Talk:Brazilian real

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Brazil (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Numismatics (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Exchange Rate[edit]

I have removed the note about the exchange rate of the Real being 3 to 1 (dollar). Since this is always fluctuating, Wikipedia is not the place to list that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quase (talkcontribs) 02:12, 14 March 2005‎


It is standard use for Brazilian currencies to be capitalized. I suppose that is why Brazilian currencies are capitalized all over. In the context, the reference is not as if to say "this would cost X real" (in which case it would be lowercased), but rather to say something like "the Real is the currency of Brazil". That's not expressing value, but rather referring to the currency by its "name", in which case it is capitalized, as if it were a proper noun (and I suppose it is..). Regards, Redux 03:17, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

An honestly held opinion, I'm sure, but absolutely out of line with general English-language practice for currencies. See United States dollar, euro, pound sterling. Any reason Brazil should be an exception? Hajor 19:23, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Nope. If it's wrong in terms of style (or grammar?), it should be fixed. Regards, Redux 05:30, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks, User:Gene Nygaard, reader of talk pages. Hajor 13:49, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Brazilian dollar[edit]

This is probably as good a place as any. Twice now I've deleted a reference to the "Brazilian dollar" from the dollar article. wth? Brazil never used dollars, did it? Hajor 13:26, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Never. No "Brazilian dollar" ever existed. Any reference to that "currency" is either wrong or vandalism. Regards, Redux 16:51, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the confirmation. Seeing the edit a second time pushed my doubt level over the edge, but now I'll continue reverting if the anon comes back. Another question (this one's just idle curiosity): are prices always specified as "R$", or is the "$" ever used on its own? Hajor 17:11, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome. As for your question, in Brazil it is common use to have prices specified "R$". There are rare instances where you can find the "$" all alone (but in unofficial places, since the legal form is "R$"), it would be understood, but that's very, very rare. Regards, Redux 21:36, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Splendid. Thanks again. Hajor 22:18, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Jpmo22 21:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC) Please, brazilian real use \mathrm{S}\!\!\!\Vert(Cifrão) not $ (Dollar Sign) we should do something about that.
Just to add a link about the Cifrão sign, from the Brazilian Central Bank website: 01:09, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Meaning: "real" vs. "royal"[edit]

This must be relevant: "real" in portuguese can mean both "real" or "royal". Maybe the latter is the meaning of the currency's name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stormwatch (talkcontribs) 20:54, 17 May 2005‎

Not really that relevant, at least for the article. It's the currency name, and as such it would not be translated (like the "peso", for instance). Besides, the distinction is not clear in the minds of Brazilians, meaning that, if enquired about this, most wouldn't be sure. Finally, in terms of history, if we considered what the government was thinking, you could say that both senses have applied. Real has now been the Brazilian currency twice. The first time around (1822 - 1942), you could say that it meant mainly "royal", since it was the currency from the times of the monarchy. The second time around (1994 - present), it's leaning more towards "real", since it was implemented to control inflation and stabilize the economy, and I remember someone saying that they wanted to have a "real" currency, with "real" values established. But I reiterate that this is all mainly retorical, since, as I've said, this is not clear in the country, because when saying "Real" people are just referring to the currency, not evoking some sort of national agenda. Regards, Redux 04:00, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
If it is a name, and as such it would not be translated, then why it was in the article? [The real (meaning "royal"... etc]. So, perhaps it is better to either remove the translation altogether or include both meanings [The real (meaning both "royal" and "real",...]. (talk) 11:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The currency does evoke both meanings. The "royal" refence is indirect, as a return to the name of the original currency of Brazil and Portugal (with the Brazilian monarchy keeping the Portuguese name for its currency in 1822). The "real" refence is quite direct, as before the introduction of the paper currency in 1994 the government created a virtual unit of account called Unidade Real de Valor (URV - "Real Unit of Value") as part of the inflation controlling program. When physical Reais were introduced, R$1 was equivalent to 1 URV. Both of these facts are common knowledge, so the "citation needed" note should be taken out of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 17:29, 31 August 2012‎

