Depends on how you read it - I read as a historical fact:

/As a member of the EU, they could have opted to use the Euro, but they decided not to./

So 'when they were a member of the EU, they could have taken in the euro, but didn't, so still have the pound'

Judging from the date on the exchange rates quoted, the UK was still (just) in the EU when it was written. Regardless, the rest of the content is still current either way you interpret it.

It's also illustrated with the £1 coin that was withdrawn 5½ years ago, and banknotes that are also all withdrawn years ago.

It's also incorrect to say visitors won't deal with £50 notes. They're rarely in ATMs but they are common when exchanging cash abroad.

It's correct to say visitors shouldn't deal with £50 notes if they can possibly help it, because they will generally struggle to pay for anything with them though..

Anything over a $20 bill has been hard to use in many/most stores for a very long time in the US (which seemingly at one point decided to freeze currency denominations in amber--see also penny--which I assume is permanent at this point as less and less cash gets used). But $100 bills at least were in pretty common use overseas. I still tend to carry some as backup cash.

They shouldn't have any problems in London, especially at places tourists typically frequent.

I once worked at such a place, and the till would be stuffed with £50 notes by the end of lunchtime.

I realise it's different north of Watford.

£50 notes were popular for criminal transactions, and also they were widely forged; I don't know whether that's still the case, but I'm very reluctant to accept a £50 note. If a shopkeeper checks it and decides it's a forgery, they have to take it off me for nothing, and I'm down fifty nicker.

>As a member of the EU, they could have opted to use the Euro, but they decided not to.

I think, just very poorly written.