confusion with similar size of 1/2
4. Change of lateral impression of stars in 5.- (out, in then out)
5. various changes of mind followed by the mark "A AA B", and without the mind mark
6. sides: some years have top and bottom side reversed by 180 degree

Again: I don't remember all changes. I will lock my books and I will report here (along the paper money changes). Cate 09:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Most of these changes (except for the metal of the 5 cents coin) are minor; by this, I mean that someone who would not be looking very carefully at the coins would not notice any difference, and in practice, the general design of the coins has not really changed. I have modified the article to reflect this. By the way, the change of alloy in 1968-1970 and for the 5 centimes coin is already mentioned in the article (in the table). Otherwise, I don't remember of any change in addition to Cate's list (by the way, you probably mean "change of mint" instead of "change of mind", since the marks A, AA and B refer to the place where the coins were minted.) Schutz 09:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The Changes:

• 1Rp
  1. Serie 1 (Shield // crowen with "1") 1850-1851
  2. Serie 2 (as serie 1, slight modified): 1853-1946
  3. Serie 3 (Swiss cross // ear + big "1"): 1948-
• 2Rp
  1. Serie 1 (Shield // crowen with "2") 1850-1851
  2. Serie 2 (as serie 1, slight modified): 1866-1946
  3. Serie 3 (Swiss cross // ear + big "2"): 1948-1974
• 5Rp
  1. Serie 1 (Shield // crowen with "5") 1850-1851
  2. Serie 2 (as serie 1, slight modified): 1872-1877
  3. Serie 3 (Head of Libertas // crowen with "5"): 1879-1980
  4. Serie 4 (same design, other alloy and color): 1981-
• 10Rp
  1. Serie 1 (Shield // crowen with "10") 1850-1851
  2. Serie 2 (as serie 1, slight modified): 1871-1876
  3. Serie 3 (Head of libertas// crowen with "5"): 1879
• 20Rp
  1. Serie 1 (Shield // crowen with "20") 1850-1851
  2. Serie 2 (as serie 1, slight modified): 1858-1859
  3. Serie 3 (Head of Libertas // crowen with "20"): 1881-
• 1/2Fr
  1. Serie 1 (seated Helvetia // crowen with "1/2 Fr") 1850-1851
  2. Serie 2 (standing Helvetia // crowen with "1/2 Fr"): 1875-
• 1Fr
  1. Serie 1 (seated Helvetia // crowen with "1 Fr.") 1850-1861
  2. Serie 2 (standing Helvetia // crowen with "1 Fr."): 1875-
• 2Fr
  1. Serie 1 (seated Helvetia // crowen with "2 Fr.") 1850-1863
  2. Serie 2 (standing Helvetia // crowen with "2 Fr."): 1874-
• 5Fr
  1. Serie 1 (seated Helvetia // crowen with "5 Fr.") 1850-1874
  2. Serie 2 (Head of Helvetia // crowen with shield and "5 F"): 1888-1916
  3. Serie 3 (shepheard's head // smaller crowen with shield and "5 Fr." on top): 1888-1916
  4. Serie 4 (slight modified, and uper case "5 FR."): 1931-
• Special 5Fr: instead of the head, some commemorating event: 1936, 1939, 1941, 1944, 1948, 1963 and from 1974 once or twice yearly
• in gold:
  1. 10Fr. 1911-1922
  2. 20Fr. Serie 1 1883-1896; Serie 2: 1897-1949