(The above paragraph was unsigned and is not mine.) Uh, I'm sorry to burst the bubble of people who are thinking that there is an actual reference to "royal", but the idea of the unit of currency referring to the monarchy itself is quite ridiculous. The word "royal" refers to a king, and there was never a Brazilian king; we only had Portuguese kings when were a colony, and Brazil wouldn't be too fond of the idea of our currency referencing that. If it was a reference to our monarchy, it would need to be called imperial, not real. The name may indeed be taken as either a historical reference to the old unit (much akin to how the National Order of the Southern Cross is named after the long-extinct Imperial Order of the Southern Cross), but most often it is just taken as having the sense of "real" in the Unidade real de valor, assuming the name's origin is thought about at all. That is common knowledge and common sense to us Brazilian nationals. For those reasons, I am going to be bold and just remove the "citation needed" note. I will also drop a note on the talk page for the person who added it and link them to this, as a token of respect and a demonstration of my good faith belief that the note is unneeded. Vítor Cassol (talk) 19:18, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

"there was never a Brazilian king"?? Vítor, are you aware that Brazil was a monarchy from its independence in 1822 until 1889? And during all this "royal" period, the Brazilian currency was, guess what, the Real? —capmo (talk) 22:18, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
However, as Vitor points out, there was never a Brazilian king during all of that period of monarchy. The two Pedros were emperors not kings. He makes a good point. Bagunceiro (talk) 19:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
A late reply, but I think it's worth reading this discussion on the difference in meaning between a king and an emperor. According to the definitions presented there, the "emperors" of Brazil should be more properly defined as "kings" instead. —capmo (talk) 20:52, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Real in this case means actual, reality-based, not royalty. It came from the perception that Cruzeiros meant nothing economically when Brazil was bordering on hyperinflation, and this new monetary unit was "for real". This is the same concept used by the preparatory "Unidade Real de Valor". — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:15, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Markings in bottom-left corner[edit]

What are those markings on the bank-notes for? Are they designed to work as a barcode, or, like on the Argentinian and Canadian banknotes, are they there so blind people will know that they did get the right change after all? Nazism isn't cool 22:27, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I checked it. The markings are part of the anticounterfeiting system. The drawings are supposed to be difficult to replicate, and, embedded in there, there's a holographic image, which they call "Latent Image" that is also a safety measure: according to the official explanation, if you hold a legitimate note against the Sun, you should see the letters "B" and "C" in it (stands for Banco Central — Central Bank in Portuguese). Here is the official page containing all the security measures in the Brazilian banknotes. It's in Portuguese though. Regards, Redux 22:53, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
Portuguese is a Romance language just like Romanian, and I know some of the more closely related Spanish, so it won't be that much of a problem reading the page. I know a few Portuguese speakers, so I'll get to one of them if I need a translation. Nazism isn't cool 06:24, 18 August 2005 (UTC)


The animal in the back of the 50s note is a onça-pintada (literally, spotted-ounce) and not a jaguar.LtDoc 05:34, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The correct translation of the Portuguese word "onça" is jaguar. The word "ounce" is a unit of measure (weight). The article is correct — although the English language does uses the word for a feline, the Snow leopard, which bares a striking resemblance to the "onça-pintada", but it is not the same animal – scientific names: Snow leopard = Uncia uncia, the onça-pintada: Panthera onca. Regards, Redux 14:43, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


