On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset
Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:nfo56nFa4h6U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset
Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time*
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the "percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially by
licenced financial institutions.
On 1 Sep 2026 at 21:02:35 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were offered a
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nfo56nFa4h6U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset
Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time*
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially by
licenced financial institutions.
"pre-paid credit card" I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron, but it is only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing; I would expect that what was being offered was card which did not require a credit check or risk incurring debt but was likely to be accepted by payees in nearly all (perhaps not continuous authorities) respects on the same terms as a real credit card from the same issuer.
I do not find it in the least unbelievable that this was permitted, at least at some time in the past.
Equally I would not be surprised if this was never the case.
But why you find this to be an issue of principle, when principles are hardly ever observed in advertising, I really don't know. Especially as it is generally hard to prove a negative.
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this case establishing that a person is an adult.
On 2026-09-01, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be
whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a >> kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a
depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this
case establishing that a person is an adult.
We did discuss that though, the context being that a "prepaid credit
card" doesn't involve, er, credit, so things like the Consumer Credit
Act are not particularly relevant, hence the lack of regulation.
It appears that the age limit these days for a prepaid card is 6 years
old, although I don't know if that's a decision that the industry has
come to itself or if it was imposed by some law or other. Either way,
they're clearly not suitable for proving adulthood.
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2026-09-01, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be >>> whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a >>> kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a
depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this >>> case establishing that a person is an adult.
We did discuss that though, the context being that a "prepaid credit
card" doesn't involve, er, credit, so things like the Consumer Credit
Act are not particularly relevant, hence the lack of regulation.
There is too much to trawl through to discover exactly who said what but my recollection is that it was strongly denied that rCLprepaid credit cardsrCY that were available at some time in the past were what these days we would more accurately describe as a prepaid payment card.
The historical question, while interesting, does not help to answer the question of whether or not the 16 digit card number on a current payment
card is a reliable way to determine whether or not the principal cardholder has entered into an agreement that it available only to adults. I think the discussion came close to addressing that question but never quite got over the line.
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 1 Sep 2026 at 21:02:35 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were offered >> a
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nfo56nFa4h6U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset >>>>> Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you >>>> really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time* >>>
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits >>>
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially by
licenced financial institutions.
"pre-paid credit card" I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron, but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing; I would expect >> that what was being offered was card which did not require a credit check or >> risk incurring debt but was likely to be accepted by payees in nearly all
(perhaps not continuous authorities) respects on the same terms as a real
credit card from the same issuer.
I do not find it in the least unbelievable that this was permitted, at least >> at some time in the past.
Equally I would not be surprised if this was never the case.
But why you find this to be an issue of principle, when principles are hardly
ever observed in advertising, I really don't know. Especially as it is
generally hard to prove a negative.
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this case establishing that a person is an adult.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour; including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
rest snipped
bb--
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
On 2 Sep 2026 at 08:36:23 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread"
unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the
perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour; >> including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is
drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of
spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper than using wholemeal flour.
On 2 Sep 2026 at 08:36:23 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread"
unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour; >> including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is
drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper than using wholemeal flour.
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper than using wholemeal flour.
And ITYWF that the definition of a *spring* for advertised water is pretty elastic too.
On 9/2/26 09:35, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 08:36:23 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the
perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is >>> drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of >>> spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran >> added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper >> than using wholemeal flour.
I recently saw a similar claim about yoghurt. Manufacturers recombine highly processed ingredients to simulate traditional yoghurt. Which means this yoghurt does not contain the bacteria beneficial to the gut microbiome.
All a bit distressing, as I love natural yoghurt and thought I was being healthy.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran >> added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper >> than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* >>> actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper >>> than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* >>>> actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* >>>>> actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted >>>>> bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is
cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...What's the problem?
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* >>>> actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* >>>>> actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* >>>> actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
On 02/09/2026 18:03, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers
*are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and
extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is
cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.What's the problem?
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
Do you want it to be tasteless and unappetising, and go mouldy overnight?
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:6885662517.6f1d5c29@uninhabited.net...
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted >>>>>> bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
I first learned all about the Chorleywood process in 1985.
As a result of reading the detailed account in Walker & Cannon
"The Great Food Scandal"
Whereas your seeming obsession, would seem to suggest that you've only
just learned about it; maybe following a feature on "BBC Breakfast",
"The One Show"* or some other BBC consumer type programme
bb--
* And such pitiable load of patronising rubbish; as compared with
the "Tonight" of our youth.,
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are* >>>>> actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:42:48 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:6885662517.6f1d5c29@uninhabited.net...
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted >>>>>>> bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even >>> have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
I first learned all about the Chorleywood process in 1985.
As a result of reading the detailed account in Walker & Cannon
"The Great Food Scandal"
Whereas your seeming obsession, would seem to suggest that you've only
just learned about it; maybe following a feature on "BBC Breakfast",
"The One Show"* or some other BBC consumer type programme
I've known about it for more than sixty years, since 'O' level economics.
Pre-paid credit cards on the other hand are something really worth being obsessed about.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:8293908070.14a16400@uninhabited.net...
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:42:48 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:6885662517.6f1d5c29@uninhabited.net...
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>>
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even >>>> have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
I first learned all about the Chorleywood process in 1985.
As a result of reading the detailed account in Walker & Cannon
"The Great Food Scandal"
Whereas your seeming obsession, would seem to suggest that you've only
just learned about it; maybe following a feature on "BBC Breakfast",
"The One Show"* or some other BBC consumer type programme
I've known about it for more than sixty years, since 'O' level economics.
Oh dear! Oh dear,oh dear oh dead !
As that's even worse of course.
So you've known about the Chorleywood process for over sixty years,
And not only have you known about it for sixty years but you can actually remember when you first learned about it.
And here you were, trying to introduce the Chorleywood process into the conversation .......sixty years later.
Because you thought I wouldn't have heard of it.
So what's the betting that every time the question of bread has popped up
in the conversation, in the pub, with family members, even with patients
over the last sixty years, you won't have tried to slip in a reference to the
Chorleywood process at some point ?
Otherwise how comes you only just remembered it now, after sixty years ?
You simply can't let it go can you ?
Pre-paid credit cards on the other hand are something really worth being
obsessed about.
The topic of pre-paid credit cards only popped up about a month or two ago,
And rather than trying to introduce the subject at every possible opportunity its only of relevance here on Usenet. Its really no different or credible than
Roland Perry claiming he's breeding unicorns in his back garden or regularly visiting Scotland to take photos of the Loch Ness monster, which never
seem to come out
So what's not to like ?
bb
* I most probably first read about the Chorleywood process in the excellent "Insight"
column in the Sunday Times around 55 years ago (it was only developed 65 years
ago)
But as it was something "I couldn't realistically do anything about" I simply let it go,
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>> "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for the Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a considerable number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases
because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others act more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, enzymes that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, microbial sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the ingredients used.
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>> "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted >>>>>>> bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even >>> have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for the >> Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a considerable >> number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases
because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more
precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others act >> more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, enzymes >> that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell
stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, microbial >> sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be
better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the ingredients >> used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political decision to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use of these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:3272828146.e8cae5a5@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>>> "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even >>>> have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for the >>> Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a considerable >>> number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases
because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more
precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others act >>> more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, enzymes >>> that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell
stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, microbial >>> sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be >>> better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the ingredients >>> used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political decision >> to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use of >> these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread.
That's presumably because the heat from baking inactivates the enzymes.
As it is they list a "Flour Treatment Agent. Whereas if instead they
listed amylase, protease or xylanase how many of their average buyers
would be any the wiser ? Never mind start chaining themselves to
the nearest available railings.
While in actual fact, a lot of people actually prefer relatively tasteless bread. As when they make or eat sandwiches, they want to taste the filling the actual ingredients not the bread. The bread is just a handy way
of getting the stuff into their mouth without spilling any on their clothes. As doubtless Lord Sandwich originally intended Not a basis for some big crusade
However if people want to pay ten times the price for organic
aritisanal bread (based on recipes picked up by some budding
entrepreneur from a website) full of bits which stick in your
teeth, then they're perfectly free to do so
What I miss most are "proper" crusty white rolls; as could
be bought in any bakery. Proper round rolls, not batch rolls;
with a nice shiny crust
bb--
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset
Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed by such a labelling rule.
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>> "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for the >> Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a considerable >> number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases
because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more
precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others act >> more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, enzymes >> that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell
stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, microbial >> sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be
better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the ingredients >> used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political decision to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use of these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:3272828146.e8cae5a5@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>>> "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even >>>> have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for the >>> Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a considerable >>> number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases
because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more
precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others act >>> more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, enzymes >>> that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell
stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, microbial >>> sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be >>> better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the ingredients >>> used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political decision >> to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use of >> these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread.
That's presumably because the heat from baking inactivates the enzymes.
As it is they list a "Flour Treatment Agent. Whereas if instead they
listed amylase, protease or xylanase how many of their average buyers
would be any the wiser ? Never mind start chaining themselves to
the nearest available railings.
While in actual fact, a lot of people actually prefer relatively tasteless bread. As when they make or eat sandwiches, they want to taste the filling the actual ingredients not the bread. The bread is just a handy way
of getting the stuff into their mouth without spilling any on their clothes. As doubtless Lord Sandwich originally intended Not a basis for some big crusade
However if people want to pay ten times the price for organic
aritisanal bread (based on recipes picked up by some budding
entrepreneur from a website) full of bits which stick in your
teeth, then they're perfectly free to do so
What I miss most are "proper" crusty white rolls; as could
be bought in any bakery. Proper round rolls, not batch rolls;
with a nice shiny crust
bb
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset
Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation further
down into the mud?
On 03/09/2026 15:20, Roger Hayter wrote:
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just
inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product
contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a
functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed by
such a labelling rule.
Absolutely. And too bad if people get annoyed or upset because that is totally irrational and we shouldn't be pandering to it.
On 3 Sep 2026 at 15:57:21 BST, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 03/09/2026 15:20, Roger Hayter wrote:
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just
inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product
contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a
functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed by
such a labelling rule.
Absolutely. And too bad if people get annoyed or upset because that is
totally irrational and we shouldn't be pandering to it.
And you'll be equally happy with the labelling regulations when steak and chips can be advertised as meat free?
On 03/09/2026 17:19, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Sep 2026 at 15:57:21 BST, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 03/09/2026 15:20, Roger Hayter wrote:
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just
inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product >>>> contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a >>>> functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed by
such a labelling rule.
Absolutely. And too bad if people get annoyed or upset because that is
totally irrational and we shouldn't be pandering to it.
And you'll be equally happy with the labelling regulations when steak and
chips can be advertised as meat free?
I don't think that's a parallel, but there are many examples already of
the vegetarian mafia offering meat-free 'sausages', soy 'milk', veggie 'burgers', vegetarian 'bacon', vegan 'chicken breast' etc.
It's even got a name, 'gastronomic appropriation'.
And, no, I'm not happy with that. It's blatantly dishonest.
On 3 Sep 2026 at 13:54:36 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:3272828146.e8cae5a5@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>>>> "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and >>>>>>>>> extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as >>>>>>>>> *wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even >>>>> have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for the >>>> Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a considerable
number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases
because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more
precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others act
more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, enzymes >>>> that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell
stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, microbial
sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be >>>> better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the ingredients
used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political decision
to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use of >>> these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread.
That's presumably because the heat from baking inactivates the enzymes.
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed by such a labelling rule.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:4520905740.7ac8f87d@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 13:54:36 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:3272828146.e8cae5a5@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and >>>>>>>>>> extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't even
have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for the
Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a considerable
number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases >>>>> because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more >>>>> precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others act
more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, enzymes
that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell >>>>> stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, microbial
sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be >>>>> better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the ingredients
used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political decision
to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use of
these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread.
That's presumably because the heat from baking inactivates the enzymes.
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just
inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product
contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a
functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed by
such a labelling rule.
I could easily get have got 2,000 words out of that; which is doubtless
what you were hoping for.
Instead I'll just settle for a couple of aphorisms to start with.
Which while clearly not universal in their application, in this instance
seem particularly apt.
(1) What you don't know about can't hurt you.
and
Ignorance is bliss
Thus saving some otherwise tortured souls from excruciating moral
dilemmas; as they block up the bread aisle in the supermarket
While religious prohibitions based on 2000 year old practices
are clearly irrational in this day and age. see (1)
Enzyems like leather shoes are a bye-product in their case of an
indefensible method of slaughter which nevertheless isn't going to
be brought to a halt by.virtue of their elimination in bakery.
bb
In message <1177b0t$24via$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:02:35 on Tue, 1 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset
Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation further down into the mud?
On 3 Sep 2026 at 19:48:56 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:4520905740.7ac8f87d@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 13:54:36 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:3272828146.e8cae5a5@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:That's presumably because the heat from baking inactivates the enzymes. >>>
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers >>>>>>>>>>> *are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and >>>>>>>>>>> extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it >>>>>>>>>>> as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is >>>>>>>>>>> cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain
salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't >>>>>>> even
have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process.
A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for >>>>>> the
Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a
considerable
number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases >>>>>> because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more >>>>>> precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others >>>>>> act
more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, >>>>>> enzymes
that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell >>>>>> stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, >>>>>> microbial
sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be >>>>>> better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the
ingredients
used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political >>>>> decision
to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use >>>>> of
these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread. >>>>
inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product
contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a
functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed >>> by
such a labelling rule.
I could easily get have got 2,000 words out of that; which is doubtless
what you were hoping for.
Instead I'll just settle for a couple of aphorisms to start with.
Which while clearly not universal in their application, in this instance
seem particularly apt.
(1) What you don't know about can't hurt you.
and
Ignorance is bliss
Thus saving some otherwise tortured souls from excruciating moral
dilemmas; as they block up the bread aisle in the supermarket
While religious prohibitions based on 2000 year old practices
are clearly irrational in this day and age. see (1)
Enzyems like leather shoes are a bye-product in their case of an
indefensible method of slaughter which nevertheless isn't going to
be brought to a halt by.virtue of their elimination in bakery.
bb
Is there, then, a defensible method of slaughter? In practice, probably not.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:6225454302.44fdebd7@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 19:48:56 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:4520905740.7ac8f87d@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 13:54:36 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>>
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:3272828146.e8cae5a5@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>>That's presumably because the heat from baking inactivates the enzymes. >>>>
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for >>>>>>> the
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread makers
*are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and >>>>>>>>>>>> extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it >>>>>>>>>>>> as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method is
cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain >>>>>>>>> salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate,
tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc.
etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't >>>>>>>> even
have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process. >>>>>>>
Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a
considerable
number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases >>>>>>> because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more >>>>>>> precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others >>>>>>> act
more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, >>>>>>> enzymes
that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell >>>>>>> stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, >>>>>>> microbial
sources are preferred because with the large range available they can be
better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the
ingredients
used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political >>>>>> decision
to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use >>>>>> of
these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread. >>>>>
inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product >>>> contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a >>>> functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed >>>> by
such a labelling rule.
I could easily get have got 2,000 words out of that; which is doubtless
what you were hoping for.
Instead I'll just settle for a couple of aphorisms to start with.
Which while clearly not universal in their application, in this instance >>> seem particularly apt.
(1) What you don't know about can't hurt you.
and
Ignorance is bliss
Thus saving some otherwise tortured souls from excruciating moral
dilemmas; as they block up the bread aisle in the supermarket
While religious prohibitions based on 2000 year old practices
are clearly irrational in this day and age. see (1)
Enzyems like leather shoes are a bye-product in their case of an
indefensible method of slaughter which nevertheless isn't going to
be brought to a halt by.virtue of their elimination in bakery.
bb
Is there, then, a defensible method of slaughter? In practice, probably not.
"Humanely" slaughtering animals that are in obvious and incurable pain for one
bb
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message news:JCkp0gEiYYmqFASW@perry.uk...
In message <1177b0t$24via$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:02:35 on Tue, 1 Sep 2026, >> billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset >>>>> Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you >>>> really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate
misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation further down >> into the mud?
As I've always said, I am always more than happy to be proved wrong.
As curing oneself of misconceptions, is a very good way of increasing
one's fund of knowledge.
In this case however, there are two factors strongly mitigating against
any such possibility.
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
And secondly, there are the bare stats. Your actual form.
As on the basis of all the available evidence, I regret to inform
you that objectively speaking, your actual level of performance
in terms of actually winning arguments or supporting your views
on UseNet, is woeful to say the very least.
On 3 Sep 2026 at 20:20:05 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:6225454302.44fdebd7@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 19:48:56 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:4520905740.7ac8f87d@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 13:54:36 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>>>
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just >>>>> inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product >>>>> contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a >>>>> functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:3272828146.e8cae5a5@uninhabited.net...
On 3 Sep 2026 at 09:39:02 BST, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>That's presumably because the heat from baking inactivates the enzymes. >>>>>
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 2 Sep 2026 at 18:03:47 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:A quick skim through some of the literature strongly suggests that for >>>>>>>> the
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:nfqrkmFn8i6U3@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 10:13 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
That's a good example of why you are wrong. Industrial bread >>>>>>>>>>>>> makers
*are*
actually allowed to use white flour, extracted wheat germ and >>>>>>>>>>>>> extracted
bran
added together to make a simulation of wholemeal flour and sell it
as
*wholemeal*. Apparently that industrial highly processed method >>>>>>>>>>>>> is
cheaper
than using wholemeal flour.
How can it possibly be cheaper ?
Wholemeal flour is flour with nothing added or taken away
That's almost good enough to use as an advertising slogan.
That's the flour.