So, maybe someone can add a table as for paper money. Cate 18:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Some info in http://www.swissmint.ch/e/numismatics/coinage_table.shtml Cate 14:32, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I am thinking of starting a List of Swiss banknotes article, which would contain the details of all Swiss banknotes, since this level of detail would be too much for this article. If we want to give all the details about the coins too, should we maybe start also a separate article, and keep only the major changes in this article (as per my comment above) ? Schutz 11:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I Agree. The page is coming to long and some information are not so relevant to a "Swiss Franc" article. But Instead of a list, would not be better to do a "Numismatic of Switzerland" or "history of swiss moneys" and move the historic part of article (but some summary) in the new article? Note: I would write neutral (not "Franc") to include ev. also cantonal moneys -- Cate 12:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The reason I am proposing a list for the banknotes is that it is easy to do: there has not been that many banknotes, they have all been produced by the same entity, all the denominations change (more or less) at the same time, and they are generally easy to list — for example, one table per series, as I did for the current series. Thus, it would be easy to create a complete article, with a reasonable size. History of notes, etc, could still go on the "History of Swiss moneys" page, but the detailed list probably deserves an article by itself. Coins would be more complicated, especially if, as you mention, it would containg cantonal coins. I'd think it would be reasonable to have the two separate articles. Schutz 12:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with splitting. May I suggest the name "Banknotes of Switzerland" and "Coins of Switzerland". These names are compliant with Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. I know, many of the existing pages are not. May I also suggest the recommended table style at Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style/Currency article. But if editors here are not so interested in standardization, I can take up the task. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 21:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I moved the article to Banknotes of Switzerland, as you have noticed. I will also convert the tables in the near future. Schutz 19:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm very excited to see that. If I have time, I will also help. IMHO, more text should be moved to the banknote article. And what remains on Swiss franc should be some kind of introductory paragraph. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 19:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I will copy the rest of the text to the new article, but I don't think there is a need to move it; maybe the text with the overview of banknote series could be moved, but otherwise I think what's there fits well in the main article. Schutz 19:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

From my experience, keeping the same data/text in two places could lead to trouble. What if someone updates one copy? Should we syncrhonize them? Is this an effort worth its benefit? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 19:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

What languages to include in the infobox?

Please discuss at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics#Peseta. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Zug

The currencies of most of the cantons around the turn of the 19th century seem clear, except for that of Zug. Krause & Mishler give 12 Haller = 12 Angster = 3 Rappen = 1 Schilling, 2 Schilling = 1 Assis which seems rather odd. Only two coins are listed, the Angster and the Rappen. Can anyone provide more information?
Dove1950 22:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Stable against Euro? Not true

The article claims "Since mid-2003, its exchange rate with the euro has been stable at a value of about 1.55 CHF per euro". Current market rates definitely show that this is not true. In July 2007 the CHF/EUR rate is now 1.66 which is significantly different. The article should not imply that there is a stable exchange rate; that claim seems based on just a 20 month period, an empirical observation at the time (now outdated). Jberkes 09:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Source: [3]. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 00:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

'The franc as an international reserve currency' This section is very misleading - obviously there are far more dollars in circulation which will skew the figures. What would actually be useful would be listing the proportion of each dollar or franc thats backed by gold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.248.202 (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Backing?

Could somebody add some info about how the currency is backed, if at all or if it's a fiat currency? BillMcGonigle (talk) 04:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I concur that the article does seem to be missing any discussion of this topic, even in a historical sense. Wasn't the Swiss Frank formerly backed by (exchangeable in) some form of monetary metal, just like the UK Pound Sterling or the US Dollar (prior to the 1970s)? Anyone have a source for the history of the Swiss Frank in this regard? N2e (talk) 00:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Here a good source (written in french): [4]. Basicaly, and since the monetary law of 1931, Swiss Franc was backed at 40% by gold at the official price of 4595 fr./kg. Gold backing was abandonned on jan 1st, 2000 following a popular votation on apr 18, 1999. 77.56.238.18 (talk) 21:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Why does this article consistently use "centime" instead of "rappen"?

Both are correct names for the subdivision of the Swiss franc, but given that German is spoken by more than 3 times as many people in Switzerland as French, I would think the German name for the denomination would be the better one to use. 75.76.213.106 (talk) 03:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

"overvaluation"

There is no such thing as an overvalued currency. This is commonly asserted and we can go into how "mainstream" economists will say its overvalued, and how that is a bunch of rubbish. But the main point is that the overvaluation is perceived. Central bankers think a currency is overvalued, so they take actions to devalue it. That doesnt mean it IS overvalued. Thus, I changed it to alleged overvaluation. Perceived could also be used, but alleged seems to work better.--Metallurgist (talk) 04:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

small comment

the abbreviation SNB is never defined. Philtime (talk) 16:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)