This term is used in the article to describe an artform, but it is not clearly explained. Nevertheless, it seems to be linked to the Marajó article about a large island in the Amazon's mouth. Perhaps the link is inappropriate and should be removed. Otherwise, a brief explanation of the term Marajoara is in order. Kelisi 04:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I've just found a passing reference to the term in the German article about Marajó. It is apparently an ancient culture that disappeared even before the Portuguese arrived. I know nothing more about it than that. Perhaps someone could elaborate, if not here then at the Marajó article, which is still quite stubby. Kelisi 04:40, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, the purpose was that the term would be better developed at the specific article. It is only mentioned here inside the infobox. There is no space in it to elaborate on that without messing up the layout, and there's no context in the article to expand on an art style, I believe. The best way to go would be the expansion of the Marajó article. Regards, Redux 16:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know marajoara is simply the adjective for people/things from Marajó. But the word is also often used to refer to the pre-columbian society that existed on the island. I say this because there is also an article about this culture, and I don´t really know which of the two should be linked from here. AoS1014 05:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


People, I find this latest section, named "Orders of magnitude" to be unencyclopedic. It is especially notable that the list is needlessly long. Something like this, even if to be kept, would be only a illustrative exemplification. In actuality, however, I find it as unencyclopedic as those convertion rates that we have to remove every now and then. First, there's inflation, which makes the list always out of date. And then, and perhaps more importantly, there's price variations. An example: a can of coke in Brazil (in January of 2006) can cost anywhere between R$1.10 and R$2.50 (I know, it's shocking, but true) if you buy it cold. If you buy it warm, at a market or supermarket, then it can cost anywhere between R$0.80 and R$1.10. I favor removing this list altogether. Regards, Redux 16:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

If no one posts here soon, I will remove that new section. Redux 02:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you, Redux. It should be removed. -- 14:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. The section is gone. Redux 21:59, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

"Modelo sem valor"[edit]

Por que isso? Tão com medo que resolvam imprimir as imagens pra falsificar o dinheiro? Cuzandor 00:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The markings on the images are there because that's the official digital sample provided by the Brazilian Central Bank in its website. I believe it is a common measure to mark those reproductions with some kind of notice that the images are for information only. A clear, high resolution image could indeed make it easier for counterfeiters. And please, try to post in English only on this Wikipedia, so that the comments are available for all to read. If you would like to contribute in Portuguese, please visit the Wikipedia in Portuguese website. In addition, the Meta-wiki is a multilingual project, where one can post in any language. Thanks, Redux 02:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Impossível, eu já tentei falsificar dinheiro assim e garanto que não funciona. Impressora nenhuma tem resolução alta o bastante pra fazer uma cópia aceitável. Cuzandor 02:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Again, please post in English on this Wikipedia, so that the discussions are available to all who wish to participate. Regardless of whether or not it would be possible to print false banknotes from a clear sample, we are using the official digital sample, available at the official website of the Brazilian Central Bank. Regards, Redux 02:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Could the moderators of Wikipedia be so kind to get Cuzandor's IP and send it to the Brazilian Federal Police (if he is Brazilian, as he seems to be)? He has confessed that he has tried to counterfeit our currency and that's a federal crime. jggouvea 02:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Mas ninguém entra aqui! Cuzandor 15:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean? Redux 16:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


How do you pronounce 'real'? I think this should be in the article but I don't know myself. S Sepp 10:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Let's see, I'll have to do it the longer way, but I'll get there :). First, I'll devide the word in two parts: re-al. The first part, to approximate the sound in Portuguese, would sound like the following underlined part of the english word "hail". The second part would sound like the word "owl". Was that clear? If not, I can try to come up with a different explanation. Redux 11:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
That is clear, thank you! S Sepp 11:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Even clearer rɛ.'aw, pl. rɛ.'ajs

