491917 BIN Check - Lithuania Visa Prepaid Card
The three places it never failed: Google Play, App Store, Steam. Everything above 90% success in the log traces back to those.
Pay With Anon issues 491917 out of Lithuania. Classed Prepaid, runs on Visa.
491917, decoded
- BIN
- 491917
- Card network
- Visa
- Issuing country
- Lithuania
- Card type
- Prepaid
- Issued by
- Pay With Anon
- Card form
- Virtual only
- KYC tier
- No KYC
- 3-D Secure
- Yes
- AVS check
- No
- Billing address
- Global
- Funding methods
- Crypto · Bank transfer
- Max cards per account
- Multiple
- Issuer risk rating
- High
The fee stack
Nothing exotic in the pricing. no issuance fee, no top-up fee, and on non-USD billing, no FX markup. Nobody advertises the decline fee, so we list it. That is the number that surprises people.
| Card creation fee | Free |
|---|---|
| Monthly fee | Free |
| Top-up fee | — |
| FX / conversion fee | — |
| Declined transaction fee | — |
| Minimum top-up | — |
The test results
Everything we pushed through this range, including the merchants it never cleared.
Merchant by merchant
| Merchant | Attempts | Cleared | Rate | What happened |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Google Play | 86 | 80 | 93% | cleared on the first attempt, no challenge issued |
| App Store | 70 | 63 | 90% | went through on a fresh card with the issuer's default address |
| Steam | 54 | 44 | 81% | cleared first time; a second charge a week later also went through |
| StockX | 35 | 0 | 0% | 3-D Secure challenge never completed. The order timed out waiting for the OTP. |
| Tidal | 26 | 9 | 35% | Geo mismatch. The connection country did not match the card's country of issue. |
Run from a Lithuania-region account between 15 Jul to 26 Aug 2026, with the billing address set to the issuer default unless noted. Declines were logged with the reason the gateway returned.
Failures we could not fix
The weak spot is StockX, which declined every time. Everything else was either clean or fixed by correcting the billing address.
What to change before you retry
- StockX: 0 of 35 cleared. Charges only happen when a bid is accepted, so the balance has to be sitting there before the seller responds. A card that funds on demand is what fails here, not the range.
- Tidal: 9 of 26 cleared. Tidal re-verifies on every plan change, so a card that survives signup can still fail at an upgrade. Keep the address static between changes.
Three things worth doing
- Bank transfer is the cheap funding route here, but it is not instant. Top up a day before a renewal rather than the same morning.
- Funding is crypto-first. Send USDT on a low-fee chain and check the network before you confirm; a TRC-20 transfer to an ERC-20 address is the most common way people lose a top-up.
- Paste the Lithuania billing address Pay With Anon generates rather than typing your own. One transposed digit is enough to fail the check.
Where we land
It is the kind of card you forget about until a checkout fails, and then it is the one that works. Nothing here makes it the best option, and nothing makes it a bad one.
Questions we get about 491917
What does the 491917 BIN tell a merchant?
It tells the risk engine three things before your bank is ever contacted: issuer Pay With Anon, country of issue Lithuania, product class Prepaid. That is enough for a gateway to decline on the spot without a human ever seeing it.
Is 491917 a real card number?
No, and this trips people up. 491917 is a range identifier shared across every card Pay With Anon issues in Lithuania. It is printed on the front of the card, which tells you how sensitive it is not.
Why would 491917 be declined if the range is fine?
Changing one variable at a time is the only way to diagnose this. Address first, then card, then the connection country. We have seen people change all three and learn nothing.
Can thousands of people share the same BIN?
Shared by design. Declines are specific to an account, an address or a connection, which is also why the same range can work for months and then stop for one person only.
Method
We bought a Pay With Anon card, funded it, and pushed 271 charges through live merchant checkout pages between 15 Jul to 26 Aug 2026. Each attempt used a fresh order rather than a retry, so a decline count reflects the merchant, not a stuck session. 196 cleared.
Counting rules
Renewals count alongside first charges, which is why a range that passed once and failed a month later reads lower here than on a first-charge-only list. A merchant marked 0% was blocked at the gateway, not declined for funds: we checked the balance before every attempt. Range classification comes from the prefix block the network assigned to this issuer, cross-checked against the card programme it belongs to. Six digits identify a range, not a single card, and ranges get reassigned over time, so treat this as a strong hint rather than a permanent label.
Log through 13 Sep 2026 14:40 UTC · rate last re-checked 03 September 2026 · 271 charges on record for this range.