lhendricks92 said:DavidScubadiver said:lhendricks92 said: Refusing to discuss all of the other elements of creditworthiness - HHI, net worth, REVOLVING BALANCES! - makes little sense.It makes perfect sense. Nobody applies for 5 credit cards at once unless they are desparate for credit or unless they are playing games with CC's money.

Incorrect. You're assuming all hard inquiries are the result of applying for credit cards. Don't forget opening deposit accounts often result in hard pulls.

I'll reiterate. I can't see how applying a simple "if inquiries > 5, then close all accounts" rule makes much sense. I can see how lenders might want to cut off unprofitable customers - both gamers and actual credit risks. I, too, am amazed that Citi and others have let A0R-types (including myself) play their games indefinitely. However, that's not what's happening in many of these latest stories of A/A from Citi. Several FWFers who have spotless credit and don't play games are getting cut off at the knees because of 5 or more inquiries. That's just plain silly.Well, in THIS case he applied for five cards. So in THIS case the "rule" assuming it was applied as a rule, caught what it was supposed to catch. I guess if there are people who don't game the system that are getting their lines cut because of inquiries, they have people like us to thank for it. Post a link where those people are complaining. I am curious to see non-gamers getting hurt by something as innocuous as 5 inquiries.

Edited:
In this case, the inquiries were 13 not simply ">five". And he was given 5 cards from the issuer. Its not a "simple" calculation but it is one that may go like this: When you sneak 5 applications in under the wire, and are given 5 cards as a result, and have made 8 other applications to other issuers, I don't want your business regardless of whether you have the ability to repay debt. You are doing something I don't like and don't have the time to worry about."

ifyouhavetoask said:]. Neither is impressive, and neither is a smart move for someone who claims to be a future attorney. Most likely, you're not telling us the truth.

For the last time LustForTheMoment, oops I mean ifyouhavetoask, we are not here to impress you. I don't know why both of you, I mean both of your personalities, insist on making "impress" comments. Secondly Mike has been very forthcoming on exactly how he made this much money and it is very likely he is telling the truth. He told us exactly what he was going to do before he attempted it.

Sadly, there's a stunning shortage of knowledge on FW,

There sure is s stunning lack of knowledge. Like people who claim companies will have gone bankrupt 6 months ago that are still fine. People who said we should already be years into a depression that makes the Great Depression look mild.

 

Of course, all of this makes sense, when one observes the immediate gratification aspect of FW.

In another post you called his work a "part time job". I don't know any other 1-2 hour a week part time job that makes $41,000 a year.

Since when is making money on a guaranteed arbitrage opportunity "immediate gratification". A lot of people here pour the profits of their AOR into retirement accounts and don't touch it for 30 years. It is the opposite of what you are saying.'

There are more long term thinkers on this board than any other finance forum I have found. Most people would take that money and buy lottery tickets or plasma TVs. People on here freak out about going $1 over FDIC limits. I'd hardly call "us" the immediate gratification crowd.

DavidScubadiver said:Post a link where those people are complaining. I am curious to see non-gamers getting hurt by something as innocuous as 5 inquiries.

I was referring to other stories of Citi A/A in the adverse action thread.

technique, for example. 74ak, too.

ifyouhavetoask said:kranky said:IIRC, he had permission from multiple family members to apply for cards in their names to get access to more BT funds.If true, that's frightening beyond belief. Also, it would mean that HE didn't make $36k.

These "family AOR's" are not unlike a gambler who has run out of money, and then begins to hit up mom and dad for more money to hit the jackpot.

To make $36,000 in 10 months, based on 5% CD's, he would need to have around $800,000 floating out there. Doing this, and using family member's credit to do it, would be its own part-time job. Then, there's the tax implications related to the $36,000.

$36,000 = fantasy

I bet mom really loves 'ya when she sees 20 inquiries on her Equifax report, Citibank closes her accounts, sonny forgets to make a payment to BoA, and her FICO score drops 100 points... just in time for her to try to refi the mortgage on her house

"Trust me 'ma, I know how this credit stuff works!"

Can you just go somewhere else, your not an AORer and have no idea what your talking about!!!!