And wholemeal bread can only be made from wholemeal flour.
So all good so far ?
But that's not to say that it might not also legally contain >>>>>>>>>> salt, vegetable oil, caramelised sugar,calcium proplomate, >>>>>>>>>> tartaric esters, flour treatment agent, ascorbic acid etc. >>>>>>>>>> etc. altogether four lines of spell-checker defying small
print "extras".
And it can legally be made using enzymes from sheep guts which don't >>>>>>>>> even
have
to be put on the ingredients list. Look up Chorleywood process. >>>>>>>>
Chorleywood Bread Process, fungal enzymes (of which there is a >>>>>>>> considerable
number) are preferred over animal sources.
In a long list of relevant enzymes, AI mentioned this:
Quote:
Microbial lipases are generally preferred over animal-derived lipases >>>>>>>> because their activity and substrate specificity can be selected more >>>>>>>> precisely. Some are predominantly triacylglycerol lipases, while others
act
more effectively on polar lipids such as phospholipids. For bread, >>>>>>>> enzymes
that generate surface-active lipid species can improve dough gas-cell >>>>>>>> stability and crumb softness.
Unquote
So it would appear that while animal-derived enzymes can be used, >>>>>>>> microbial
sources are preferred because with the large range available they can >>>>>>>> be
better tailored to the individual manufacturing process and the >>>>>>>> ingredients
used.
That's interesting. It doesn't change the the interesting political >>>>>>> decision
to exempt the firms using these processes from having to include the use
of
these enzymes on the ingredients list for industrially produced bread. >>>>>>
by
such a labelling rule.
I could easily get have got 2,000 words out of that; which is doubtless >>>> what you were hoping for.
Instead I'll just settle for a couple of aphorisms to start with.
Which while clearly not universal in their application, in this instance >>>> seem particularly apt.
(1) What you don't know about can't hurt you.
and
Ignorance is bliss
Thus saving some otherwise tortured souls from excruciating moral
dilemmas; as they block up the bread aisle in the supermarket
While religious prohibitions based on 2000 year old practices
are clearly irrational in this day and age. see (1)
Enzyems like leather shoes are a bye-product in their case of an
indefensible method of slaughter which nevertheless isn't going to
be brought to a halt by.virtue of their elimination in bakery.
bb
Is there, then, a defensible method of slaughter? In practice, probably not.
"Humanely" slaughtering animals that are in obvious and incurable pain for >> one
bb
You can't use sedatives or prolonged one to one attention on animals for
meat production, so that is completely irrelevant to the point.
On 03/09/2026 08:17 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
There certainly IS such evidence. Here's my very recent interrogation of MS CoPilot on the subject.
QUOTE:
Q: Good evening. Am I right in thinking that at one time, the banks in the UK offered a card account where money had to be loaded onto the account (to put the account in credit) and allow payment to be made with the card up to the value - whatever that might be - of the monies loaded into the account (with no overdraft or lending facilities)?
CoPilot:
Yes - you're remembering prepaid card accounts, which were indeed offered in the UK and still exist today. The key idea was exactly what you describe: you load money onto the card first, and you can only spend what you've loaded, with no overdraft and no lending facility.
What these accounts were:
They were typically called:
- Prepaid debit cards
- Prepaid card accounts
- E-money accounts (because most were issued by e-money institutions, not banks)
They worked like a debit card but were not linked to a traditional current account. You topped them up manually (cash, bank transfer, or online), and the
card would only authorise payments up to the available balance. When the balance hit zero, the card simply stopped working - no chance of going overdrawn.
Historically, UK high-street banks did not widely offer prepaid-only accounts,
because prepaid cards were mostly issued by:
- E-money companies (Cashplus, Pockit, Monese, Suits Me)
- Travel-money providers (Caxton, Post Office Travel Money Card)
- Children's money apps (gohenry, nimbl)
Banks tended instead to offer basic bank accounts, which behave similarly (no overdraft, no fees), but they are still full bank accounts rather than prepaid
cards.
However, some banks did offer prepaid travel cards under their branding (e.g.,
the Post Office Travel Money Card, though the Post Office isn't a bank).
Why people used them
Sources highlight several reasons:
- No overdraft risk - you simply cannot spend more than you loaded.
- No credit check - accessible to people refused a standard bank account.
- Budgeting - ringfence money for holidays, kids, or weekly spending.
- Safety - use online without exposing your main bank card.
ENDQUOTE
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 03/09/2026 08:17 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
There certainly IS such evidence. Here's my very recent interrogation of MS >> CoPilot on the subject.
QUOTE:
Q: Good evening. Am I right in thinking that at one time, the banks in the UK
offered a card account where money had to be loaded onto the account (to put >> the account in credit) and allow payment to be made with the card up to the >> value - whatever that might be - of the monies loaded into the account (with >> no overdraft or lending facilities)?
CoPilot:
Yes - you're remembering prepaid card accounts, which were indeed offered in >> the UK and still exist today. The key idea was exactly what you describe: you
load money onto the card first, and you can only spend what you've loaded, >> with no overdraft and no lending facility.
What these accounts were:
They were typically called:
- Prepaid debit cards
- Prepaid card accounts
- E-money accounts (because most were issued by e-money institutions, not
banks)
They worked like a debit card but were not linked to a traditional current >> account. You topped them up manually (cash, bank transfer, or online), and the
card would only authorise payments up to the available balance. When the
balance hit zero, the card simply stopped working - no chance of going
overdrawn.
Historically, UK high-street banks did not widely offer prepaid-only accounts,
because prepaid cards were mostly issued by:
- E-money companies (Cashplus, Pockit, Monese, Suits Me)
- Travel-money providers (Caxton, Post Office Travel Money Card)
- Children's money apps (gohenry, nimbl)
Banks tended instead to offer basic bank accounts, which behave similarly (no
overdraft, no fees), but they are still full bank accounts rather than prepaid
cards.
However, some banks did offer prepaid travel cards under their branding (e.g.,
the Post Office Travel Money Card, though the Post Office isn't a bank).
Why people used them
Sources highlight several reasons:
- No overdraft risk - you simply cannot spend more than you loaded.
- No credit check - accessible to people refused a standard bank account.
- Budgeting - ringfence money for holidays, kids, or weekly spending.
- Safety - use online without exposing your main bank card.
ENDQUOTE
That looks all very impressive, I must say; and the effort you put in
would be highly commendable; were it not for one rather unfortunate fact.
Nowhere in there, is there, any actual mention of the actual item under discussion; namely "pre-paid credit cards"
So that in this instance, it would appear that not only have you not answered the question; but you that you have not even read the question.
Years earlier:
Knock knock !
"Ah come in Nugent, It is Nugent isn't it ? Ah yes, and is that the essay you've produced, as a result of spending the whole of last week working
away in the library ?
Just sit down would you; while I take a quick look.
Five minutes later :
"Well Nugent, there does seem to be slight problem"
is absolutely clear that the cards described by another poster not only did exist but continue to do so. I even have one, though I accept that the term "credit" cannot strictly be used in the title of the facility.
Right now, I have a similar facility: a Global card which has to be pre-loaded from a main account but will only purchase to the amount of
money loaded onto the card.
Its attraction is that the card can be used outside the UK with no
separate currency exchange fees. And it can betopped up at a monet's notice.
On 3 Sep 2026 at 18:35:19 BST, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 03/09/2026 17:19, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Sep 2026 at 15:57:21 BST, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 03/09/2026 15:20, Roger Hayter wrote:
Heat denatures all proteins. The enzymes are still in the bread, just >>>>> inactive. Would you say it was unnecessary to tell consumers a product >>>>> contained gelatine which was a pork product, because it was no longer a >>>>> functional pig protein? There's a lot of people who would be quite annoyed by
such a labelling rule.
Absolutely. And too bad if people get annoyed or upset because that is >>>> totally irrational and we shouldn't be pandering to it.
And you'll be equally happy with the labelling regulations when steak and >>> chips can be advertised as meat free?
I don't think that's a parallel, but there are many examples already of
the vegetarian mafia offering meat-free 'sausages', soy 'milk', veggie
'burgers', vegetarian 'bacon', vegan 'chicken breast' etc.
It's even got a name, 'gastronomic appropriation'.
And, no, I'm not happy with that. It's blatantly dishonest.
The point is that steak is entirely made of meat but, by the logic of the bread regulations, it no longer counts as meat once it's cooked and denatured.
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
[rCa]
Right now, I have a similar facility: a Global card which has to be
pre-loaded from a main account but will only purchase to the amount of
money loaded onto the card.
Its attraction is that the card can be used outside the UK with no
separate currency exchange fees. And it can betopped up at a monet's notice.
A rCYmonetrCOs noticerCY sounds a little like a bridge too far ;-)
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
snip
is absolutely clear that the cards described by another poster not only did >> exist but continue to do so. I even have one, though I accept that the term >> "credit" cannot strictly be used in the title of the facility.
snip
So you also have one; although the term "credit" cannot strictly be
used in the title of the facility "
In other words they don't actually exist.
Much the same as the unicorns, in both your own and Perry's
back gardens.
On 04/09/2026 09:56 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
snip
is absolutely clear that the cards described by another poster not only did >>> exist but continue to do so. I even have one, though I accept that the term >>> "credit" cannot strictly be used in the title of the facility.
snip
So you also have one; although the term "credit" cannot strictly be
used in the title of the facility "
In other words they don't actually exist.
It's shame that this is a hill upon which you are so prepared to die and
are not prepared to see anyone else's POV on it.
It isn't even an important distinction, but there you go...
--
Much the same as the unicorns, in both your own and Perry's
back gardens.
Whatever.
On 04/09/2026 09:56 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
snip
is absolutely clear that the cards described by another poster not only did >>> exist but continue to do so. I even have one, though I accept that the term >>> "credit" cannot strictly be used in the title of the facility.
snip
So you also have one; although the term "credit" cannot strictly be
used in the title of the facility "
In other words they don't actually exist.
It's shame that this is a hill upon which you are so prepared to die and are not prepared to see anyone else's POV on it.
It isn't even an important distinction, but there you go...
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message news:nfvnadFgfoqU2@mid.individual.net...
On 04/09/2026 09:56 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
snip
is absolutely clear that the cards described by another poster not only did
exist but continue to do so. I even have one, though I accept that the term
"credit" cannot strictly be used in the title of the facility.
snip
So you also have one; although the term "credit" cannot strictly be
used in the title of the facility "
In other words they don't actually exist.
It's shame that this is a hill upon which you are so prepared to die and are >> not prepared to see anyone else's POV on it.
It isn't even an important distinction, but there you go...
Possibly not if you owe someone shedloads of money.
Not unless you happen to be someone determined to create an argument out of bits and pieces of no importance.
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate
misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation further down >> into the mud?
As I've always said, I am always more than happy to be proved wrong.
As curing oneself of misconceptions, is a very good way of increasing
one's fund of knowledge.
In this case however, there are two factors strongly mitigating against
any such possibility.
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
And secondly, there are the bare stats. Your actual form.
As on the basis of all the available evidence, I regret to inform
you that objectively speaking, your actual level of performance
in terms of actually winning arguments or supporting your views
on UseNet, is woeful to say the very least.
In message <117ch3p$3vrm9$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:17:10 on Thu, 3 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate
misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation further down
into the mud?
As I've always said, I am always more than happy to be proved wrong.
As curing oneself of misconceptions, is a very good way of increasing
one's fund of knowledge.
In this case however, there are two factors strongly mitigating against
any such possibility.
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
And secondly, there are the bare stats. Your actual form.
As on the basis of all the available evidence, I regret to inform
you that objectively speaking, your actual level of performance
in terms of actually winning arguments or supporting your views
on UseNet, is woeful to say the very least.
Still determined to drag your reputation down further I see. Every single thing you said there has been debunked. Please go and waste
other people's time, somewhere else.
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message news:w3z3J1K$E+mqFA2s@perry.uk...
[...]
Still determined to drag your reputation down further I see. Every
single thing you said there has been debunked. Please go and waste
other people's time, somewhere else.
Thank you for replying. As it allows me to add a third factor, which
I had previously totally overlooked.
Three reasons why it can be safely assumed, that "pre-paid credit
cards" have never existed
1. No objective evidence has ever been produced in support of their existence.
2. The only person to have ever claimed to have seen a "pre-paid
credit card" let alone used one, is Mr Roland Perry, Research will
confirm that in the course of his exchanges on Usenet, Mr Perry has
been found to be in the wrong, at least 75% of the time.
3. Mr Perry has never admitted to having been in the wrong about
anything. Ever. Which thereby gravely undermines his credibility.
Because if occasionally he did admit to having been in the wrong,
then this would lead more conviction to those occasions, when he was insistent he was in the right.
So the message is clear.
Don't let anyone try and convince you that these "pre-paid credit
cards" have ever existed. As they're simply trying to pull the wool
over your eyes.
You know it makes sense !
bb
Why are you replying to Roland but referring to him in the third
person?
"Pamela" <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote in message news:XnsB4BE7D0853AA91F3QA2@157.180.91.226...Trying to. But I recognise him for the troll he is.
Why are you replying to Roland but referring to him in the third
person?
For the fairly obvious reason, I'd have thought, that my arguments
are clearly addressed towards independent-minded third parties;
and not towards Mr Perry himself.
Concerning whom, it is fairly safe to say, has never shown any
indication of ever admitting that anyone else was ever in the
right, about anything at all.
Anyway it's nice to see that the medication seem to working, at
least.
So that far from threatening to report Mr Wells to the police, as
he was yesterday, he is now playing games with him, instead.
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message >news:w3z3J1K$E+mqFA2s@perry.uk...
In message <117ch3p$3vrm9$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:17:10 on Thu, 3 Sep 2026, >> billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate
misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation >>>>further down into the mud?
As I've always said, I am always more than happy to be proved wrong.
As curing oneself of misconceptions, is a very good way of increasing >>>one's fund of knowledge.
In this case however, there are two factors strongly mitigating against >>>any such possibility.
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
And secondly, there are the bare stats. Your actual form.
As on the basis of all the available evidence, I regret to inform
you that objectively speaking, your actual level of performance
in terms of actually winning arguments or supporting your views
on UseNet, is woeful to say the very least.
Still determined to drag your reputation down further I see. Every single
thing you said there has been debunked. Please go and waste
other people's time, somewhere else.
Thank you for replying. As it allows me to add a third factor, which I
had previously totally overlooked.
Three reasons why it can be safely assumed, that "pre-paid credit cards"
have never existed
1. No objective evidence has ever been produced in support of their >existence.
2. The only person to have ever claimed to have seen a "pre-paid credit card" >let alone used one, is Mr Roland Perry, Research will confirm that
in the course of his exchanges on Usenet, Mr Perry has been found to
be in the wrong, at least 75% of the time.
3. Mr Perry has never admitted to having been in the wrong about
anything. Ever. Which thereby gravely undermines his
credibility. Because if occasionally he did admit to having been
in the wrong, then this would lead more conviction to those
occasions, when he was insistent he was in the right.
So the message is clear.
Don't let anyone try and convince you that these "pre-paid credit cards"
have ever existed. As they're simply trying to pull the wool over
your eyes.
You know it makes sense !
In message <117gs2j$1egqb$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:48:49 on Sat, 5 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message >>news:w3z3J1K$E+mqFA2s@perry.uk...
In message <117ch3p$3vrm9$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:17:10 on Thu, 3 Sep 2026, >>> billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate
misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation further >>>>> down into the mud?
As I've always said, I am always more than happy to be proved wrong.
As curing oneself of misconceptions, is a very good way of increasing >>>>one's fund of knowledge.
In this case however, there are two factors strongly mitigating against >>>>any such possibility.
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
And secondly, there are the bare stats. Your actual form.
As on the basis of all the available evidence, I regret to inform
you that objectively speaking, your actual level of performance
in terms of actually winning arguments or supporting your views
on UseNet, is woeful to say the very least.
Still determined to drag your reputation down further I see. Every single >>> thing you said there has been debunked. Please go and waste
other people's time, somewhere else.
Thank you for replying. As it allows me to add a third factor, which I
had previously totally overlooked.
Three reasons why it can be safely assumed, that "pre-paid credit cards" >>have never existed
1. No objective evidence has ever been produced in support of their >>existence.
2. The only person to have ever claimed to have seen a "pre-paid credit card" >>let alone used one, is Mr Roland Perry, Research will confirm that
in the course of his exchanges on Usenet, Mr Perry has been found to
be in the wrong, at least 75% of the time.
3. Mr Perry has never admitted to having been in the wrong about
anything. Ever. Which thereby gravely undermines his
credibility. Because if occasionally he did admit to having been
in the wrong, then this would lead more conviction to those
occasions, when he was insistent he was in the right.
So the message is clear.
Don't let anyone try and convince you that these "pre-paid credit cards" >>have ever existed. As they're simply trying to pull the wool over
your eyes.
You know it makes sense !
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are an
AI bot.
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then "
a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly
something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
"Pamela" <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote in message >news:XnsB4BE7D0853AA91F3QA2@157.180.91.226...
Why are you replying to Roland but referring to him in the third
person?
For the fairly obvious reason, I'd have thought, that my arguments
are clearly addressed towards independent-minded third parties;
and not towards Mr Perry himself.
Concerning whom, it is fairly safe to say, has never shown any
indication of ever admitting that anyone else was ever in the
right, about anything at all.
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 Sep
2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then "
a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly
something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have, either.
In message <117gs2j$1egqb$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:48:49 on Sat, 5 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message >>news:w3z3J1K$E+mqFA2s@perry.uk...
In message <117ch3p$3vrm9$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:17:10 on Thu, 3 Sep 2026, >>> billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
So how were they advertised ?