I, on the other hand, would like to know the proper pronunciation and plural form for real in English. English speakers probably pronounce it as the English word real, I guess, but is "reals" used for the plural? What is the official form, if one exists? I know in Brazil we pronounce and write currency names with little or no thought for the original language (dollar/s = dólar/dólares), so I ask. AoS1014 05:12, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I can think of at least 6 diferent ways of pronouncing "real" in Brazilian Portuguese: he'aw, hɛ'aw, xe'aw, re'aw, re'aɫ, hi'aw. Either we include all of these (and others) or we include none. 17:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Hum, no. That's not quite how it works. We need to include a pronunciation guide that is official (meaning: not created by someone in their garage) and recognized. Wikipedia usually adopts the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), which is what this article is using, similar to many other articles. It is not our job to provide a pronunciation guide to every possible accent in existence. Redux 21:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Please tell me who makes a certain pronunciation "official" and who "recognizes" them. The article currently has the Rio de Janeiro and the Lisbon pronunciations. Why are they "official" and "recognized"? Are they more oficial as, say, the São Paulo pronunciation? And who established this? (talk) 15:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
We use the International Phonetic Alphabet, as I mentioned. It is created and maintained by the International Phonetic Association. This is the parameter we adopt. We have users who do this research and include in articles the pronunciation recommended or used by the Association. I'm not sure how they select any given pronunciation for any given item, but we do need some kind of guideline or parameter, since it would be, clearly, excessive for an encyclopedia to carry every conceivable rendition of any given word. In this case, we are using the IPA's. This is, after all, only meant to provide readers with an idea of how the word would sound in actuality, as a useful addition to the actual goal of Wikipedia, which is to be an encyclopedia. Redux (talk) 18:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
The IPA is a set of symbols to represent phones and phonemes. It is not a pronunciation guideline. It is merely a tool, and with this tool you can represent any pronunciation whatsoever. As a matter of fact, the pronunciations I wrote above ([he'aw], [hɛ'aw], [xe'aw], [re'aw], [re'aɫ], [hi'aw]), which you disdained as something made on someone's garage, all use IPA symbols. The International Phonetic Association does not issue pronunciation guidelines or anything of that sort. They do not "select" pronunciations for anything, they simply give you the tools to represent any pronunciation on paper. (talk) 20:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The São Paulo pronunciation of "real" is virtually identical to the Rio pronunciation; there's no need to differentiate them. I find it a little odd, however, that the Portuguese pronunciation should be present in the article, given that this article is about a Brazilian currency Rsazevedo msg 11:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The current Brazilian pronunciation in the article is [xe'aw]. I find it very unlikely that people from São Paulo would use a velar fricative for /r/. It would probably be a glotal fricative or, in the case of some older speakers, a post-alveolar tap or trill. Anyway, the point is that there are many more possible pronunciations in Brazilian Portuguese. Where I was born, for instance, it is pronounced [hɛ'aw]. (talk) 13:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I've lived in São Paulo all my life, and can attest that the local pronunciation lies somewhere between [xe'aw] and [he'aw] (the usage in modern times of a post-alveolar tap or trill pronunciation of initial-r in the São Paulo dialect is a longstanding myth in Brazil). I suppose this intermediate between velar and glottal fricative is the most frequent pronunciation found in Brazil, and the one that's closest to a Brazilian "standard", since it's widely used in the national media. Rsazevedo msg 14:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Then we should use this, the most widely used pronunciation, and only this. After all, Wikipedia is not a pronunciation guide; it is an encyclopedia — and as I mentioned, the pronunciation guide is a useful thing that we add as a tool to enrich content by providing readers with a notion of how the native pronounciation might sound like. I agree that there would seem to be no reason why a Portuguese key should be included in the article in addition to a Brazilian key. It is excessive, and we must adhere to the dialect to which the main subject pertains. Redux (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed completely. Rsazevedo msg 22:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, if anecdotal evidence means anything, I live in São Paulo state as well, and I have heard onset post-alveolar tap in the pronunciation of some older speakers. It is certainly rare, and is sure to disappear in a few years, but it's not a myth. It may though be exclusive to first generation descendants of Italian immigrants, but the sheer amount of Italian immigrants in São Paulo makes this worth mentioning. (talk) 22:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The most widely used pronunciation is [he'aw]. (talk) 22:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd consider a more accurate definition of the standard Brazilian pronunciation "somewhere between [xe'aw] and [he'aw]", but for clarity's sake I'd settle for [he'aw] in the article. Rsazevedo msg 00:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


