I think that should be 2,000 in English, not 2.000.

The question is: what does it mean?
two-point-zero-zero-zero?
two thousand?
Maybe better would be 2 000? Or 2'000? Or just 2000?

(Corrected version)

> two-point-zero-zero-zero?

Almost certainly not. I don't know of any currencies that DON'T have two digits after the point.

> Maybe better would be 2 000? Or 2'000? Or just 2000?

The last would be OK. The second isn't used in English. Personally, I don't like the first but it might be acceptable.

The first would be good in longer, the second is "colloquial", the third I think is the best.

And what about 2,000? Wouldn't this be the best option?

> Wouldn't this be the best option?

I think so, and that's what I suggested in the first place.

I think either 2.000 or 2,000 suggests two point zero-zero-zero. Two versions 2 000 and 2000 leaves no doubt that we mean two thousand, not two-point-zero. As 2 000 is useful for large numbers such as 234 235 144 234, there is no use to do so in 2000.

> I think either 2.000 or 2,000 suggests two point zero-zero-zero.

NOT in English. In English 2,000 = Two thousand, 2.000 = 2. It's really quite simple.

Ok, so I've changed just as you suggested.