As pre-paid credit cards of course. Are now well past deliberate
misinterpretation and firmly in troll country.
Haven't you got anything better to do than drag your reputation further >>>>> down into the mud?
As I've always said, I am always more than happy to be proved wrong.
As curing oneself of misconceptions, is a very good way of increasing >>>>one's fund of knowledge.
In this case however, there are two factors strongly mitigating against >>>>any such possibility.
First the complete dearth of any actual evidence or argument in
support of "pre paid credit cards"; over and above bald assertion
And secondly, there are the bare stats. Your actual form.
As on the basis of all the available evidence, I regret to inform
you that objectively speaking, your actual level of performance
in terms of actually winning arguments or supporting your views
on UseNet, is woeful to say the very least.
Still determined to drag your reputation down further I see. Every single >>> thing you said there has been debunked. Please go and waste
other people's time, somewhere else.
Thank you for replying. As it allows me to add a third factor, which I
had previously totally overlooked.
Three reasons why it can be safely assumed, that "pre-paid credit cards" >>have never existed
1. No objective evidence has ever been produced in support of their >>existence.
2. The only person to have ever claimed to have seen a "pre-paid credit card" >>let alone used one, is Mr Roland Perry, Research will confirm that
in the course of his exchanges on Usenet, Mr Perry has been found to
be in the wrong, at least 75% of the time.
3. Mr Perry has never admitted to having been in the wrong about
anything. Ever. Which thereby gravely undermines his
credibility. Because if occasionally he did admit to having been
in the wrong, then this would lead more conviction to those
occasions, when he was insistent he was in the right.
So the message is clear.
Don't let anyone try and convince you that these "pre-paid credit cards" >>have ever existed. As they're simply trying to pull the wool over
your eyes.
You know it makes sense !
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are an AI bot.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 Sep
2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are >>>> an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then "
a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly
something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have, either.
We may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the accounts to which Mr Perry may be referring have history from before AI was capable of posting the articles to which he is referring.
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the idea that unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That hallucination is something we could take as an indication that Mr Perry is an AI bot but the point about a sufficiently long history also applies so I am reasonably confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion but that could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr Perry believe that some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting politician's deflection in the response. Surprise me.)
In message <117h59q$1hlr3$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:26:15 on Sat, 5 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
"Pamela" <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:XnsB4BE7D0853AA91F3QA2@157.180.91.226...
Why are you replying to Roland but referring to him in the third
person?
For the fairly obvious reason, I'd have thought, that my arguments
are clearly addressed towards independent-minded third parties;
and not towards Mr Perry himself.
Concerning whom, it is fairly safe to say, has never shown any
indication of ever admitting that anyone else was ever in the
right, about anything at all.
You are wrong about that. There are numerous postings with which I agree.
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:117jkpq$2b5tr$1@dont-email.me...
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 Sep
2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are
an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then "
a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly
something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have, either.
We may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the accounts to
which Mr Perry may be referring have history from before AI was capable of >> posting the articles to which he is referring.
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the idea that
unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That hallucination is
something we could take as an indication that Mr Perry is an AI bot but the >> point about a sufficiently long history also applies so I am reasonably
confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion but that
could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr Perry believe that
some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting politician's deflection in the
response. Surprise me.)
On possible alternative explanation.
Mr Perry believes that all the major players in AI and search engines,
held a meeting in California, around a month or two ago. At which they
agreed to wipe all references to "pre-paid credit cards" from their
servers; so as to make it appear that "pre-paid credit cards" had never
ever existed. This was as a result of my having sent them an email
Or at least, so it would seem
bb
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are an
AI bot.
But if I were an AI bot, why would I be so insistent that "pre-paid credit >cards "have never existed" ?
Which I am. They haven't.
On 06/09/2026 18:41, billy bookcase wrote:
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in messageQuestion to AI: "has there ever been a thing described and marketed as a prepaid credit card even though logically such a thing cannot exist"
news:117jkpq$2b5tr$1@dont-email.me...
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 SepWe may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the accounts to >>> which Mr Perry may be referring have history from before AI was capable of >>> posting the articles to which he is referring.
2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you >>>>>> are
an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then "
a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly
something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have, either. >>>
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the idea that >>> unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That hallucination is
something we could take as an indication that Mr Perry is an AI bot but the >>> point about a sufficiently long history also applies so I am reasonably
confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion but that >>> could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr Perry believe that >>> some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting politician's deflection in the >>> response. Surprise me.)
On possible alternative explanation.
Mr Perry believes that all the major players in AI and search engines,
held a meeting in California, around a month or two ago. At which they
agreed to wipe all references to "pre-paid credit cards" from their
servers; so as to make it appear that "pre-paid credit cards" had never
ever existed. This was as a result of my having sent them an email
Or at least, so it would seem
bb
Answer: "Yes, "prepaid credit cards" are widely marketed and sold,
even though the phrase is an absolute linguistic and logical contradiction.
Logically, "prepaid" means you have already paid the money, while "credit" means you are borrowing money to pay later. You cannot borrow money that you have already advanced. Despite this paradox, major financial corporations, retailers, and marketers have heavily pushed the term for decades."
So everybody is right > rest?
and the argument is surely pointless. Time to give it a
In message <117k6ha$2i0u0$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:05:45 on Sun, 6 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are >>> an
AI bot.
But if I were an AI bot, why would I be so insistent that "pre-paid credit >>cards "have never existed" ?
Which I am. They haven't.
Thanks for admitting you are an AI bot, no-one has ever done that before.
On 06/09/2026 18:41, billy bookcase wrote:
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in messageQuestion to AI: "has there ever been a thing described and marketed as
news:117jkpq$2b5tr$1@dont-email.me...
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 Sep
2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because >>>>>> you are
an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then "
a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly
something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have,
either.
We may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the accounts to >>> which Mr Perry may be referring have history from before AI was
capable of
posting the articles to which he is referring.
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the idea
that
unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That hallucination is
something we could take as an indication that Mr Perry is an AI bot
but the
point about a sufficiently long history also applies so I am reasonably
confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion but that >>> could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr Perry believe
that
some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting politician's deflection in the >>> response. Surprise me.)
On possible alternative explanation.
Mr Perry believes that all the major players in AI and search engines,
held a meeting in California, around a month or two ago. At which they
agreed to wipe all references to "pre-paid credit cards" from their
servers; so as to make it appear that "pre-paid credit cards" had never
ever existed. This was as a result of my having sent them an email
Or at least, so it would seem
a prepaid credit card even though logically such a thing cannot exist"
Answer: "Yes, "prepaid credit cards" are widely marketed and sold, even though the phrase is an absolute linguistic and logical contradiction.
Logically, "prepaid" means you have already paid the money, while
"credit" means you are borrowing money to pay later. You cannot borrow
money that you have already advanced. Despite this paradox, major
financial corporations, retailers, and marketers have heavily pushed the
term for decades."
So everybody is right and the argument is surely pointless. Time to
give it a rest?
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message news:9SrkAnCYNpnqFAtq@perry.uk...
In message <117k6ha$2i0u0$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:05:45 on Sun, 6 Sep 2026, >> billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are >>>> an
AI bot.
But if I were an AI bot, why would I be so insistent that "pre-paid credit >>> cards "have never existed" ?
Which I am. They haven't.
Thanks for admitting you are an AI bot, no-one has ever done that before.
No I'm not.
I'm just insistent, Which from your point of view, is far, far, worse.
Even if it does seem to so upset this new best friend of yours; PJK.
You had another new best friend a while ago, I seem to remember.
They'd never posted before, and never posted again, either.
On 07/09/2026 01:43 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9SrkAnCYNpnqFAtq@perry.uk...
In message <117k6ha$2i0u0$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:05:45 on Sun, 6 Sep 2026, >>> billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:No I'm not.
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are
an
AI bot.
But if I were an AI bot, why would I be so insistent that "pre-paid credit >>>> cards "have never existed" ?
Which I am. They haven't.
Thanks for admitting you are an AI bot, no-one has ever done that before. >>
I'm just insistent, Which from your point of view, is far, far, worse.
Even if it does seem to so upset this new best friend of yours; PJK.
You had another new best friend a while ago, I seem to remember.
They'd never posted before, and never posted again, either.
An obvious question...
Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan, overdraft or credit card, what is the other possible definition of "credit" within
the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
On 06/09/2026 18:41, billy bookcase wrote:
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in messageQuestion to AI: "has there ever been a thing described and marketed as a
news:117jkpq$2b5tr$1@dont-email.me...
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 Sep >>>>> 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:We may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the accounts to >>>> which Mr Perry may be referring have history from before AI was capable of >>>> posting the articles to which he is referring.
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you >>>>>>> are
an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then " >>>>>> a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly >>>>>> something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have, either. >>>>
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the idea that >>>> unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That hallucination is
something we could take as an indication that Mr Perry is an AI bot but the
point about a sufficiently long history also applies so I am reasonably >>>> confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion but that >>>> could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr Perry believe that >>>> some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting politician's deflection in the >>>> response. Surprise me.)
On possible alternative explanation.
Mr Perry believes that all the major players in AI and search engines,
held a meeting in California, around a month or two ago. At which they
agreed to wipe all references to "pre-paid credit cards" from their
servers; so as to make it appear that "pre-paid credit cards" had never >>> ever existed. This was as a result of my having sent them an email
Or at least, so it would seem
bb
prepaid credit card even though logically such a thing cannot exist"
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Answer: "Yes, "prepaid credit cards" are widely marketed and sold,
" widely marketed and sold "
ROtFK&S&LMAO !
Got any links ?
Large language AI is superficially convincing because among other things
it simply re-arranges phrases you feed into it. Or paraphrases using alternative phrases
You fed it the phrase "pre-paid credit cards"; and so guess what it feeds back ?
even though the phrase is an absolute linguistic and logical contradiction.
Which is what you just said
Logically, "prepaid" means you have already paid the money, while "credit" >> means you are borrowing money to pay later. You cannot borrow money that you >> have already advanced. Despite this paradox, major financial corporations, >> retailers, and marketers have heavily pushed the term for decades."
No they haven;t.
Where are the links ?
So everybody is right > rest?
Oh no they're not.
and the argument is surely pointless. Time to give it a
And oh no its not.
As Mr Perry himself has been the first to point out, any failure to
dispute a claim is an admission of being in the wrong
bb
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:Would it be a conspiracy theory to suspect that ChatGPT and the AI now supplied to the general public by search providers and operating systems, designed to keep us happy and indulge our opinions*, is fundamentally
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
On 06/09/2026 18:41, billy bookcase wrote:
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in messageQuestion to AI: "has there ever been a thing described and marketed as a >>> prepaid credit card even though logically such a thing cannot exist"
news:117jkpq$2b5tr$1@dont-email.me...
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 Sep >>>>>> 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:We may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the accounts to >>>>> which Mr Perry may be referring have history from before AI was capable of
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you >>>>>>>> are
an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then " >>>>>>> a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly >>>>>>> something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have, either. >>>>>
posting the articles to which he is referring.
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the idea that >>>>> unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That hallucination is >>>>> something we could take as an indication that Mr Perry is an AI bot but the
point about a sufficiently long history also applies so I am reasonably >>>>> confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion but that >>>>> could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr Perry believe that >>>>> some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting politician's deflection in the >>>>> response. Surprise me.)
On possible alternative explanation.
Mr Perry believes that all the major players in AI and search engines, >>>> held a meeting in California, around a month or two ago. At which they >>>> agreed to wipe all references to "pre-paid credit cards" from their
servers; so as to make it appear that "pre-paid credit cards" had never >>>> ever existed. This was as a result of my having sent them an email
Or at least, so it would seem
bb
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Answer: "Yes, "prepaid credit cards" are widely marketed and sold,
" widely marketed and sold "
ROtFK&S&LMAO !
Got any links ?
Large language AI is superficially convincing because among other things
it simply re-arranges phrases you feed into it. Or paraphrases using
alternative phrases
You fed it the phrase "pre-paid credit cards"; and so guess what it feeds
back ?
even though the phrase is an absolute linguistic and logical contradiction. >>Which is what you just said
Rearranging the words entered by the human is ancient in AI terms. Anyone using emacs can enter rCyM-x doctorrCO and have a conversation with Eliza where
what they type is rearranged and returned as the response. From what I remember it is intended to behave like a non-directive therapist.
Modern LLMs are much more dangerous. They can draw on the model to create convincing but utterly false statements including plausible citations to works that do not exist. The term for this used by those working in the
field is rCyhallucinationrCO.
In May 2023 an interesting experiment was posted to the Cambridge Computer Science alumni discussion board. ChatGPT was asked to invent a plausible title and author for a work of literary fiction. Then, after a conversation reset, it was asked to write a review of that novel by that author. It gave the novel a 4/5 rating and a very convincing review of the nonexistent
novel. The title has been used as the name of an album since then - 2025 -
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cardsrCa
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally
calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
IrCOve applied your criterion strictly: the organisationrCOs own website must itself use both rCLprepaidrCY and rCLcredit cardrCY in connection with a card,
rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit
card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard rCLWith this prepaid credit cardrCarCY and rCLA PCS
card is a prepaid credit card.rCY UK-specific Recharge.com page available Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says rCLPrepaid
Credit CardsrCY and rCLpurchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle.rCY UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card rCLThe MonoBank Prepaid
Credit Card programrCarCY and rCLMono One Prepaid Credit Card.rCY UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of rCLprepaid credit cardsrCY and said it had been issuing
rCLprepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards.rCY London-based at the time; evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as described.
ChatGPT had a lot more after that but it just goes over the same ground we have discussed.
On 7 Sep 2026 at 16:10:47 BST, "Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:Would it be a conspiracy theory to suspect that ChatGPT and the AI now supplied to the general public by search providers and operating systems, designed to keep us happy and indulge our opinions*, is fundamentally different from the sort agentic AI rented to commercial firms for various specific tasks for real money?
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
On 06/09/2026 18:41, billy bookcase wrote:
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in messageQuestion to AI: "has there ever been a thing described and marketed as a >>>> prepaid credit card even though logically such a thing cannot exist"
news:117jkpq$2b5tr$1@dont-email.me...
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat, 5 Sep >>>>>>> 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you
are
an
AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke !
Roland has learned a new joke !
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting then " >>>>>>>> a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up and clearly >>>>>>>> something to look forward to, is going to be six months of
"you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have, either.
We may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the accounts to >>>>>> which Mr Perry may be referring have history from before AI was capable of
posting the articles to which he is referring.
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the idea that
unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That hallucination is >>>>>> something we could take as an indication that Mr Perry is an AI bot but the
point about a sufficiently long history also applies so I am reasonably >>>>>> confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion but that >>>>>> could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr Perry believe that
some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting politician's deflection in the >>>>>> response. Surprise me.)
On possible alternative explanation.
Mr Perry believes that all the major players in AI and search engines, >>>>> held a meeting in California, around a month or two ago. At which they >>>>> agreed to wipe all references to "pre-paid credit cards" from their
servers; so as to make it appear that "pre-paid credit cards" had never >>>>> ever existed. This was as a result of my having sent them an email
Or at least, so it would seem
bb
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Answer: "Yes, "prepaid credit cards" are widely marketed and sold,
" widely marketed and sold "
ROtFK&S&LMAO !
Got any links ?
Large language AI is superficially convincing because among other things >>> it simply re-arranges phrases you feed into it. Or paraphrases using
alternative phrases
You fed it the phrase "pre-paid credit cards"; and so guess what it feeds >>> back ?
even though the phrase is an absolute linguistic and logical contradiction.
Which is what you just said
Rearranging the words entered by the human is ancient in AI terms. Anyone
using emacs can enter rCyM-x doctorrCO and have a conversation with Eliza where
what they type is rearranged and returned as the response. From what I
remember it is intended to behave like a non-directive therapist.
Modern LLMs are much more dangerous. They can draw on the model to create
convincing but utterly false statements including plausible citations to
works that do not exist. The term for this used by those working in the
field is rCyhallucinationrCO.
In May 2023 an interesting experiment was posted to the Cambridge Computer >> Science alumni discussion board. ChatGPT was asked to invent a plausible
title and author for a work of literary fiction. Then, after a conversation >> reset, it was asked to write a review of that novel by that author. It gave >> the novel a 4/5 rating and a very convincing review of the nonexistent
novel. The title has been used as the name of an album since then - 2025 - >> I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cardsrCa
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally
calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
IrCOve applied your criterion strictly: the organisationrCOs own website must
itself use both rCLprepaidrCY and rCLcredit cardrCY in connection with a card,
rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit
card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard rCLWith this prepaid credit cardrCarCY and rCLA PCS
card is a prepaid credit card.rCY UK-specific Recharge.com page available >> Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says rCLPrepaid
Credit CardsrCY and rCLpurchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle.rCY UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card rCLThe MonoBank Prepaid
Credit Card programrCarCY and rCLMono One Prepaid Credit Card.rCY UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of rCLprepaid credit cardsrCY and said it had been issuing
rCLprepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards.rCY London-based at the time; >> evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as
described.
ChatGPT had a lot more after that but it just goes over the same ground we >> have discussed.
*indulging us in the same way as social media indulge us by giving us opinions
from people who appear to agree with us, perhaps?
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 01:43 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9SrkAnCYNpnqFAtq@perry.uk...
In message <117k6ha$2i0u0$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:05:45 on Sun, 6 Sep 2026,No I'm not.
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are
an
AI bot.
But if I were an AI bot, why would I be so insistent that "pre-paid credit
cards "have never existed" ?
Which I am. They haven't.