Sorry, i messed the picture :( --Striver 15:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I've fixed it :). Thanks for letting us know here. If you would like to re-upload that other image, I might suggest a slightly different title, such as "RealBook". If you'd like, I can do that for you. Regards, Redux 15:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, i solved it on my own :) peace! --Striver 09:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


Maybe I'm imagining things, but the centavo bears a resemblance to the Euro, imo. I don't know if it's note-worthy in the article or not, it's just an observation. DTPQueen

I take it you mean that the 1c and 5c Real coins of the Second Family bear a resemblance to the 1c and 5c Euro coins, right? I had never noticed, but indeed you're right (I went over to the Euro article to look at the images..). I'd say it is most likely coincidental, since the Euro coins and the Real Second Family coins were both released in 1998, so there would have been no time for a design "inspired by". Perhaps we could make a short note of this resemblance, just a few words though, since, as you mentioned, it's not really relevant. Redux 19:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
I would not be so sure. There had been talks about "modern coin design" going on here about then and the designers of the Brazilian meant could have had some tips on the design of the euro coins. This needs to be elaborated jggouvea 02:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Since I was a kid until quite recently, I never notice any particular resemblance between the Brazilian coins (which have changed many times over the last decades) and the coins of any other country. I don't recall any Brazilian copper-colored coin, for instance; but I do recall duraluminium coins, which do not seem to be popular elsewhere. Thus I find the resemblance of the latest real coins to American and European coins -- in size ratios, colors, thicknesses, etc. -- remarkable to the point of embarassment. The bicolor design of the 1 real, for example, is all too similar to that of French pre-euro coins. (BTW, Fernando Henrique the academic had strong ties to France). I presume that the imitation was intentional, to underscore the image of the real as being not just another "Brazilian" currency, but a new currency "like the dollar". But this is just "original research", of course. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
PS. The imitation is most obvious in the set of values. Before the real, Brazilian coins and banknotes generally used the value series 1:2:5 times a power of ten, and coin sizes were generally proportional to their values. Rather logical. The real instead copied the US system of 1:5:10:50 banknotes (the 2 and 20 came later) and 1,5,10,25,50 cents for the coins, with the 10 cent coin being the smallest of the set. Now, for Americans those peculiar values, colors and sizes are just a very long tradition that (like the green color of the bills) contributes to the image of a stable currency. For Brazilians, well, ... --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 02:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Edge of coins[edit]

It's also worth noting that the 50 centavos (and higher) coins from the second family have the Brazilian Progressivist moto "Ordem e Progresso" engraved along the edge of them. However, I can only find the 50 centavo coin in my collection, but the other coins are worth looking into as well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 00:48, 1 December 2006‎.

Indeed. But I believe this is a feature present only in the 50-cent coin. It is far "thicker" than the other coins, and they used this space to include the engraving. If I'm not mistaken, though, no other coins feature it. I'll figure out where to include the information for the 50 cent coin in the article. Thanks. Redux 11:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
The R$ 1 and the brass coins (R$ 0,10 and 0,25) also have markings on the edge. The brass coins have engraved stripes, and the R$ 1 has five groups of engraved stripes alternating with equal-width plain surfaces. The other (copper) coins have plain edges. Rsnetto74 18:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Historical Real vs. present-day Real[edit]

