How does a cc company know if a charge is international?

Wolf K wrote:
On 2019-01-04 23:50, nospam wrote:
In article , Wolf K
wrote:

Your card number is linked to a pile of metadata, including your
location and that of the card issuer.

what you're calling 'location' is known as the 'cardholder billing
address'.

Aw gee, sorry for not making that explicit. I'm sure I confused a
massive number of readers.

you quite likely did, given that you don't understand it yourself.

Ah, yes, my use of "location" instead of "billing address" must be proof
that I don't understand the process. You have _no_ idea what I do and
don't understand. You jump to conclusions based on your notions of what
words mean. It doesn't occur to you to read assuming that the writer
understand at least as much and as well as you do.

Sigh. You really do have a problem with anything other than the most
limited terminology. FTR, I considered using "billing address", but I
decided against it, because then I'd have had to say something like
"...billing address, which includes your location..." Why "...includes"?
Because the OP's question was about international transactions, and in
that context "location" would refer primarily to the country, with more
specific details being secondary. Besides, a PO Box number hides some of
those details.

In this day and age of electronic 'banking', "location" actually makes
*more* sense than the outdated (nospam "obsolete" /nospam) term
"billing address".

To add insult to injury: I just checked the credit card bills of our
credit cards and for one of the two cards, they do not even *have* a
"billing address" (or any other address for tat matter)! (The only
identifying information is last four digits of the credit card number,
name and customer number.)

Snip the rest. I'm getting tired of this. You just will not accept that
the way other people use language is at least as legitimate as your own.

+ very_large_number

Also, you repeatedly snip posts without marking the snips, which has the
effect of misrepresenting the discussion.

+ even_larger_number

"He's just a compulsive arguer."
[Mayayana ]

"If you inferred that, you have a problem."
[Wolf K ]

[Unintended] "Self-satire is a pleasure to observe."
[Wolf K ]

"You are myopic."
[Ed Cryer ]

"True. Exceedingly foolish suggestions, from people that lack adequate
knowledge, seem to be routine for the poster you are referring to!"
[sms on nospam]

Have a frabjous day,

You too.

"Frank Slootweg" wrote:
Wolf K wrote:
Also, you repeatedly snip posts without marking the snips, which
has the effect of misrepresenting the discussion.

+ even_larger_number

At least he snips the ****ing posts unlike some in this group (not
aimed at you). Notice I'm not indicating snips as I'm only replying
to a small part and not misrepresenting anything. I find too much
snip indication [] (as JPG is wont to do) is a distraction.

"He's just a compulsive arguer."
[Mayayana ]

He is, and that can be annoying. However, sometimes he's right. Not
sure about this thread though, the arguing seems to be pointless.

In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote:

In this day and age of electronic 'banking', "location" actually makes
*more* sense than the outdated (nospam "obsolete" /nospam) term
"billing address".

there's nothing outdated about a billing address, which the card issuer
needs to know to properly verify your identity when applying, where to
find you in case you don't pay your bills and where to send a bill for
those who don't use paperless billing.

To add insult to injury: I just checked the credit card bills of our
credit cards and for one of the two cards, they do not even *have* a
"billing address" (or any other address for tat matter)! (The only
identifying information is last four digits of the credit card number,
name and customer number.)

just because there's no address listed on your bill doesn't mean there
isn't one. the card issuer knows what it is.

In article , Wolf K
wrote:

Your card number is linked to a pile of metadata, including your
location and that of the card issuer.

what you're calling 'location' is known as the 'cardholder billing
address'.

Aw gee, sorry for not making that explicit. I'm sure I confused a
massive number of readers.

you quite likely did, given that you don't understand it yourself.

Ah, yes, my use of "location" instead of "billing address" must be proof
that I don't understand the process.

nope. your sloppy choice of words can (and likely will) confuse people.

i knew what you meant, but not everyone does.

there are *other* things that indicate you don't understand the process.

You have _no_ idea what I do and
don't understand. You jump to conclusions based on your notions of what
words mean. It doesn't occur to you to read assuming that the writer
understand at least as much and as well as you do.

nope. my conclusions are based on what you write, and in this case,
it's clear you do not understand how it works.

you said the card number is all that matters for an international
transaction. that is simply not correct.

Sigh. You really do have a problem with anything other than the most
limited terminology. FTR, I considered using "billing address", but I
decided against it, because then I'd have had to say something like
"...billing address, which includes your location..." Why "...includes"?

nope. you wouldn't have needed to say anything like that.

and actually, only the country of the billing address is what matters,
not the entire address, but that's nitpicking.

Because the OP's question was about international transactions, and in
that context "location" would refer primarily to the country, with more
specific details being secondary.

the country of the billing address.

his location will change as he travels, and in some cases, may matter.

Besides, a PO Box number hides some of
those details.

none that matter, plus it's not hidden from the card issuer, who knows
your details.

diversion attempt fail.

Snip the rest. I'm getting tired of this. You just will not accept that
the way other people use language is at least as legitimate as your own.

your language use is very sloppy, but in this case, that wasn't the
issue.

Also, you repeatedly snip posts without marking the snips, which has the
effect of misrepresenting the discussion.

also false.

In article , Wolf K
wrote:

Sigh. You really do have a problem with anything other than the most
limited terminology. FTR, I considered using "billing address", but I
decided against it, because then I'd have had to say something like
"...billing address, which includes your location..." Why "...includes"?
nope. you wouldn't have needed to say anything like that.

and actually, only the country of the billing address is what matters,
not the entire address, but that's nitpicking.

Which is what I said in the bit you snipped.

except that it *wasn't* snipped and you originally said it was the card
number, which *you* snipped.

To quote myself:

Because the OP's question was about international transactions, and in
that context "location" would refer primarily to the country, with more
specific details being secondary. Besides, a PO Box number hides some of
those details.

Which is why you snipped it.

that was not snipped.

you are *really* confused.