Thanks for admitting you are an AI bot, no-one has ever done that before. >>>
I'm just insistent, Which from your point of view, is far, far, worse.
Even if it does seem to so upset this new best friend of yours; PJK.
You had another new best friend a while ago, I seem to remember.
They'd never posted before, and never posted again, either.
An obvious question...
Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan, overdraft or
credit card, what is the other possible definition of "credit" within
the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by credit card you
mean? What about the use of the network for a month and all calls made in that
time being paid for in arrears? That sounds like credit to me?
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
On 06/09/2026 18:41, billy bookcase wrote:
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:117jkpq$2b5tr$1@dont-email.me...
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
In message <117h7ro$1iiun$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:57 on Sat,
5 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is
because you are an AI bot.
Roland has learned a new joke ! Roland has learned a new joke ! >>>>>>>
So that after six months of "You're not here for the hunting
then " a joke he apparently first heard 30 years ago, next up
and clearly something to look forward to, is going to be six
months of "you're an AI bot"
I've been saying that about certain accounts for up to a year.
The odd thing is, none ever deny it. And I don't think you have,
either.
We may each form our own opinion but as far as I can see the
accounts to which Mr Perry may be referring have history from
before AI was capable of posting the articles to which he is
referring.
The remark about failure to deny looks like resurrection of the
idea that unchallenged assertions on usenet must be true. That
hallucination is something we could take as an indication that Mr
Perry is an AI bot but the point about a sufficiently long
history also applies so I am reasonably confident that he is not.
I may have been misled by the vagueness of Mr Perry's assertion
but that could be cleared up by an explanation of what makes Mr
Perry believe that some posters are AI bots. (I am expecting
politician's deflection in the response. Surprise me.)
On possible alternative explanation.
Mr Perry believes that all the major players in AI and search
engines, held a meeting in California, around a month or two ago.
At which they agreed to wipe all references to "pre-paid credit
cards" from their servers; so as to make it appear that "pre-paid
credit cards" had never ever existed. This was as a result of my
having sent them an email
Or at least, so it would seem
bb
Question to AI: "has there ever been a thing described and
marketed as a prepaid credit card even though logically such a
thing cannot exist"
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
" widely marketed and sold "
Answer: "Yes, "prepaid credit cards" are widely marketed and sold,
ROtFK&S&LMAO ! Got any links ?
Large language AI is superficially convincing because among other
things it simply re-arranges phrases you feed into it. Or
paraphrases using alternative phrases
You fed it the phrase "pre-paid credit cards"; and so guess what it
feeds back ?
even though the phrase is an absolute linguistic and logical
contradiction.
Which is what you just said
Rearranging the words entered by the human is ancient in AI terms.
Anyone using emacs can enter aM-x doctorA and have a conversation
with Eliza where what they type is rearranged and returned as the
response. From what I remember it is intended to behave like a
non-directive therapist.
Modern LLMs are much more dangerous. They can draw on the model to
create convincing but utterly false statements including plausible
citations to works that do not exist. The term for this used by those
working in the field is 'hallucination'.
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cardsrCa
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally
calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
IrCOve applied your criterion strictly: the organisationrCOs own website must itself use both rCLprepaidrCY and rCLcredit cardrCY in connection with a card,
rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit
card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard rCLWith this prepaid credit cardrCarCY and rCLA PCS
card is a prepaid credit card.rCY UK-specific Recharge.com page available Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says rCLPrepaid Credit CardsrCY and rCLpurchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle.rCY UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card rCLThe MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card programrCarCY and rCLMono One Prepaid Credit Card.rCY UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of rCLprepaid credit cardsrCY and said it had been issuing
rCLprepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards.rCY London-based at the time;
evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as described.
On 07/09/2026 04:10 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 01:43 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9SrkAnCYNpnqFAtq@perry.uk...
In message <117k6ha$2i0u0$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:05:45 on Sun, 6 Sep 2026,No I'm not.
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are
an
AI bot.
But if I were an AI bot, why would I be so insistent that "pre-paid credit
cards "have never existed" ?
Which I am. They haven't.
Thanks for admitting you are an AI bot, no-one has ever done that before. >>>>
I'm just insistent, Which from your point of view, is far, far, worse. >>>>
Even if it does seem to so upset this new best friend of yours; PJK.
You had another new best friend a while ago, I seem to remember.
They'd never posted before, and never posted again, either.
An obvious question...
Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan, overdraft or >>> credit card, what is the other possible definition of "credit" within
the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by credit card you
mean? What about the use of the network for a month and all calls made in that
time being paid for in arrears? That sounds like credit to me?
The credit card method of payment involves borrowing from the credit
card provider. That is the case for any CC purchase and is not peculiar
to the mobile phone industry.
In what other circumstances might one use the word "credit" within the context of a mobile phone contract?
On 7 Sep 2026 at 16:45:30 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 04:10 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan,
overdraft or credit card, what is the other possible definition of
"credit" within the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by
credit card you mean? What about the use of the network for a month
and all calls made in that time being paid for in arrears? That
sounds like credit to me?
The credit card method of payment involves borrowing from the credit
card provider. That is the case for any CC purchase and is not peculiar
to the mobile phone industry.
In what other circumstances might one use the word "credit" within the
context of a mobile phone contract?
You could try reading what I said. Letting you connect to the mobile
network for a month and receive calls, and letting you make calls with
no payment in advance, is clearly credit. That is totally independent
of your payment method.
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...because I have always thought it works quite well - although I
SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation policy
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cards.
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally
calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
I've applied your criterion strictly: the organisation's own website must
itself use both "prepaid" and "credit card" in connection with a card,
rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit
card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard "With this prepaid credit card." and "A PCS
card is a prepaid credit card." UK-specific Recharge.com page available
Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says "Prepaid
Credit Cards" and "purchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle." UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card "The MonoBank Prepaid
Credit Card program." and "Mono One Prepaid Credit Card." UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of "prepaid credit cards" and said it had been issuing >> "prepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards." London-based at the time;
evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as
described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those
sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/
"The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
On 2026-09-07, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 16:45:30 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 04:10 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan,
overdraft or credit card, what is the other possible definition of
"credit" within the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by
credit card you mean? What about the use of the network for a month
and all calls made in that time being paid for in arrears? That
sounds like credit to me?
The credit card method of payment involves borrowing from the credit
card provider. That is the case for any CC purchase and is not peculiar
to the mobile phone industry.
In what other circumstances might one use the word "credit" within the
context of a mobile phone contract?
You could try reading what I said. Letting you connect to the mobile
network for a month and receive calls, and letting you make calls with
no payment in advance, is clearly credit. That is totally independent
of your payment method.
JNugent is doing his usual trick of refusing to say what he's talking
about, which in this case is prepaid mobile phones, where people will
often say something like "I have -u7 credit", meaning that they have
a -u7 credit balance with the mobile company, not that they can borrow
-u7 from the mobile company.
It's a reasonable observation but it has no effect on any argument
that anyone has made. People don't use "credit card" to mean "a card
that you can credit money to".
On 07/09/2026 13:40, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
because I have always thought it works quite well - although I personally would prefer to see a more rigorous application of the rules for some posters.SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation policy
i have traced back many of my posts to UK Legal and the moderated group to many years ago - the days of Jim Hulbert and Marshall Rice amongst others although I realise that for many posters that still makes me a newbie. Of course I realise that I have not been as prolific as you but I can live with that!
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message news:ng8c5qFs8ctU1@mid.individual.net...
On 07/09/2026 13:40, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messagebecause I have always thought it works quite well - although I personally
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation policy
would prefer to see a more rigorous application of the rules for some posters.
i have traced back many of my posts to UK Legal and the moderated group to >> many years ago - the days of Jim Hulbert and Marshall Rice amongst others
although I realise that for many posters that still makes me a newbie. Of >> course I realise that I have not been as prolific as you but I can live with >> that!
NewsGroups live or die based on the number of active posters; not on
the number of active readers, unfortunately,.
While on a group such as ULM a large number of threads are probably going
to veer towards being OT; within a relatively short number of posts.
bb
On 07/09/2026 19:26, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messageIndeed that is true, but if you want a debate but are critical of other people
news:ng8c5qFs8ctU1@mid.individual.net...
On 07/09/2026 13:40, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messagebecause I have always thought it works quite well - although I personally >>> would prefer to see a more rigorous application of the rules for some
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation policy
posters.
i have traced back many of my posts to UK Legal and the moderated group to >>> many years ago - the days of Jim Hulbert and Marshall Rice amongst others >>> although I realise that for many posters that still makes me a newbie. Of >>> course I realise that I have not been as prolific as you but I can live with
that!
NewsGroups live or die based on the number of active posters; not on
the number of active readers, unfortunately,.
While on a group such as ULM a large number of threads are probably going
to veer towards being OT; within a relatively short number of posts.
bb
commenting based on their posting history then Usenet may not be the ideal place for that.
On 07/09/2026 19:26, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messageIndeed that is true, but if you want a debate but are critical of other people commenting based on their posting history then Usenet may not be
news:ng8c5qFs8ctU1@mid.individual.net...
On 07/09/2026 13:40, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messagebecause I have always thought it works quite well - although I personally >>> would prefer to see a more rigorous application of the rules for some posters.
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation policy
i have traced back many of my posts to UK Legal and the moderated group to >>> many years ago - the days of Jim Hulbert and Marshall Rice amongst others >>> although I realise that for many posters that still makes me a newbie. Of >>> course I realise that I have not been as prolific as you but I can live with
that!
NewsGroups live or die based on the number of active posters; not on
the number of active readers, unfortunately,.
While on a group such as ULM a large number of threads are probably going
to veer towards being OT; within a relatively short number of posts.
bb
the ideal place for that.
Peter
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message news:ng8c5qFs8ctU1@mid.individual.net...
On 07/09/2026 13:40, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messagebecause I have always thought it works quite well - although I personally
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation policy
would prefer to see a more rigorous application of the rules for some posters.
i have traced back many of my posts to UK Legal and the moderated group to >> many years ago - the days of Jim Hulbert and Marshall Rice amongst others
although I realise that for many posters that still makes me a newbie. Of >> course I realise that I have not been as prolific as you but I can live with >> that!
NewsGroups live or die based on the number of active posters; not on
the number of active readers, unfortunately,.
While on a group such as ULM a large number of threads are probably going
to veer towards being OT; within a relatively short number of posts.
bb--
On 7 Sep 2026 at 19:26:18 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:ng8c5qFs8ctU1@mid.individual.net...
On 07/09/2026 13:40, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messagebecause I have always thought it works quite well - although I personally >>> would prefer to see a more rigorous application of the rules for some
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation policy
posters.
i have traced back many of my posts to UK Legal and the moderated group to >>> many years ago - the days of Jim Hulbert and Marshall Rice amongst others >>> although I realise that for many posters that still makes me a newbie. Of >>> course I realise that I have not been as prolific as you but I can live with
that!
NewsGroups live or die based on the number of active posters; not on
the number of active readers, unfortunately,.
I agree ULM suffers from a lack of posters. But a bigger hazard to the survival of ULM is probably having two regular posters who post extremely copious drivel.
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cardsrCa
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally
calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
IrCOve applied your criterion strictly: the organisationrCOs own website must
itself use both rCLprepaidrCY and rCLcredit cardrCY in connection with a card,
rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit
card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard rCLWith this prepaid credit cardrCarCY and rCLA PCS
card is a prepaid credit card.rCY UK-specific Recharge.com page available >> Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says rCLPrepaid >> Credit CardsrCY and rCLpurchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle.rCY UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card rCLThe MonoBank Prepaid >> Credit Card programrCarCY and rCLMono One Prepaid Credit Card.rCY UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of rCLprepaid credit cardsrCY and said it had been issuing
rCLprepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards.rCY London-based at the time;
evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as
described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those
sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/
"The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
On 7 Sep 2026 at 16:45:30 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 04:10 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 01:43 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9SrkAnCYNpnqFAtq@perry.uk...
In message <117k6ha$2i0u0$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:05:45 on Sun, 6 Sep 2026,
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
I'm now convinced your lack of shame and self-awareness is because you are
an
AI bot.
But if I were an AI bot, why would I be so insistent that "pre-paid credit
cards "have never existed" ?
Which I am. They haven't.
Thanks for admitting you are an AI bot, no-one has ever done that before.
No I'm not.
I'm just insistent, Which from your point of view, is far, far, worse. >>>>>
Even if it does seem to so upset this new best friend of yours; PJK. >>>>>
You had another new best friend a while ago, I seem to remember.
They'd never posted before, and never posted again, either.
An obvious question...
Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan, overdraft or >>>> credit card, what is the other possible definition of "credit" within
the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by credit card you
mean? What about the use of the network for a month and all calls made in that
time being paid for in arrears? That sounds like credit to me?
The credit card method of payment involves borrowing from the credit
card provider. That is the case for any CC purchase and is not peculiar
to the mobile phone industry.
In what other circumstances might one use the word "credit" within the
context of a mobile phone contract?
You could try reading what I said. Letting you connect to the mobile network for a month and receive calls, and letting you make calls with no payment in advance, is clearly credit. That is totally independent of your payment method.
On 2026-09-07, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 16:45:30 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 04:10 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan,
overdraft or credit card, what is the other possible definition of
"credit" within the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by
credit card you mean? What about the use of the network for a month
and all calls made in that time being paid for in arrears? That
sounds like credit to me?
The credit card method of payment involves borrowing from the credit
card provider. That is the case for any CC purchase and is not peculiar
to the mobile phone industry.
In what other circumstances might one use the word "credit" within the
context of a mobile phone contract?
You could try reading what I said. Letting you connect to the mobile
network for a month and receive calls, and letting you make calls with
no payment in advance, is clearly credit. That is totally independent
of your payment method.
JNugent is doing his usual trick of refusing to say what he's talking
about, which in this case is prepaid mobile phones, where people will
often say something like "I have -u7 credit", meaning that they have
a -u7 credit balance with the mobile company, not that they can borrow
-u7 from the mobile company.
It's a reasonable observation but it has no effect on any argument
that anyone has made. People don't use "credit card" to mean "a card
that you can credit money to".
On 07/09/2026 05:56 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2026-09-07, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 16:45:30 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 04:10 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan,
overdraft or credit card, what is the other possible definition of >>>>>> "credit" within the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by
credit card you mean? What about the use of the network for a month
and all calls made in that time being paid for in arrears? That
sounds like credit to me?
The credit card method of payment involves borrowing from the credit
card provider. That is the case for any CC purchase and is not peculiar >>>> to the mobile phone industry.
In what other circumstances might one use the word "credit" within the >>>> context of a mobile phone contract?
You could try reading what I said. Letting you connect to the mobile
network for a month and receive calls, and letting you make calls with
no payment in advance, is clearly credit. That is totally independent
of your payment method.
JNugent is doing his usual trick of refusing to say what he's talking
about, which in this case is prepaid mobile phones, where people will
often say something like "I have -u7 credit", meaning that they have
a -u7 credit balance with the mobile company, not that they can borrow
-u7 from the mobile company.
The art of cross-examination relies upon not disclosing the whole of
one's hand at too early a stage.
It's a reasonable observation but it has no effect on any argument
that anyone has made. People don't use "credit card" to mean "a card
that you can credit money to".
It doesn't matter what customers call it.
It is perhaps not surprising that some of the posters to uk.legal.moderated treat it as an adversarial context where the objective is to win each argument.
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 05:56 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote:That approach may be appropriate in an adversarial context where the sole objective is to win.
On 2026-09-07, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 16:45:30 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 04:10 PM, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 7 Sep 2026 at 15:54:59 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Other than meaning the purchase of the handset with a loan,
overdraft or credit card, what is the other possible definition of >>>>>>> "credit" within the context of a mobile 'phone contract?
Apart from paying the network subscription and call charges by
credit card you mean? What about the use of the network for a month >>>>>> and all calls made in that time being paid for in arrears? That
sounds like credit to me?
The credit card method of payment involves borrowing from the credit >>>>> card provider. That is the case for any CC purchase and is not peculiar >>>>> to the mobile phone industry.
In what other circumstances might one use the word "credit" within the >>>>> context of a mobile phone contract?
You could try reading what I said. Letting you connect to the mobile
network for a month and receive calls, and letting you make calls with >>>> no payment in advance, is clearly credit. That is totally independent
of your payment method.
JNugent is doing his usual trick of refusing to say what he's talking
about, which in this case is prepaid mobile phones, where people will
often say something like "I have -u7 credit", meaning that they have
a -u7 credit balance with the mobile company, not that they can borrow
-u7 from the mobile company.
The art of cross-examination relies upon not disclosing the whole of
one's hand at too early a stage.
It is not appropriate in a cooperative context where the objective is to discover the truth.
It is perhaps not surprising that some of the posters to uk.legal.moderated treat it as an adversarial context where the objective is to win each argument. The UK has an adversarial judicial system rather than an inquisitorial system as used in some other jurisdictions.
It's a reasonable observation but it has no effect on any argument
that anyone has made. People don't use "credit card" to mean "a card
that you can credit money to".
It doesn't matter what customers call it.
Since the discussion in this sub thread is about how and where a word is used, what people call things not only matters, it is the central issue.
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:117nht5$3ngbe$1@dont-email.me...
It is perhaps not surprising that some of the posters to uk.legal.moderated >> treat it as an adversarial context where the objective is to win each
argument.
What could possibly have given you that idea ?
Posters on ULM are far more grown-up than that.
You simply couldn't be more wrong.
Anyway, that's 1-0 to me.
Anyway, that's 1-0 to me.
You may claim victory if you wish but like any such claim by a participant
it is worthless.
On 9/8/26 15:04, Owen Rees wrote:
Anyway, that's 1-0 to me.