This article deals with both Brazilian currencies, which are in fact distinct entities. Shouldn't the article be split in two? Rsnetto74 18:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Only if there should be a need for that,meaning, if there were so much information on each time period that this article started to be too long. This is an instance where one, same country used a particular name for its currency in two separate timeframes, albeit each time with different regulations, so as long as the article isn't too long, we should keep it unified. Redux 20:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I support the split of the article for historical reasons, as both currencies are not otherwise related, except for their names. The first currency was also represented differently (R1:000$000 instead of R$1.000.000,00 for the million) and the plural form was different (réis instead of reais, which is a neologism). jggouvea 02:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I also support the split. I think there should be an article for each ISO code. The first Brazilian real doesn't have a code, but it should. Also, the two templates would have several differences. (talk) 15:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, split. Wikipedia articles are about concepts, not words. The two currencies are different things (separated by 50 years of turbulent monetary history and a factor of 2.75 sextillion in value!), with different coins and banknotes, so they should have separate articles. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 03:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:20real.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:20real.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm looking into it. Thanks. Redux 21:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


Currently the source is this. I don't understand the table, nor can I find 3.14% in it. Can somebody fix it? Thanks. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Banknotes - R$1[edit]

Hi, I am brazilian and I just want to emphasize that the R$1 note is largely used at almost the whole country, and not "rarely used" as shown. If someone could fix it or confirm what I've just said, it would be really nice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to the board at the top of the article. Yes, I agree. I have actually made an invertion: R$100 banknotes are the ones rarely used in daily circulation, whereas R$1 banknotes are commonly used. That tends to change, however, since R$1 banknotes have been discontinued by the Central Bank and will eventually disappear from circulation. Redux (talk) 18:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
As of 2010, the 1 real banknote is rarely seen around here (Campinas, São Paulo). Pity, I liked the color... All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

100 reais banknote[edit]

Hi, I am Brazilian and I work at a bank. The 100 reais banknote was never discontinued and it looks ludicrous to say so — even more in 1997 —, considering that the currency is depreciating over time. Perhaps the person who wrote this made a mistake due to real using the comma instead of a period to separate centavos from reais.

I have seen brand new packs of 100 reais from the BC this week coming to my branch. Also, this page of the BCB website shows that there are 214.000.000 million of such banknotes in circulation . jggouvea (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Note about decimal separators[edit]

I am removing the part in the introduction about commas and periods as decimal/thousands separators. That seems to reflect a biased assumption as to where the reader is coming from. I don't see such a note of clarification on the U.S. Dollar's page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

In the past[edit]

  • 1000 Reis = 1 Milreis
  • 100 Centavos = 1 Cruzeiro

Böri (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

The above statements need clarification: 1000 Réis was indeed the same as 1 Mil-réis (=1 Thousand-Réis). As for the 100 Centavos, it depends:
  • 100 centavos de Cruzeiro = 1 Cruzeiro
  • 100 centavos de Cruzado = 1 Cruzado
  • 100 centavos de Real = 1 Real
That is to say, all Brazilian monetary units have historically been divided in cêntimos (or centavos). --capmo 22:01, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

10 platic note & General article Improvement[edit]

Could someone write something about the polymer 10 reais note being replaced non officially by the government?

I tried to do it by myself but I wasn't able to find a way to include the information in the article, preserving the style...

Basically, those notes started to disappear from market some years ago, probably because the notes started to loose color, including the red dot in the middle of the transparent circle. Also, some ATMs and Vending Machines had problems with those notes. Nowadays we only see standard notes...

There is no official report from Brazilian Government, but you can find several people asking where those notes are on forums, there are people on "Brazilian Ebay" (Mercado Livre) selling those notes for up to R$200,00... A good source to begin with (including the words of bank employee - in Portuguese):

Also, wouldn't be good to include pictures from older notes and from the coins in the article? For example, the Polymer 10 reais note section cites parts of the note that you can only understand while observing one...

Thank you for your attention...

PS: The article on Wikipedia in Portuguese is also a good point to start improving the article

Victorprosa (talk) 21:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


Why not use the images used in the Portuguese version of this article (in: Real (moeda brasileira) ), in order to expand and enrich the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:59, 20 July 2012‎