Your just here to be a thorn in our side, ARE YOU A MOLE???

Please don't answer, you obviously are here to cause trouble and not to help the FWFers here!!!

DavidScubadiver said:Well, in THIS case he applied for five cards. So in THIS case the "rule" assuming it was applied as a rule, caught what it was supposed to catch. I guess if there are people who don't game the system that are getting their lines cut because of inquiries, they have people like us to thank for it. Post a link where those people are complaining. I am curious to see non-gamers getting hurt by something as innocuous as 5 inquiries.

Edited:
In this case, the inquiries were 13 not simply ">five". And he was given 5 cards from the issuer. Its not a "simple" calculation but it is one that may go like this: When you sneak 5 applications in under the wire, and are given 5 cards as a result, and have made 8 other applications to other issuers, I don't want your business regardless of whether you have the ability to repay debt. You are doing something I don't like and don't have the time to worry about."

Do you really think Citibank cares about how many applications you submit? Not even slightly. They care about risk and reward, and they are using applications as a proxy to estimate that. The "rule" is most likely supposed to catch financially distressed customers who are likely to default and the OP is not one of them (he's a false positive).

As undesirable as they may be, I seriously doubt that gamers looking to float interest free loans were meant to be included in the same category as people getting ready to default. The difference in risk is analogous to stocks vs FDIC insured bank accounts. One puts interest at jeopardy while the other interest plus principal. Treating them the same is entirely inappropriate and I suspect that if Citibank were to specifically consider gamers in their formal procedures then universal default would not be the adverse action chosen to apply to them.

I know if I were a lender I would love to be able to market my services to a group of people as financially responsible and disciplined as the FW crowd. I just wouldn't offer them any arbitrage opportunities. Banning financially responsible, low risk customers just because they aren't foolish enough to forgo arbitrage opportunities is just bad business.

DavidScubadiver said:As a professional what, have you taken offense? I can't imagine why you think they misjudged this account and acted improperly. If I were a credit card company, I'd punish anybody that did an AOR. The whole point of an AOR is to trick the company into extending credit. I don't like being tricked and don't expect they do either. Thus, it makes perfect sense to me what happened.

As a professional statistician I take offense at you praising Citibank's primitive, error-prone techniques. It's insulting to those who do a better job.

Why would Citibank care about punishing people? Citibank is a faceless corporation that doesn't like or dislike anything. Their self-important credit analysts might dislike it, but Citibank itself would most benefit by understanding how to best profit from every customer. Meting out karmic justice by punishing the "bad" customers does not increase their bottom line. Your personification of Citibank makes absolutely no sense.

williamgunn said:ArbolLoco said:lhendricks92 said:OP doesn't need to be reprimanded for his A0R activities. He's not asking for sympathy - he's warning us about his experiences and asking for advice. All of the "we told you so" replies add nothing to the discussion.

If Citi is freaking out over more than 5 inquiries in a year, the community needs to know this and respond appropriately. No one here should be surprised that a major lender has had a significant change in risk management policy, but this one, IMHO, is ridiculous. Refusing to discuss all of the other elements of creditworthiness - HHI, net worth, REVOLVING BALANCES! - makes little sense.

Good luck, OP. Let us know how things proceed.you're assuming that OP's data is 100% truthful and accurate, which is not always the case on FWF.

Did anyone else catch where he said he's using his AOR money for arbitrage investing? Perhaps he meant to refer to earning HYS interest, but I'd like some more information here before feeling too sympathetic.