You may claim victory if you wish but like any such claim by a participant >> it is worthless.
Surely the example of the leader of the free world utilising the most implausible claims of victory suggests that it must have some worth?
So that is 1-0 to me, bigly.
On 7 Sep 2026 at 19:34:25 BST, "PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2026 19:26, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messageIndeed that is true, but if you want a debate but are critical of
news:ng8c5qFs8ctU1@mid.individual.net...
On 07/09/2026 13:40, billy bookcase wrote:
"PJK" <pjkvck@outlook.com> wrote in messagebecause I have always thought it works quite well - although I
news:ng7gjdFnv0vU1@mid.individual.net...
SNIP
Oh hello PJK !
Welcome to the group.
This looks like your first ever posting to UNNM
Indeed it may be - I have never had cause to discuss moderation
policy
personally would prefer to see a more rigorous application of the
rules for some posters.
i have traced back many of my posts to UK Legal and the moderated
group to many years ago - the days of Jim Hulbert and Marshall
Rice amongst others although I realise that for many posters that
still makes me a newbie. Of course I realise that I have not been
as prolific as you but I can live with that!
NewsGroups live or die based on the number of active posters; not
on the number of active readers, unfortunately,.
While on a group such as ULM a large number of threads are probably
going to veer towards being OT; within a relatively short number of
posts.
bb
other people commenting based on their posting history then Usenet
may not be the ideal place for that.
Peter
To be honest, I don't think he was actually intending to criticise
you originally; he was suspecting Roland of using a sock puppet. But
when that turned out to be probably untrue he couldn't resist a
pointless criticism!
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:nfo56nFa4h6U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset
Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time* would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the "percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially byGiven that claim, I assume you won't want to hear about the Cashplus
licenced financial institutions
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 1 Sep 2026 at 21:02:35 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
So how were they advertised ?I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were offered a
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time* >>>
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits >>>
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially by
licenced financial institutions.
"pre-paid credit card" I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron, but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing; I would expect >> that what was being offered was card which did not require a credit check or >> risk incurring debt but was likely to be accepted by payees in nearly all
(perhaps not continuous authorities) respects on the same terms as a real
credit card from the same issuer.
I do not find it in the least unbelievable that this was permitted, at least >> at some time in the past.
Equally I would not be surprised if this was never the case.
But why you find this to be an issue of principle, when principles are hardly
ever observed in advertising, I really don't know. Especially as it is
generally hard to prove a negative.
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this case establishing that a person is an adult.
On 2026-09-01, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
We did discuss that though, the context being that a "prepaid credit
card" doesn't involve, er, credit, so things like the Consumer Credit
Act are not particularly relevant, hence the lack of regulation.
There is too much to trawl through to discover exactly who said what but my >> recollection is that it was strongly denied that rCLprepaid credit cardsrCY >> that were available at some time in the past were what these days we would >> more accurately describe as a prepaid payment card.
The historical question, while interesting, does not help to answer the
question of whether or not the 16 digit card number on a current payment
card is a reliable way to determine whether or not the principal cardholder >> has entered into an agreement that it available only to adults. I think the >> discussion came close to addressing that question but never quite got over >> the line.
Eh? It clearly certainly is a reliable way to determine that, because
giant companies such as Apple use it for that purpose, and Ofcom would
have told them off for doing so if it wasn't a suitable way of doing it.
They require credit cards and not debit cards or prepaid cards.
"Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1177fuf$26pp9$1@dont-email.me...The Cashplus cards referenced in my other posts were all marketed by MasterCard. They had the full weight of MasterCard's marketing
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 1 Sep 2026 at 21:02:35 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were offered
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nfo56nFa4h6U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset >>>>>> Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been >>>>>> shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you >>>>> really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty >>>>> much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some >>>>> seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time* >>>>
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits >>>>
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in >>>>> mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially by
licenced financial institutions.
a
"pre-paid credit card" I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron, but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing; I would expect
that what was being offered was card which did not require a credit check or
risk incurring debt but was likely to be accepted by payees in nearly all >>> (perhaps not continuous authorities) respects on the same terms as a real >>> credit card from the same issuer.
I do not find it in the least unbelievable that this was permitted, at least
at some time in the past.
Equally I would not be surprised if this was never the case.
But why you find this to be an issue of principle, when principles are hardly
ever observed in advertising, I really don't know. Especially as it is
generally hard to prove a negative.
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be
whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a >> kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a
depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this
case establishing that a person is an adult.
The matter at issue is quite simply stated.
Mr Perry needed to furnish himself with cards to issue to some visitors
so as to allow them to travel on the London Underground.
He rejected the possibility of issuing them with Oyster Cards the
most obvious solution on the grounds that each would require a
+U5 deposit " which though refundable was a troublesome process.
This latter claim was disputed by at least one poster
Instead he opted for free, "pre-paid credit cards" instead.
Which despite Mr Hayter's protestations to the contrary I would
claim would be impossible to advertise as such.
For reasons explained in my other post
So that even if some firm was issuing cards *which just so
happened to appear as credit cards to LT ticket validators
although they were not in fact credit cards, how would Mr Perry
have got to know about them about them in the first place ?
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...Assume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour; including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
On 01/09/2026 21:02, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nfo56nFa4h6U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset >>>> Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
The Cashplus MasterCard was probably the first such example of a card
and was, from memory, marketed precisely as that, namely a "Cashplus MasterCard".
They were marketed to those with poor credit ratings that could not
obtain traditional credit cards. Legislation already existed to provide
such ones with "basic" bank accounts, many of which had a debit card attached, so these prepaid cards filled a hole in the market.
One of the big advantages to the holders of such prepaid cards over traditional debit cards was that, from a retailer's perspective, they
were indistinguishable from a credit card which from the cardholder's perspective meant they could be used where traditional debit cards could
not. For example, transactions which required a "holding" payment such
as when checking in at a hotel or when hiring a vehicle.
They looked like credit cards to the retailer because the BIN (also
known as the IIS) system used by the merchant processing the card
transaction on behalf of the retailer identified them as such.
This was because the BIN system was originally conceived and designed as
a worldwide system to identify the financial institution that was
backing the card and with whom the payment was to be authorised and
extracted (although the latter did not necessary happen in real-time in
all instances).
BIN could correctly distinguish between charge, debit and credit cards. However, when the prepaid cards first came out each financial
institution issuing or backing a card reserved a bank of numbers
internally for use on prepaid cards.
Later, they started sharing these reserved number sets with each other
and, more importantly with the BIN system, meaning it became possible to identify prepaid cards as such but not so with the early ones.
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time*
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits
See above. To all intents and purposes, the original Cashplus card did
offer many of the benefits of a traditional credit card.
Except that instead of declining transactions that would take the card balance over the cardholder's pre-approved credit limit, (as would
happen with a credit card), the Cashplus card would decline the
transaction if there were insufficient funds preloaded onto the card.
The retailer would see the same thing in both cases: "Transaction
Declined - Insufficient Funds." (or substance thereof).
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all
I agree wholeheartedly and therefore expect you will have no problem whatsoever with anything stated herein.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially byGiven that claim, I assume you won't want to hear about the Cashplus
licenced financial institutions
card's slightly younger brothers then?
Firstly, there was the "CashPlus Credit Builder Card". It functioned
the same as the original card but had an annual fee (c. -u60 from memory) which was advanced as "credit" at the start of the year and repaid as a monthly fee (again from memory, at c. -u5 pcm). As the annual fee was presented as a credit advance, successful repayment of this credit via
the monthly fee could be reported to the relevant credit reference
agencies and used to build / rebuild the cardholder's credit history (or damage it further if the card had insufficient credit when the monthly payment became due).
Secondly, (although, for the avoidance of doubt, launched at the same
time as Credit Builder Card), was the "Cashplus Gold MasterCard". This
had a higher annual fee (c. -u70) which was paid as an initial fee for issuing the card (-u10) and a similar monthly fee. Again it could be
used to build / rebuild / destroy one's credit history, depending on how
it was used, but was a beautiful shiny gold card giving a premium look.
All three were prepaid cards that looked and functioned like a credit
card, two of which even fed into one's credit history further blurring
the lines of what is a credit card and what is a prepaid card.
As this group is unmoderated I will remind you that you are personally
liable for any defamatory statements you may make such as suggesting
that MasterCard would launch products with the express aim of
"misleading the public".
I can assure you that they have a well resourced legal team staffed with qualified professionals and may not take kindly to someone impugning
their good name and reputation.
Regards
S.P.
On 02/09/2026 00:33, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2026-09-01, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
We did discuss that though, the context being that a "prepaid credit
card" doesn't involve, er, credit, so things like the Consumer Credit
Act are not particularly relevant, hence the lack of regulation.
There is too much to trawl through to discover exactly who said what
but my recollection is that it was strongly denied that rCLprepaid
credit cardsrCY that were available at some time in the past were what
these days we would more accurately describe as a prepaid payment
card.
The historical question, while interesting, does not help to answer
the question of whether or not the 16 digit card number on a current
payment card is a reliable way to determine whether or not the
principal cardholder has entered into an agreement that it available
only to adults. I think the discussion came close to addressing that
question but never quite got over the line.
Eh? It clearly certainly is a reliable way to determine that, because
giant companies such as Apple use it for that purpose, and Ofcom would
have told them off for doing so if it wasn't a suitable way of doing it.
They require credit cards and not debit cards or prepaid cards.
The fact that the BIN system and other complementary tools and systems
can now be used to do this does not mean that it has always been
possible to do this. And certainly not some decades ago when the
systems were much simpler.
On 01/09/2026 21:02, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nfo56nFa4h6U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/08/2026 20:45, billy bookcase wrote:
From the way events transpired, it appeared it was because I'd upset >>>> Roland Perry in being too persistent in my questioning his claim
to have used "pre-paid credit cards". None of which have never been
shown to exist, except in Perry's imagination.
They existed. I can give you a brief overview of their history, if you
really want as I worked in-house at a credit card company at the
relevant time so have first hand knowledge of how they were handled
internally. (Free clue: Jon Ribbens made a post here that was pretty
much bang on the money in that the major claims by both sides are
broadly correct, and are not nearly so difficult to reconcile as some
seem determined to believe.)
So how were they advertised ?
The Cashplus MasterCard was probably the first such example of a card and was,
from memory, marketed precisely as that, namely a "Cashplus MasterCard".
They were marketed to those with poor credit ratings that could not obtain traditional credit cards. Legislation already existed to provide such ones with "basic" bank accounts, many of which had a debit card attached, so these prepaid cards filled a hole in the market.
One of the big advantages to the holders of such prepaid cards over traditional debit cards was that, from a retailer's perspective, they were indistinguishable from a credit card which from the cardholder's perspective meant they could be used where traditional debit cards could not. For example, transactions which required a "holding" payment such as when checking
in at a hotel or when hiring a vehicle.
They looked like credit cards to the retailer because the BIN (also known as the IIS) system used by the merchant processing the card transaction on behalf
of the retailer identified them as such.
This was because the BIN system was originally conceived and designed as a worldwide system to identify the financial institution that was backing the card and with whom the payment was to be authorised and extracted (although the latter did not necessary happen in real-time in all instances).
BIN could correctly distinguish between charge, debit and credit cards. However, when the prepaid cards first came out each financial institution issuing or backing a card reserved a bank of numbers internally for use on prepaid cards.
Later, they started sharing these reserved number sets with each other and, more importantly with the BIN system, meaning it became possible to identify prepaid cards as such but not so with the early ones.
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time*
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits
See above. To all intents and purposes, the original Cashplus card did offer many of the benefits of a traditional credit card.
Except that instead of declining transactions that would take the card balance
over the cardholder's pre-approved credit limit, (as would happen with a credit card), the Cashplus card would decline the transaction if there were insufficient funds preloaded onto the card. The retailer would see the same thing in both cases: "Transaction Declined - Insufficient Funds." (or substance thereof).
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in
mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all
I agree wholeheartedly and therefore expect you will have no problem whatsoever with anything stated herein.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially byGiven that claim, I assume you won't want to hear about the Cashplus card's slightly younger brothers then?
licenced financial institutions
Firstly, there was the "CashPlus Credit Builder Card". It functioned the same
as the original card but had an annual fee (c. u60 from memory) which was advanced as "credit" at the start of the year and repaid as a monthly fee (again from memory, at c. u5 pcm). As the annual fee was presented as a credit advance, successful repayment of this credit via the monthly fee could be reported to the relevant credit reference agencies and used to build / rebuild the cardholder's credit history (or damage it further if the card had insufficient credit when the monthly payment became due).
Secondly, (although, for the avoidance of doubt, launched at the same time as Credit Builder Card), was the "Cashplus Gold MasterCard". This had a higher annual fee (c. u70) which was paid as an initial fee for issuing the card (u10) and a similar monthly fee. Again it could be used to build / rebuild / destroy one's credit history, depending on how it was used, but was a beautiful shiny gold card giving a premium look.
All three were prepaid cards that looked and functioned like a credit card, two of which even fed into one's credit history further blurring the lines of what is a credit card and what is a prepaid card.
As this group is unmoderated I will remind you that you are personally liable for any defamatory statements you may make such as suggesting that MasterCard would launch products with the express aim of "misleading the public".
I can assure you that they have a well resourced legal team staffed with qualified professionals and may not take kindly to someone impugning their good name and reputation.
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messageAssume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago.
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a "<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card.
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread"
unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the
perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour; >> including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is
drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of
spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable to
the case in hand?
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messageAssume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. >> How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were
offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago. >>
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The >> target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no >> credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in
Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit >> card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the
hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones >> he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a
"<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and
functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card.
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a
marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the
perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is >>> drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of
spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is
allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
Q Does a "pre-paid credit card" offer credit
A No.
bb--
.
On 9 Sep 2026 at 21:35:34 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messageAssume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. >>> How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were >>>>> offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago. >>>
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards
could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The >>> target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no >>> credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in >>> Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region >>> were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the
Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be
a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit
card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the >>> hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones
he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a
"<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and
functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card. >>>
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a
marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the
perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain
flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is >>>> drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of >>>> spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is
allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable >>> to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering questions like that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I simply don't agree with the answer.
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years and for all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to use it for credit at all, but merely as a means of payment more widely accepted for single or regular payments that a debit card or cash. I suspect this is the main reason a lot of people use them.
Especially the OP, who apparently took advantage of
prepaid "credit" cards at a time when they were indistinguishable to most or all payees from actual credit cards.
Perhaps prepaid cards are not so widely useful as they were then, who knows?
But your answer to your question is untrue, whether the question uses the alternative "main" or the even more conclusively fallacious "only".
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is
allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
On 9 Sep 2026 at 21:35:34 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering questions like that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I simply don't agree with the answer.
A It offers credit
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years and for all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to use it for credit at all, but merely as a means of payment more widely accepted for single or regular payments that a debit card or cash. I suspect this is the main reason a lot of people use them. Especially the OP, who apparently took advantage of prepaid "credit" cards at a time when they were indistinguishable to most or all payees from actual credit cards.
Perhaps prepaid cards are not so widely useful as they were then, who knows?
But your answer to your question is untrue, whether the question uses the alternative "main" or the even more conclusively fallacious "only".
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:8770656152.fd810509@uninhabited.net...
On 9 Sep 2026 at 21:35:34 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messageAssume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. >>>> How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were >>>>>> offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago.
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards >>>> could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The
target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no >>>> credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in >>>> Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region >>>> were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the
Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be
a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit
card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the >>>> hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones
he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a >>>> "<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and
functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card. >>>>
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a
marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>>>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the >>>>> perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain >>>>> flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is >>>>> drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of >>>>> spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is, >>>>> the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is >>>> allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable
to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering questions like
that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I simply don't agree with the >> answer.
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years and for >> all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to use it for credit at
all, but merely as a means of payment more widely accepted for single or
regular payments that a debit card or cash. I suspect this is the main reason
a lot of people use them.
But if your "credit card" didn't offer you "credit" then you wouldn't be able to use it pay for anything, would you ? Whether as an alternative to debit cards, cash or anything
else
It would just be a useless piece of plastic.
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old
piece of plastic ?
A It offers credit !
Why are you making such heavy weather of this >
Especially the OP, who apparently took advantage of
prepaid "credit" cards at a time when they were indistinguishable to most or >> all payees from actual credit cards.
Until such time as the existence of pre-paid credit cards, at any time or at any place, has been firmly established, there is no "appsrently" about it.
Perhaps prepaid cards are not so widely useful as they were then, who knows? >>
But your answer to your question is untrue, whether the question uses the
alternative "main" or the even more conclusively fallacious "only".
Oh not is not !
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old piece of
plastic ?
What is it main/only perceived benefit ?
A It offers credit !
Whatever you do with it subsequently, is first dependant on that !
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:8770656152.fd810509@uninhabited.net...
On 9 Sep 2026 at 21:35:34 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messageAssume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. >>>> How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were >>>>>> offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago.
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards >>>> could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The
target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no >>>> credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in >>>> Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region >>>> were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the
Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be
a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit
card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the >>>> hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones
he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a >>>> "<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and
functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card. >>>>
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a
marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>>>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the >>>>> perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain >>>>> flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is >>>>> drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of >>>>> spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is, >>>>> the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is >>>> allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable
to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering questions like
that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I simply don't agree with the >> answer.
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years and for >> all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to use it for credit at
all, but merely as a means of payment more widely accepted for single or
regular payments that a debit card or cash. I suspect this is the main reason
a lot of people use them.
But if your "credit card" didn't offer you "credit" then you wouldn't be able to use it pay for anything, would you ? Whether as an alternative to debit cards, cash or anything
else
It would just be a useless piece of plastic.
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old
piece of plastic ?
A It offers credit !
Why are you making such heavy weather of this >
Especially the OP, who apparently took advantage of
prepaid "credit" cards at a time when they were indistinguishable to most or >> all payees from actual credit cards.
Until such time as the existence of pre-paid credit cards, at any time or at any place, has been firmly established, there is no "appsrently" about it.
Perhaps prepaid cards are not so widely useful as they were then, who knows? >>
But your answer to your question is untrue, whether the question uses the
alternative "main" or the even more conclusively fallacious "only".
Oh not is not !
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old piece of
plastic ?
What is it main/only perceived benefit ?
A It offers credit !
Whatever you do with it subsequently, is first dependant on that !
bb
On 09/09/2026 10:58 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:8770656152.fd810509@uninhabited.net...
On 9 Sep 2026 at 21:35:34 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messageHow many prepaid cards existed at the time?
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were >>>>>>> offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es >>>>> Assume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years.
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago.
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons, >>>>>> which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards >>>>> could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The
target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no
credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in >>>>> Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region >>>>> were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the
Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be
a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit
card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the >>>>> hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones
he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal? >>>>>
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a >>>>> "<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and >>>>> functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card. >>>>>
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a >>>>> marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm? >>>>>
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>>>>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the >>>>>> perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain >>>>>> flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is
drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of >>>>>> spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water >>>>>>
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards", >>>>>> which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is, >>>>>> the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is >>>>> allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable
to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering questions like
that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I simply don't agree with the >>> answer.
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years and for >>> all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to use it for credit at
all, but merely as a means of payment more widely accepted for single or >>> regular payments that a debit card or cash. I suspect this is the main reason
a lot of people use them.
But if your "credit card" didn't offer you "credit" then you wouldn't be able
to use it pay for anything, would you ? Whether as an alternative to debit >> cards, cash or anything
else
It would just be a useless piece of plastic.
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old
piece of plastic ?
A It offers credit !
Why are you making such heavy weather of this >
Especially the OP, who apparently took advantage of
prepaid "credit" cards at a time when they were indistinguishable to most or
all payees from actual credit cards.
Until such time as the existence of pre-paid credit cards, at any time or at >> any place, has been firmly established, there is no "appsrently" about it. >>
Perhaps prepaid cards are not so widely useful as they were then, who knows?
But your answer to your question is untrue, whether the question uses the >>> alternative "main" or the even more conclusively fallacious "only".
Oh not is not !
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old piece of
plastic ?
What is it main/only perceived benefit ?
A It offers credit !
Whatever you do with it subsequently, is first dependant on that !
A charge card or a debit card does exactly the same. And they are not
credit cards.
On 01/09/2026 22:26, Owen Rees wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 1 Sep 2026 at 21:02:35 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
So how were they advertised ?I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were offered a
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time* >>>>
would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits >>>>
It may well be a lengthy and complicated post though, so bear that in >>>>> mind before responding.
There really nothing complicated about it, at all.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially by
licenced financial institutions.
"pre-paid credit card" I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron, but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing; I would expect
that what was being offered was card which did not require a credit check or
risk incurring debt but was likely to be accepted by payees in nearly all >>> (perhaps not continuous authorities) respects on the same terms as a real >>> credit card from the same issuer.
I do not find it in the least unbelievable that this was permitted, at least
at some time in the past.
Equally I would not be surprised if this was never the case.
But why you find this to be an issue of principle, when principles are hardly
ever observed in advertising, I really don't know. Especially as it is
generally hard to prove a negative.
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be
whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a >> kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
The three examples I've given upthread were all only available to those
aged 18 or over, not least because two of them were technically credit cards, even though they were prepaid cards.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a
depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this
case establishing that a person is an adult.
Nowadays, the BIN system can tell you if a card is a prepaid card. When
the cards first came out, it couldn't. As far as BIN was concerned,
they *were* credit cards. That means as far as the merchant and
retailer were concerned, they *were* credit cards. MasterCard knew they were prepaid cards, but *at the time*, there was no way for them to pass that information to the merchant nor for the merchant to pass it to the retailer.
The BIN system has been modified since then and it is now possible to distinguish between them, but it was not always thus.
Regards
S.P.
Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> wrote:
On 9/8/26 15:04, Owen Rees wrote:
Anyway, that's 1-0 to me.
You may claim victory if you wish but like any such claim by a participant >>> it is worthless.
Surely the example of the leader of the free world utilising the most
implausible claims of victory suggests that it must have some worth?
So that is 1-0 to me, bigly.
I must concede that you should be the next recipient of the FIFA Peace
Prize.
On 09/09/2026 09:35 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
[ ... ]
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is
allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable
to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Really?
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
So it does. It also, though, enables spending without having to carry cash or
potentially having to wait for a cheque to clear.
That, as I am sure you will agree, is an even better "benefit".
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 09/09/2026 09:35 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
[ ... ]
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is, >>>>> the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is >>>> allowed. What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think >>>> is applicable to the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Really?
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
So it does. It also, though, enables spending without having to carry cash or
potentially having to wait for a cheque to clear.
So try using it when you're over your "credit" limit.
That, as I am sure you will agree, is an even better "benefit".
Not when you're over your "credit" limit, it isn't.
Then it just reverts to being a piece of plastic,
Why is this so difficult to understand ?
On 9 Sep 2026 at 22:58:50 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:8770656152.fd810509@uninhabited.net...
On 9 Sep 2026 at 21:35:34 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>>
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messageHow many prepaid cards existed at the time?
news:9380665220.5b1ea0e7@uninhabited.net...
I don't know why you're making such heavy weather of this. If I were >>>>>>> offered a "pre-paid credit card"
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es >>>>> Assume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years.
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years >>>>> ago.
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
I would indeed by irritated by the oxymoron,
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons, >>>>>> which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards >>>>> could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. >>>>> The
target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no
credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in >>>>> Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region >>>>> were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the
Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to >>>>> be
a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his >>>>> debit
card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the >>>>> hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the >>>>> ones
he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal? >>>>>
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a >>>>> "<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and >>>>> functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card. >>>>>
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a >>>>> marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm? >>>>>
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
but it is
only a typical technical lie of the kind common in marketing;
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>>>>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the >>>>>> perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain >>>>>> flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is
drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of >>>>>> spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water >>>>>>
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards", >>>>>> which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is, >>>>>> the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is >>>>> allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is
applicable
to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering questions >>> like
that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I simply don't agree with the >>> answer.
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years and for >>> all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to use it for credit >>> at
all, but merely as a means of payment more widely accepted for single or >>> regular payments that a debit card or cash. I suspect this is the main
reason
a lot of people use them.
But if your "credit card" didn't offer you "credit" then you wouldn't be able
to use it pay for anything, would you ? Whether as an alternative to debit >> cards, cash or anything
else
It would just be a useless piece of plastic.
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old
piece of plastic ?
A It offers credit !
Why are you making such heavy weather of this >
Especially the OP, who apparently took advantage of
prepaid "credit" cards at a time when they were indistinguishable to most or
all payees from actual credit cards.
Until such time as the existence of pre-paid credit cards, at any time or at >> any place, has been firmly established, there is no "appsrently" about it. >>
Perhaps prepaid cards are not so widely useful as they were then, who knows?
But your answer to your question is untrue, whether the question uses the >>> alternative "main" or the even more conclusively fallacious "only".
Oh not is not !
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old piece >> of
plastic ?
What is it main/only perceived benefit ?
A It offers credit !
Whatever you do with it subsequently, is first dependant on that !
bb
If my credit card didn't offer me credit I'd use it in exactly the same way but pay a month in advance
rather than a month in arrears. There are still
things you need a mastercard or visa card for rather than a debit card.
On 10/09/2026 09:25 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 09/09/2026 09:35 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
[ ... ]
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards", >>>>>> which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is, >>>>>> the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is >>>>> allowed. What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think >>>>> is applicable to the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Really?
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
So it does. It also, though, enables spending without having to carry cash >>> or
potentially having to wait for a cheque to clear.
So try using it when you're over your "credit" limit.
Why would that be even relevant? Cheques on accounts in overdraft will bounce
(or at least, have been known to do so).
That, as I am sure you will agree, is an even better "benefit".
Not when you're over your "credit" limit, it isn't.
I am not talking of use of the card as a line of credit EXCEPT for the period
between the date of use and the "payment required by" date on the card issuer's invoice.
I think you can guiess that I have always paid each month, in full. The card is a useful tool. I am not its slave.
You used to be able to get that servoce from a simple charge card (eg, Diner's
Club or the original green American Express card - neither of which is still available in the UK or USA, unfortunately). But a credit card provides the full equivalent service as long as the user simply has the self-control required to pay off the balance each month and not to incur interest.
Then it just reverts to being a piece of plastic,
Why is this so difficult to understand ?
STOP PRESS!
CREDIT CARDS DECLINED BY ISSUING BANK WHEN THE USER FAILS TO PAY WHAT HE OWES!
WHO KNEW?
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cards.
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally
calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
I've applied your criterion strictly: the organisation's own website must >>> itself use both "prepaid" and "credit card" in connection with a card,
rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit
card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard "With this prepaid credit card." and "A PCS
card is a prepaid credit card." UK-specific Recharge.com page available
Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says "Prepaid >>> Credit Cards" and "purchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle." UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card "The MonoBank Prepaid >>> Credit Card program." and "Mono One Prepaid Credit Card." UK-incorporated >>> company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described >>> itself as a provider of "prepaid credit cards" and said it had been issuing >>> "prepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards." London-based at the time;
evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as
described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those
sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/
"The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card.
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail,
A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cards.
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally >>>> calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
I've applied your criterion strictly: the organisation's own website must >>>> itself use both "prepaid" and "credit card" in connection with a card, >>>> rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit >>>> card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard "With this prepaid credit card." and "A PCS >>>> card is a prepaid credit card." UK-specific Recharge.com page available >>>> Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says "Prepaid >>>> Credit Cards" and "purchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle." UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card "The MonoBank Prepaid >>>> Credit Card program." and "Mono One Prepaid Credit Card." UK-incorporated >>>> company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described >>>> itself as a provider of "prepaid credit cards" and said it had been issuing
"prepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards." London-based at the time;
evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as
described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those
sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards." >>>
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/
"The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card.
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail,
A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard
themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago
and
proving you wrong again is just unnecessary overkill? For once we agree!
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cards.
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally >>>>> calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
I've applied your criterion strictly: the organisation's own website must >>>>> itself use both "prepaid" and "credit card" in connection with a card, >>>>> rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit >>>>> card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard "With this prepaid credit card." and "A PCS >>>>> card is a prepaid credit card." UK-specific Recharge.com page available >>>>> Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says "Prepaid >>>>> Credit Cards" and "purchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle." UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card "The MonoBank Prepaid >>>>> Credit Card program." and "Mono One Prepaid Credit Card." UK-incorporated >>>>> company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described >>>>> itself as a provider of "prepaid credit cards" and said it had been issuing
"prepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards." London-based at the time; >>>>> evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as >>>>> described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those
sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards." >>>>
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/
"The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary >>> to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card.
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail,
A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard
themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago
No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cards.
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally >>>>>> calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
I've applied your criterion strictly: the organisation's own website must
itself use both "prepaid" and "credit card" in connection with a card, >>>>>> rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit >>>>>> card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard "With this prepaid credit card." and "A PCS >>>>>> card is a prepaid credit card." UK-specific Recharge.com page available >>>>>> Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says "Prepaid >>>>>> Credit Cards" and "purchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle." UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card "The MonoBank Prepaid
Credit Card program." and "Mono One Prepaid Credit Card." UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of "prepaid credit cards" and said it had been issuing
"prepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards." London-based at the time; >>>>>> evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as >>>>>> described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those
sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards." >>>>>
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/
"The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary >>>> to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card.
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail,
A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago
No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the
face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you completely wrong?
On 10 Sep 2026 at 17:27:14 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cards.
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally >>>>>>> calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
I've applied your criterion strictly: the organisation's own website must
itself use both "prepaid" and "credit card" in connection with a card, >>>>>>> rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit >>>>>>> card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard "With this prepaid credit card." and "A PCS >>>>>>> card is a prepaid credit card." UK-specific Recharge.com page available >>>>>>> Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says "Prepaid
Credit Cards" and "purchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle." UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card "The MonoBank Prepaid
Credit Card program." and "Mono One Prepaid Credit Card." UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of "prepaid credit cards" and said it had been issuing
"prepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards." London-based at the time; >>>>>>> evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as >>>>>>> described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards." >>>>>>
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary >>>>> to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago
No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the
face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you
completely wrong?
I think this disagreement has gone well beyond the bounds of actual reality and entered the realm of quasi-religious dogma.
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, Owen Rees <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do not know if there if any connection.
I asked ChatGPT about prepaid credit cards.
You said:
Please produce the list of UK organisations whose own website literally >>>>>> calls a card both prepaid and credit.
ChatGPT said:
I've applied your criterion strictly: the organisation's own website must
itself use both "prepaid" and "credit card" in connection with a card, >>>>>> rather than my inferring that a prepaid card can be used like a credit >>>>>> card.
On that basis, the list is surprisingly short.
UK organisations meeting the criterion
Organisation Card/product Exact wording found UK status
Recharge.com PCS Mastercard "With this prepaid credit card." and "A PCS >>>>>> card is a prepaid credit card." UK-specific Recharge.com page available >>>>>> Dundle (GB) Prepaid cards generally Its UK site explicitly says "Prepaid >>>>>> Credit Cards" and "purchase your prepaid credit card from
dundle." UK/GB-specific operation
MonoBank PLC MonoOne / MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card "The MonoBank Prepaid
Credit Card program." and "Mono One Prepaid Credit Card." UK-incorporated
company, but appears historical/inactive as a consumer offering
PPRO Group Prepaid Mastercard/Visa cards Its own corporate site described
itself as a provider of "prepaid credit cards" and said it had been >>>>>> issuing
"prepaid MasterCard and Visa credit cards." London-based at the time; >>>>>> evidence is historical rather than a current retail offering
====
When I looked up those four, none of the websites had the wording as >>>>>> described.
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those
sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards." >>>>>
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/
"The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary >>>> to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card.
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail,
A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago
No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the
face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you completely wrong?
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards." >>>>>>
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary >>>>> to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago
No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the
face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you
completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, you-Are not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary >>>>>> to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the
face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, youAre not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish".
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message news:slrn11a5qu1.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..." >>>>>>>>
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as >>>>>>> his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the >>>> face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, you-Are not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit
cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish".
So which word or words in the ten word phrase
" This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards "
are you having the biggest difficulty with ?
Or maybe you actually missed that bit before ?
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..."
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary >>>>>> to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as
his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the
face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, you-Are not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim
was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described
as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that
they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5qu1.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit >>>>>>>>> Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..." >>>>>>>>>
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an
intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as >>>>>>>> his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html >>>>>>>>
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the >>>>> face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>>>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, youAre not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit
cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish".
So which word or words in the ten word phrase
" This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards "
are you having the biggest difficulty with ?
Or maybe you actually missed that bit before ?
You lost, you can stop now.
On 10 Sep 2026 at 18:41:21 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit >>>>>>>> Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..." >>>>>>>>
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as >>>>>>> his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the >>>> face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, youAre not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit
cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim
was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described
as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that
they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
Indeed; companies talking "a load of old rubbish" in order to sell things is hardly new.
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:6342868031.ab271cb8@uninhabited.net...
On 10 Sep 2026 at 18:41:21 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit >>>>>>>>> Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..." >>>>>>>>>
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as >>>>>>>> his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard >>>>>>>> themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html >>>>>>>>
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the >>>>> face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>>>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, yourCOre not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit
cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim
was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described >>> as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that
they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
Indeed; companies talking "a load of old rubbish" in order to sell things is >> hardly new.
Oh yes ! People would be queing up around the block to get hold of
"pre-paid credit cards", which didn't in fact offer them any credit;
wouldn't they ? Imagine their surprise when they first tried them
out in a shop.
It's just what people have been waiting for !
With your business brain its a surprise you waste so much time posting
on UseNet; when you could be making yourself millions.
bb--
On 10 Sep 2026 at 19:17:45 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:6342868031.ab271cb8@uninhabited.net...
On 10 Sep 2026 at 18:41:21 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> >>> wrote:
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit >>>>>>>>>> Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..." >>>>>>>>>>
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as >>>>>>>>> his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard
themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html >>>>>>>>>
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the >>>>>> face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>>>>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, yourCOre not linking your bank account. Instead, >>>>> you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit >>>> cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim
was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described >>>> as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that >>>> they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
Indeed; companies talking "a load of old rubbish" in order to sell things is
hardly new.
Oh yes ! People would be queing up around the block to get hold of
"pre-paid credit cards", which didn't in fact offer them any credit;
wouldn't they ? Imagine their surprise when they first tried them
out in a shop.
It's just what people have been waiting for !
It is totally impossible to imagine that someone a few years ago might have sought out precisely this type of card as the only short term way of paying TfL without overhead or complications and avoiding the bureaucracy of a new Oyster card application. Who could possibly have done something like that?
With your business brain its a surprise you waste so much time posting
on UseNet; when you could be making yourself millions.
bb
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 10 Sep 2026 at 19:17:45 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote: >>
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:6342868031.ab271cb8@uninhabited.net...
On 10 Sep 2026 at 18:41:21 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> >>>> wrote:
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..." >>>>>>>>>>>
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit >>>>>>>>>>> Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..." >>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as >>>>>>>>>> his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard
themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html >>>>>>>>>>
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>>>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the >>>>>>> face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you
completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, yourCOre not linking your bank account. Instead, >>>>>> you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit >>>>> cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim >>>>> was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described >>>>> as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that >>>>> they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
Indeed; companies talking "a load of old rubbish" in order to sell things is
hardly new.
Oh yes ! People would be queing up around the block to get hold of
"pre-paid credit cards", which didn't in fact offer them any credit;
wouldn't they ? Imagine their surprise when they first tried them
out in a shop.
It's just what people have been waiting for !
It is totally impossible to imagine that someone a few years ago might have >> sought out precisely this type of card as the only short term way of paying >> TfL without overhead or complications and avoiding the bureaucracy of a new >> Oyster card application. Who could possibly have done something like that?
TfL press releases from the time when cards other than Oyster cards were first accepted say that many kinds of cards were accepted. There has been
no independent source for the assertion that a rCyprepaid credit cardrCO was the only other kind of card accepted and the press releases were wrong.
Thanks to those who provided links to various web pages rather than bald assertions we now know that the term rCyprepaid credit cardrCO appears in the marketing for certain cards. In one respect that must be misleading since a prepaid card does not offer credit but perhaps it is a reasonable way to describe a prepaid payment card that can be used as if it were a credit
card where a debit card would not be accepted.
Thanks mainly to the clear and detailed information provided by Mr Parker I can see where such a card would be valuable.
--
With your business brain its a surprise you waste so much time posting
on UseNet; when you could be making yourself millions.
bb
On 10 Sep 2026 at 19:17:45 BST, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:6342868031.ab271cb8@uninhabited.net...
On 10 Sep 2026 at 18:41:21 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> >>> wrote:
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a5mj2.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-10, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn11a59go.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2026-09-07, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:No. Precisely the opposite, in fact.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrn119tq44.8k8.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
I am as sceptical of LLMs as the next person, but all four of those >>>>>>>>>> sites talk about "prepaid credit cards":
https://www.recharge.com/en/ie/pcs
"With this prepaid credit card, you can do anything ..."
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
"Safeguard your personal information online with Prepaid Credit >>>>>>>>>> Cards."
https://monobank.co.uk/consumer_products.html
"The MonoBank Prepaid Credit Card program is designed for ..." >>>>>>>>>>
https://www.ppro.com/news/ppro-group-issues-millionth-prepaid-card/ >>>>>>>>>> "The specialists in ... prepaid credit cards ..."
The latter are "business cards" which can be tailored by an >>>>>>>>> intermediary
to offer facilities offered by two or more lenders, on the one card. >>>>>>>>>
I thought these might have been what Roland maybe had in mind as >>>>>>>>> his "ideal solution"; until he realised he couldn't buy them retail, >>>>>>>>> A fact he had subsequntly forgotten
Recharge mentions "Mastercard pre-paid credit cards"; which Mastercard
themselves don't seem to know anything about
https://www.mastercard.com/europe/en/personal/find-a-card.html >>>>>>>>>
The other two just seem to be drivel.
This is all well-trodden territory
"well-trodden"? Are you saying you were already proven wrong long ago >>>>>>>
Ok. So in what way are you claiming that the above links - which on the >>>>>> face of it would appear to prove you completely wrong - do not prove you >>>>>> completely wrong?
quote:
With prepaid cards, you're not linking your bank account. Instead,
you pay using a preloaded balance on a card or eWallet.
This makes prepaid credit cards (also called prepaid debit cards)
a strong choice for anyone who values privacy and control.
:unquote
https://dundle.com/gb/payment-cards/prepaid-cards/
Which on then face of it, is also called a load of old rubbish.
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit >>>> cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim
was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described >>>> as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that >>>> they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
Indeed; companies talking "a load of old rubbish" in order to sell things is
hardly new.
Oh yes ! People would be queing up around the block to get hold of
"pre-paid credit cards", which didn't in fact offer them any credit;
wouldn't they ? Imagine their surprise when they first tried them
out in a shop.
It's just what people have been waiting for !
It is totally impossible to imagine that someone a few years ago might have sought out precisely this type of card as the only short term way of paying TfL without overhead or complications and avoiding the bureaucracy of a new Oyster card application. Who could possibly have done something like that?
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
It is totally impossible to imagine that someone a few years ago might have >> sought out precisely this type of card as the only short term way of paying >> TfL without overhead or complications and avoiding the bureaucracy of a new >> Oyster card application. Who could possibly have done something like that?
Indeed.
Why pay a refundable u5 deposit for an Oyster Card which can be guarenteed
to work in TFL ticket vakidators, when instaed you can load u5 or u10 or u20 into a prepaid credit card such as that issued by the likes of Monobank
.Plc
(one of Mr Ribbens' personal recommendations I believe ) and possibly end
up with your vistitors waving around their useless pieces of plastic following their first encounter with a piece of TfL hardware.
What could possibly go wrong ?
quote:
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has obtained a court order against Monobank Plc (Monobank)
which paves the way for ?77,000 (approximately u64,000) of ..
:unquote.
https://bridgingloandirectory.co.uk/regulation/fsa-secures-e77000-for-victims-of-boiler-room-fraud/
quote:
The Financial Services Authority won a court order extending a freeze on some MonoBank Plc assets, arguing the online bank services company can't solicit . :unquote
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-09-08/fsa-gets-new-freeze-order-against-online-bank-services-firm
On 11 Sep 2026 at 00:10:33 BST, "Owen Rees" <orees@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks mainly to the clear and detailed information provided by Mr Parker I >> can see where such a card would be valuable.
There is also the point that "prepaid debit card" would have been an almost equally misleading description, as "debit card" was generally understood at the time at least as a way of making payments from an existing account. But I agree, such a thing could have been advertised under that name. I don't know if it was at the time. The third kind of payment card, like American Express, has always cost money to set up and is not freely available to unscreened customers and would not have been a useful alternative.
On 09/09/2026 10:58 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:8770656152.fd810509@uninhabited.net...
I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering
questions like
that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I simply don't agree
with the
answer.
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years
and for
all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to use it for
credit at
all, but merely as a means of payment more widely accepted for single or >>> regular payments that a debit card or cash. I suspect this is the
main reason
a lot of people use them.
But if your "credit card" didn't offer you "credit" then you wouldn't
be able
to use it pay for anything, would you ? Whether as an alternative to
debit
cards, cash or anything
else
It would just be a useless piece of plastic.
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old
piece of plastic ?
A It offers credit !
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
Assume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. >> How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago. >>
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The >> target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no >> credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in
Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit >> card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the
hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones >> he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a
"<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and
functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card.
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a
marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the
perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is >>> drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of
spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is
allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
Q Does a "pre-paid credit card" offer credit
A No
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message news:ngfauaFtkbU1@mid.individual.net...
On 10/09/2026 09:25 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
You seem to have forgotten or deliberately overlooked, (please feel freeThen it just reverts to being a piece of plastic,
Why is this so difficult to understand ?
STOP PRESS!
CREDIT CARDS DECLINED BY ISSUING BANK WHEN THE USER FAILS TO PAY WHAT HE OWES!
WHO KNEW?
Never mind thread drift.
This thread must be headed for some kind of record.
The title of the thread is "pre-paid credit cards"
And yet every single post, some of them running to multiple
paragraphs is a about a card or cards which are definitely
*not* "pre-paid credit cards"
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message news:6342868031.ab271cb8@uninhabited.net...Pre-paid cards were neither aimed at nor marketed towards people that
On 10 Sep 2026 at 18:41:21 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit
cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim
was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described >>> as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that
they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
Indeed; companies talking "a load of old rubbish" in order to sell things is >> hardly new.
Oh yes ! People would be queing up around the block to get hold of
"pre-paid credit cards", which didn't in fact offer them any credit;
wouldn't they ? Imagine their surprise when they first tried them
out in a shop.
It's just what people have been waiting for !
With your business brain its a surprise you waste so much time posting
on UseNet; when you could be making yourself millions.
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ngdmf5FnjadU1@mid.individual.net...
On 01/09/2026 21:02, billy bookcase wrote:
So how were they advertised ?
The Cashplus MasterCard was probably the first such example of a card and was,
from memory, marketed precisely as that, namely a "Cashplus MasterCard".
So not as a "Pre-Paid Credit Card" then ?
Er no ?
So that's no luck, so far then..
But never mind. Keep trying, as they say
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time* >>> would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering the
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits
See above. To all intents and purposes, the original Cashplus card did offer
many of the benefits of a traditional credit card.
Never mind "to all intents and purposes"; was it, or was it not advertised marketed and offered to the public as a "Pre-paid Credit Card" ?
Yes or no ?
It's every simple question; and people are surely entitled to ask themselves why you seem to be having such great difficulty in answering it.
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially byGiven that claim, I assume you won't want to hear about the Cashplus card's >> slightly younger brothers then?
licenced financial institutions
Firstly, there was the "CashPlus Credit Builder Card". It functioned the same
as the original card but had an annual fee (c. +U60 from memory) which was >> advanced as "credit" at the start of the year and repaid as a monthly fee
(again from memory, at c. +U5 pcm). As the annual fee was presented as a
credit advance, successful repayment of this credit via the monthly fee could
be reported to the relevant credit reference agencies and used to build /
rebuild the cardholder's credit history (or damage it further if the card had
insufficient credit when the monthly payment became due).
Secondly, (although, for the avoidance of doubt, launched at the same time as
Credit Builder Card), was the "Cashplus Gold MasterCard". This had a higher >> annual fee (c. +U70) which was paid as an initial fee for issuing the card >> (+U10) and a similar monthly fee. Again it could be used to build / rebuild /
destroy one's credit history, depending on how it was used, but was a
beautiful shiny gold card giving a premium look.
All three were prepaid cards that looked and functioned like a credit card, >> two of which even fed into one's credit history further blurring the lines of
what is a credit card and what is a prepaid card.
None of which would qualify in any case. As Mr Perry specifically required
a "free" pre-paid credit card; in preference to having to pay out a refundable
+U5 deposit for Oyster Cards,
So that's "free"; as against +U5 for an Oyster Card; or +U60, or +U70 plus, for one of these "Not a Pre-Paid Credit Cards"
As this group is unmoderated I I will remind you that you are personally liable
for any defamatory statements you may make such as suggesting that MasterCard
would launch products with the express aim of "misleading the public".
I can assure you that they have a well resourced legal team staffed with
qualified professionals and may not take kindly to someone impugning their >> good name and reputation.
Please,. please, do write to Mastercard and report me,.
They probably need a good laugh, now and again
You have my full permission,
signed
billy bookcase
09.09.2026
Simon Parker <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 01/09/2026 22:26, Owen Rees wrote:
In the context of the original question in the thread the issue would be >>> whether or not the cardholder was required to enter into an agreement of a >>> kind that cannot be offered to someone under 18.
The three examples I've given upthread were all only available to those
aged 18 or over, not least because two of them were technically credit
cards, even though they were prepaid cards.
Unfortunately there seemed to be little interest in looking beyond the
label to the underlying properties that actually matter. This is a
depressingly common issue when trying to discuss ID verification, in this >>> case establishing that a person is an adult.
Nowadays, the BIN system can tell you if a card is a prepaid card. When
the cards first came out, it couldn't. As far as BIN was concerned,
they *were* credit cards. That means as far as the merchant and
retailer were concerned, they *were* credit cards. MasterCard knew they
were prepaid cards, but *at the time*, there was no way for them to pass
that information to the merchant nor for the merchant to pass it to the
retailer.
The BIN system has been modified since then and it is now possible to
distinguish between them, but it was not always thus.
Regards
S.P.
Thank you for the detailed explanations. They provide a welcome dose of clarity.
On 2026-09-09, Simon Parker <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 02/09/2026 00:33, Jon Ribbens wrote:
Eh? It clearly certainly is a reliable way to determine that, because
giant companies such as Apple use it for that purpose, and Ofcom would
have told them off for doing so if it wasn't a suitable way of doing it. >>> They require credit cards and not debit cards or prepaid cards.
The fact that the BIN system and other complementary tools and systems
can now be used to do this does not mean that it has always been
possible to do this. And certainly not some decades ago when the
systems were much simpler.
Yes. I mentioned that before, quite recently [1]. But my answer
above was in the explicit context of "a *current* payment card",
not a historical one.
[1] <slrn1178tgp.69j.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu>
https://usenet.id/slrn1178tgp.69j.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu
On 09/09/2026 23:39, JNugent wrote:
On 09/09/2026 10:58 PM, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in message
news:8770656152.fd810509@uninhabited.net...
I believe it was some Greek who developed asking and answering
questions like that as a didactic method; but unfortunately I
simply don't agree with the answer.
For instance, I have had at least one credit card for over 50 years
and for all but three or four of those years I haven't wanted to
use it for credit at all, but merely as a means of payment more
widely accepted for single or regular payments that a debit card
or cash. I suspect this is the main reason a lot of people use them.
But if your "credit card" didn't offer you "credit" then you wouldn't
be able to use it pay for anything, would you ? Whether as an alternative >>> to debit cards, cash or anything else
It would just be a useless piece of plastic.
Your statement is equally true of a credit card which is at, or over the approved credit limit.-a By your reasoning, such a card ceases to be a credit card the second one's credit limit is reached, or if one attempts
to make a purchase in excess of one's credit limit.-a Are you really contending that a credit card ceases to be a credit card if any of the following are true:
(a) it is close to the credit limit and the pending transaction will be declined because it will take the card over limit;
(b) the card is over its credit limit meaning all transactions will be declined; or
(c) the current balance on the account is zero but the value of the
pending transaction is greater than the credit limit and will therefore
be declined.
If not, precisely what point are you trying to make?
Q What makes a credit card different from other cards or just any old
piece of plastic ?
A It offers credit !
A: It is capable of processing a "holding" payment type.-a-a At the time we're talking about, I am not aware of any debit cards that were capable
of processing payment "holding" transactions.-a Even now, (never mind
some 20+ years ago) some debit cards are incapable of processing such payments and some merchants refuse to process such payments on certain
debit cards because of the excessive time taken to release the held funds.
If you want to try this for yourself, pick a bank, any bank, and open
one of their "basic" accounts into which you will need to deposit -u20.
Wait for your debit card to arrive then go to an unmanned petrol
station, or use the "Pay at Pump" feature at a manned station, and
insert your "basic" debit card into the card reader on the pump and try
to dispense -u10 worth of fuel.-a The pump will likely decline the transaction regardless of the fact you're dispensing less fuel than is
on the card.
Now repeat the exercise with a prepaid credit card with the same -u20
loaded onto it.
Did you get your fuel second time around?
For bonus points, try booking a hotel in Australia using the same
cards. :-)
Regards
S.P.
On 14/09/2026 13:57, Simon Parker wrote:
On 09/09/2026 23:39, JNugent wrote:
NOTHING QUOTED BELOW
PLEASE NOTE: YOU WERE ADDRESSING BILLY BOOKCAS.
I can't see anything that I had written quoted above.
On 14/09/2026 15:11, JNugent wrote:
On 14/09/2026 13:57, Simon Parker wrote:
On 09/09/2026 23:39, JNugent wrote:
NOTHING QUOTED BELOW
My apologies.-a I confess I am not really sure how that happened but-a it looks like I've replied to your single line post (and then snipped the single line you did post), instead of replying to Billy Bookcase.
I am sorry for the confusion and any distress caused.
[...]
PLEASE NOTE: YOU WERE ADDRESSING BILLY BOOKCAS.
Indeed I was.
I can't see anything that I had written quoted above.
Looks like I snipped it.-a Sorry... again!
Regards
S.P.
On 09/09/2026 21:35, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 02/09/2026 08:36, billy bookcase wrote:
But why would you ever be offered a "pre-paid credit card".
There are plenty of pre-paid cards around which we "know
actually exist"; so why wouldn't you simply choose one of those ?es
Assume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. >>> How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago. >>>
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
You seem to have failed to respond to this question?
But why should the issuers of cards resort to irritating oxymorons,
which they know could only serve to irritate their clients ?
Their target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards
could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The >>> target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no >>> credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in >>> Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region >>> were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the
Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be
a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit
card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the >>> hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones
he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
It is a shame you made no comment on this either as it feeds directly into your question below, the provided answer to which is clearly erroneous.
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
And you've failed to answer this too. Is your clear failure to support your claim to be taken as a silent withdrawal of the claim?
If not, I am going to have to press you for a cite.
When they could simply issue pre-paid cards instead ?
The "prepaid" nomenclature came later. At the time, they were simply a
"<brandname> MasterCard" or a "<brandname> Visa". As they looked and
functioned like a credit card, people referred to them as a credit card. >>>
The same as people refer to a koala as a bear when it is, in fact, a
marsupial.
Or jellyfish, which are neither made of jelly nor a fish.
Or a Guinea pig which is neither from Guinea nor a pig.
Etc., etc., etc.
This simply doesn't make any sense at all really, does it ?Like ringworm being caused by a fungal infection, rather than a worm?
Breaking news: 'Not everything makes sense' shocker!
No it most definitely is not>
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell bread as being "wholemeal bread" >>>> unless it is baked entirely from wholemeal flour. This is because the
perceived
benefit of wholemeal flour is that contains more nutrients than plain
flour;
including the actual germ
Nobody is allowed to advertise and sell Spring Water unless that water is >>>> drawn from a natural spring.* This is because the perceived benefit of >>>> spring
water is that it contains extra minerals, not present in tap water
Why should anyone be allowed to advertise and offer "credit cards",
which don't in fact offer any credit; when this, providing credit is,
the *sole perceived benefit* of credit cards ?
* Even if those springs are located on what is now an industrial
estate; "Carrick Glen" and "Dove Vale" being two such
Every Lidl bit helps, as they say.
The UK is a proscriptive society - everything which is not forbidden is
allowed.
What legislation, in force at the relevant time, do you think is applicable >>> to
the case in hand?
As already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
Q Does a "pre-paid credit card" offer credit
A No
Your answers do not actually address the question I asked. Do you have any legislation in mind or not?
As to your questions, your answers are clearly erroneous. Different people have different reasons for using credit cards. In the example I quoted above in my post, the "main / only perceived benefit of a 'credit card'" was that it
could be used for securing a booking at an Australian hotel. He didn't need credit. He didn't want credit. He just wanted somewhere to stay until he could secure a flight home.
As to the second question, two of the cards I detailed in my previous post *did* offer credit and fed directly into the cardholder's credit history so this answer is evidentially wrong too.
Regards
S.P.
On 10/09/2026 13:21, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:ngfauaFtkbU1@mid.individual.net...
On 10/09/2026 09:25 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
[...]
You seem to have forgotten or deliberately overlooked, (please feel free to clarify which), that two of the three cards I named in my post were treated byThen it just reverts to being a piece of plastic,
Why is this so difficult to understand ?
STOP PRESS!
CREDIT CARDS DECLINED BY ISSUING BANK WHEN THE USER FAILS TO PAY WHAT HE >>> OWES!
WHO KNEW?
Never mind thread drift.
This thread must be headed for some kind of record.
The title of the thread is "pre-paid credit cards"
And yet every single post, some of them running to multiple
paragraphs is a about a card or cards which are definitely
*not* "pre-paid credit cards"
the industry as full-blown credit cards. One even included the word "Credit" prominently in its official name which was used in all relevant marketing and it had the word "Credit" printed on the card too.
If it assists your thinking, assume it is 2005 again and I have a credit card with Mastercard with a credit limit of u1,000
card to pay for a holiday which is going to cost u2,500. As the transaction value is greater than my remaining credit limit, I can either choose an alternative method of payment, ask MasterCard to increase my credit limit, or make a payment of u1,500 onto the card prior to paying for the holiday.
I do not want to make payment using an alternative means and I do not want to increase my credit limit meaning I make a payment of u1,500 and then pay for the holiday.
Repeat the exercise except instead of having a credit card with MasterCard I have one of their pre-paid cards. Instead of paying u1,500 onto the card prior to paying for the holiday, I pay u2,500.
Will both transactions likely succeed?
What differences will the travel agent see between the transactions?
And the merchant processing the payments?
What differences, if any, do you claim exist between the two transactions?
And having answered all of the above, now assume that immediately prior to entering the travel agent to book the holiday in the first example, I had just
been to Currys and used the card to purchase a new 32 inch plasma TV costing u999.99 meaning I need to make a payment of u2,499.99 prior to paying for the holiday.
Do any of your answers change?
If not, why not?
On 10/09/2026 19:17, billy bookcase wrote:
"Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote in messagePre-paid cards were neither aimed at nor marketed towards people that had easy
news:6342868031.ab271cb8@uninhabited.net...
On 10 Sep 2026 at 18:41:21 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> >>> wrote:
Ok, but your claim wasn't that if any companies offered "prepaid credit >>>> cards" then they would be talking "a load of old rubbish". Your claim
was that no companies offer or ever offered anything that they described >>>> as "prepaid credit cards"... and you ridiculed Roland for thinking that >>>> they had. It turns out that Roland was right, and you were wrong.
You owe Roland profuse apologies.
Indeed; companies talking "a load of old rubbish" in order to sell things is
hardly new.
Oh yes ! People would be queing up around the block to get hold of
"pre-paid credit cards", which didn't in fact offer them any credit;
wouldn't they ? Imagine their surprise when they first tried them
out in a shop.
It's just what people have been waiting for !
With your business brain its a surprise you waste so much time posting
on UseNet; when you could be making yourself millions.
access to traditional credit cards. Quite the reverse, in fact.
And these cards that you dismiss so easily were so successful that ACS, (the company with whom MasterCard originally partnered when launching the cards I have mentioned in the thread), having rebranded as CashPlus (to match the naming used on the cards),
applied for a full UK banking licence in 2017 to become a full-blown bank, with all that this entails.
Their peak valuation was approximately u80m. Not bad for a company offering something you claim never existed.
Regards
S.P
On 09/09/2026 21:29, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdmf5FnjadU1@mid.individual.net...
On 01/09/2026 21:02, billy bookcase wrote:
So how were they advertised ?
The Cashplus MasterCard was probably the first such example of a card and >>> was,
from memory, marketed precisely as that, namely a "Cashplus MasterCard".
So not as a "Pre-Paid Credit Card" then ?
Er no ?
So that's no luck, so far then..
But never mind. Keep trying, as they say
In 2005, Mastercard's share of the debit card market was so insignificant it could be rounded down to 0% without much trouble.
The same could not be said of their share of the credit card market however. Of the approximately 75 million credit and charge cards in circulation at the time, around 30 million bore the MasterCard logo.
A new card launched at this time that bore MasterCard branding and which functioned as a credit card would be received by the market as a credit card regardless of the nomenclature used in the marketing.
It is precisely for this reason that the card's name included the MasterCard branding, rather than just calling it a "CashPlus" card.
The MasterCard branding did the heavy lifting for which you're searching.
[snipped text to which you didn't respond concerning pre-paid cards working like credit cards because they permitted types of transactions that debit cards did not and how they were indistinguishable from credit cards owing to the BIN system]
Unless you are seriously suggesting that *any UK Government at any time* >>>> would sanction the promotion and issue of *Credit Cards* offering theSee above. To all intents and purposes, the original Cashplus card did
"percieved benefits* of credit cards; but which offered no such benefits >>>
offer
many of the benefits of a traditional credit card.
Never mind "to all intents and purposes"; was it, or was it not advertised >> marketed and offered to the public as a "Pre-paid Credit Card" ?
Yes or no ?
It's every simple question; and people are surely entitled to ask themselves >> why you seem to be having such great difficulty in answering it.
Except for the fact that when you asked the question, "So how were they advertised ?" a couple of posts ago, I gave a direct answer in a single sentence.
Your question and my answer thereto is still quoted above so I reject your claim that I "seem to be having such great difficulty in answering it" as I did precisely that when the question was originally posed.
To reiterate and clarify my answer as you seem to have missed it, misunderstood it, or forgotten it: The first such example of this card of which I can think is the CashPlus MasterCard which was launched and marketed as the "CashPlus MasterCard".
At the time, I cannot think of any debit cards bearing the MasterCard logo but
they had a significant share of the credit and charge card market.
From memory, MasterCard played on the market's knowledge of their operational experience and referred to it more fully as the "CashPlus MasterCard *Payment*
Card" in their marketing material. (highlighting mine)
Not a Credit Card, and not a Debit Card - but a Payment Card.
However, given their relative share of the debit card and credit card markets and that this was likely the first such payment card in existence in the UK, I
suggest that MasterCard knew exactly what they were doing and knew precisely by what name the card would become known. And lo it came to pass and the pre-paid credit card was born.
[snip more text to which you didn't respond]
Not when it comes to misleading the public, more especially byGiven that claim, I assume you won't want to hear about the Cashplus card's >>> slightly younger brothers then?
licenced financial institutions
Firstly, there was the "CashPlus Credit Builder Card". It functioned the >>> same
as the original card but had an annual fee (c. L60 from memory) which was >>> advanced as "credit" at the start of the year and repaid as a monthly fee >>> (again from memory, at c. L5 pcm). As the annual fee was presented as a >>> credit advance, successful repayment of this credit via the monthly fee
could
be reported to the relevant credit reference agencies and used to build / >>> rebuild the cardholder's credit history (or damage it further if the card >>> had
insufficient credit when the monthly payment became due).
Secondly, (although, for the avoidance of doubt, launched at the same time >>> as
Credit Builder Card), was the "Cashplus Gold MasterCard". This had a higher
annual fee (c. L70) which was paid as an initial fee for issuing the card >>> (L10) and a similar monthly fee. Again it could be used to build / rebuild >>> /
destroy one's credit history, depending on how it was used, but was a
beautiful shiny gold card giving a premium look.
All three were prepaid cards that looked and functioned like a credit card, >>> two of which even fed into one's credit history further blurring the lines >>> of
what is a credit card and what is a prepaid card.
None of which would qualify in any case. As Mr Perry specifically required >> a "free" pre-paid credit card; in preference to having to pay out a
refundable
L5 deposit for Oyster Cards,
So that's "free"; as against L5 for an Oyster Card; or L60, or L70 plus,
for one of these "Not a Pre-Paid Credit Cards"
It is my sad duty to report that my crystal ball is away being recharged so I have no idea precisely which card Mr Perry may have used nor any details of the operational parameters of that card.
My responses here are to your original claim, (despite you having subsequently
attempted to modify it), to the effect that there is not, nor has there ever been, anything that was described or functioned as a "pre-paid credit card".
There most certainly was and I've given three examples from one company, all of which functioned to the retailer and merchant as credit cards, two of which
functioned to the financial sector as credit cards and one of which included the word "Credit" in its formal short-form name.
It is to be noted that the launch of the first card I mentioned is within a few years of the launch of the Oyster card which may not be a coincidence.
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ngq9ogFnmcsU1@mid.individual.net...
On 10/09/2026 13:21, billy bookcase wrote:
You seem to have forgotten or deliberately overlooked, (please feel free to >> clarify which), that two of the three cards I named in my post were treated by
Never mind thread drift.
This thread must be headed for some kind of record.
The title of the thread is "pre-paid credit cards"
And yet every single post, some of them running to multiple
paragraphs is a about a card or cards which are definitely
*not* "pre-paid credit cards"
the industry as full-blown credit cards. One even included the word "Credit"
prominently in its official name which was used in all relevant marketing and
it had the word "Credit" printed on the card too.
If it assists your thinking, assume it is 2005 again and I have a credit card
with Mastercard with a credit limit of +U1,000
https://www.mastercard.com/gb/en/personal/find-a-card.html
. I want to use the
card to pay for a holiday which is going to cost +U2,500. As the transaction
value is greater than my remaining credit limit, I can either choose anh
alternative method of payment, ask MasterCard to increase my credit limit, or
make a payment of +U1,500 onto the card prior to paying for the holiday.
I do not want to make payment using an alternative means and I do not want to
increase my credit limit meaning I make a payment of +U1,500 and then pay for
the holiday.
Repeat the exercise except instead of having a credit card with MasterCard I >> have one of their pre-paid cards. Instead of paying +U1,500 onto the card >> prior to paying for the holiday, I pay +U2,500.
https://www.mastercard.com/gb/en/personal/find-a-card.html
Will both transactions likely succeed?
What differences will the travel agent see between the transactions?
And the merchant processing the payments?
What differences, if any, do you claim exist between the two transactions?
As neither would have been chosen by Mr Perry as an alternative to
Oyster Cards for his guests to use on Tfl, all such questions are
totally irrelevant.
And having answered all of the above, now assume that immediately prior to >> entering the travel agent to book the holiday in the first example, I had just
been to Currys and used the card to purchase a new 32 inch plasma TV costing >> +U999.99 meaning I need to make a payment of +U2,499.99 prior to paying for the
holiday.
Do any of your answers change?
If not, why not?
Because all such questions are totally irrelevant; in the context of Mr Perry choosing a card to be used mainly if not exclusively on the London Underground.
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ngq9f8Fnk82U2@mid.individual.net...
On 09/09/2026 21:35, billy bookcase wrote:
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngdncoFnnpsU1@mid.individual.net...
Assume we've all got in a time machine and use it to travel back 20 years. >>>> How many prepaid cards existed at the time?
We need to consider, not how the world is now, but how it was 20 years ago.
How many prepaid cards do you think existed in 2006?
You seem to have failed to respond to this question?
The question isn't how many "pre-paid" cards existed in 2006, but how many "pre-paid credit cards" existed in 2006 such that Mr Perry was able to
choose one as an alternative to issuing his guests with Oyster Cards
You have subsequently claimed that the only reason for the existence ofTheir target market already had access to debit cards. But debit cards >>>> could
not be used everywhere at all times. In fact, this is still the case. The
target market for first generation prepaid cards was those with poor or no >>>> credit history.
Anecdata: A good friend had the misfortune to be visiting his daughter in >>>> Australia when America invaded Iran and all flights transiting the region >>>> were
grounded for a time. He needed to extend his stay but none of the
Australian
hotels, not a one, would accept a booking via a debit card - it needed to be
a
credit card. He had plenty of money in the bank, all available on his debit
card, but only a modest balance remaining on his credit card.
Had he had a prepaid card, it is possible that some (but not all) of the >>>> hotels would have accepted it. But the majority (and certainly all the ones
he tried) seem to have a blanket ban on debit cards.
It is a shame you made no comment on this either as it feeds directly into >> your question below, the provided answer to which is clearly erroneous.
What precisely has"any" of this to do with the purported existence of "pre-paid credit cards"
And generate poor feedback and reviews. ( That's assuming this
were ever legal; which it's not )
Why do you believe the three cards I've cited elsewhere were illegal?
Nobody claimed they were illegal.
Only that they were not "pre-paid credit cards"
And so totally irrelevant to any discussion of pre-paid credit cards"
And you've failed to answer this too. Is your clear failure to support your >> claim to be taken as a silent withdrawal of the claim?
If not, I am going to have to press you for a cite.
"Pre-paid credit cards" so called have never existed.
To prove me wrong you merely need to cite one actual example.
And ideally not Monobank PLC
Just as my Omega can never have existed because it does not appear onAs already explained on numerous occasions
Q. What is the main/only perceived benefit of a "credit card"
A It offers credit
Q Does a "pre-paid credit card" offer credit
A No
Your answers do not actually address the question I asked. Do you have any >> legislation in mind or not?
As to your questions, your answers are clearly erroneous. Different people >> have different reasons for using credit cards. In the example I quoted above
in my post, the "main / only perceived benefit of a 'credit card'" was that it
could be used for securing a booking at an Australian hotel. He didn't need >> credit. H.e didn't want credit. He just wanted somewhere to stay until he >> could secure a flight home.
As to the second question, two of the cards I detailed in my previous post >> *did* offer credit and fed directly into the cardholder's credit history so >> this answer is evidentially wrong too.
They were not, and are not designated as "pre-paid credit cards"
https://www.mastercard.com/gb/en/personal/find-a-card.html
"Simon Parker" <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ngq9qcFnmcsU2@mid.individual.net...That is precisely what they were, according to at least the global
On 10/09/2026 19:17, billy bookcase wrote:
hOh yes ! People would be queing up around the block to get hold ofPre-paid cards were neither aimed at nor marketed towards people that had easy
"pre-paid credit cards", which didn't in fact offer them any credit;
wouldn't they ? Imagine their surprise when they first tried them
out in a shop.
It's just what people have been waiting for !
With your business brain its a surprise you waste so much time posting
on UseNet; when you could be making yourself millions.
access to traditional credit cards. Quite the reverse, in fact.
And these cards that you dismiss so easily were so successful that ACS, (the >> company with whom MasterCard originally partnered when launching the cards I >> have mentioned in the thread), having rebranded as CashPlus (to match the
naming used on the cards),
So not "Pre-Paid Credit Card" then ?
Which looks very much like a touch of the old "QED"'s there then.
Wouldn't you say ?
The question isn't how many "pre-paid" cards existed in 2006, but how many "pre-paid credit cards" existed in 2006 such that Mr Perry was able to[]
choose one as an alternative to issuing his guests with Oyster Cards
I commend to you the contents of the following page, created by the BBC's "Working Lunch" team in November 2006.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/working_lunch/6129838.stm
Headline: "Weighing up the pre-pay options"
Sub-Head: "Pre-pay mobile phones have been popular for years, so why not a pre-pay credit card?"
Note that phrase: "*a pre-pay credit card*"
In the face of such irrefutable evidence, it is to be hoped that you will do the decent thing and withdraw your claim, accepting the evidence that pre-paid
credit cards did exist?
Are you going to continue arguing that the global banking system is wrong and that the BBC is wrong?
Or are you going to admit that you were wrong and withdraw the claim?
And, assuming you choose the obvious and logical latter option, do you intend to do the decent thing and apologise to Roland or not?
Are you withdrawing your claim that pre-paid credit cards have never existed?
When either yourself or Mr Perry have explained where and how he could have >obtained a free pre-paid credit card to provide for his visitors, then of >course, I would have no alternative but to review the situation
On Tue, 15 Sep 2026 18:02:39 +0100
"billy bookcase" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
[]
[]
The question isn't how many "pre-paid" cards existed in 2006, but how many >> "pre-paid credit cards" existed in 2006 such that Mr Perry was able to
choose one as an alternative to issuing his guests with Oyster Cards
Can't you leave this 20yr old argument go?
especially in a mod group that really, really, isn't supposed to be a chat >room?
In message <118g69s$3msb$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:53:30 on Thu, 17 Sep 2026, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
When either yourself or Mr Perry have explained where and how he could have >>obtained a free pre-paid credit card to provide for his visitors, then of >>course, I would have no alternative but to review the situation
I've ignored most of the traffic here the past couple of weeks.
I have explained several times where I obtained these pre-paid credit
cards, but you and others simply go: LA!LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
So please tell me how I can persuade you that your continuing to be a fucking
idiot is simply wasting my time.
I've ignored most of the traffic here the past couple of weeks.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 36:40:19 |
| Calls: | 1,196 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,354 |
| D/L today: |
16 files (19,622K bytes) |
| Messages: | 294,950 |