Lets be fully clear and transparent on this matter since it seems to come up repeatedly.
- I am the OP.
- I have never done a BT, period (ie. never ever in my 31 years of life)
- There were no requested BTs from any issuer, period.
- The ONLY action I took with Citi was validating each card using their automated system
- I charged about $700 on my Premier Pass Elite card in order to collect my 25k thank you points. This was done over a 2 day period with normal charges (ie. 2 restaurants and a normal utility bill).
- I DID apply for 25 somewhat cards across many issuers, of which I was approved for 5/8 Citi apps. I realize this is somewhat controversial, but hardly the first time such action was taken in an AOR - which is why I did it. I applied for almost the same cards that the other FW member had previously tried. Frankly, I am not certain the FW standard of 5 cards would have changed anything based upon what I was told. This is, of course, pure speculation based on nothing other than my own opinion.
- A few of the Citi apps included thankyou point sign up offers
- Aside from the sign up offers, there has been utterly NO gamesmanship, no trickery, no offers taken, no calls to customer service, no combining of credit lines, nothing.
- To this day, I still have not taken any BT offers and I am still awaiting credit decisions on a couple of cards.
- This really is not that complicated. Citi indicated to me that the decision was made purely on the basis of INQUIRIES, not new accounts with Citi, not new accounts with other issuers, not balances, not overall debt exposure. Nothing other than inquiries, which the ONE credit analyst told me they expected should be 5 of fewer per year. Quite obviously, I have no way of validating whether or not this is accurate since I don't work at Citi.

Thanks.

stook2001 said:I DID apply for 25 somewhat cards across many issuers, of which I was approved for 5/8 Citi apps. I realize this is somewhat controversial, but hardly the first time such action was taken in an AOR - which is why I did it.And there you have it. Citibank is simply not going to take the time to figure out why you are doing what you are doing. They will simply assume you are going to run up your cards and flee to Poland. You sure as hell don't NEED their credit cards, and they sure as heck don't need to risk your running away with their money after giving you 25,000 thank you points.

lhendricks92 said:OP doesn't need to be reprimanded for his A0R activities. He's not asking for sympathy - he's warning us about his experiences and asking for advice. All of the "we told you so" replies add nothing to the discussion.

If Citi is freaking out over more than 5 inquiries in a year, the community needs to know this and respond appropriately. No one here should be surprised that a major lender has had a significant change in risk management policy, but this one, IMHO, is ridiculous. Refusing to discuss all of the other elements of creditworthiness - HHI, net worth, REVOLVING BALANCES! - makes little sense.

Good luck, OP. Let us know how things proceed.Sounds like HSBC's policy when they told me they "don't consider existing balances, income, credit utilzation, or FICO score, and that Inquiries are all controlling." I hung up on them. "Too bad my HSBC is a team of space monkey's thread" got deleted, or I'd link to it.

MikeR397 said:lhendricks92 said:OP doesn't need to be reprimanded for his A0R activities. He's not asking for sympathy - he's warning us about his experiences and asking for advice. All of the "we told you so" replies add nothing to the discussion.

If Citi is freaking out over more than 5 inquiries in a year, the community needs to know this and respond appropriately. No one here should be surprised that a major lender has had a significant change in risk management policy, but this one, IMHO, is ridiculous. Refusing to discuss all of the other elements of creditworthiness - HHI, net worth, REVOLVING BALANCES! - makes little sense.

Good luck, OP. Let us know how things proceed.Sounds like HSBC's policy when they told me they "don't consider existing balances, income, credit utilzation, or FICO score, and that Inquiries are all controlling." I hung up on them. "Too bad my HSBC is a team of space monkey's thread" got deleted, or I'd link to it.
Last year, with EX inquiries either side of THIRTY (and 650ish FAKOs), DW & I each got lines of ~20K; I thought the guy was going to slide thru the phone in his eagerness to BT it all (which, of course, we did). Go figure! I suppose the bell curve applies to reps like most other things

win333 said:DavidScubadiver said:stook2001 said:I DID apply for 25 somewhat cards across many issuers, of which I was approved for 5/8 Citi apps. I realize this is somewhat controversial, but hardly the first time such action was taken in an AOR - which is why I did it.And there you have it. Citibank is simply not going to take the time to figure out why you are doing what you are doing. They will simply assume you are going to run up your cards and flee to Poland. You sure as hell don't NEED their credit cards, and they sure as heck don't need to risk your running away with their money after giving you 25,000 thank you points.

Thanyou points is a good excuse, if they care to listen. My 6 apps will get me a boat load of Thankyou points. CITI even emailed me to apply for another account.

So there is just no way to figure it out, they might still shut me down. YMMV.


OP did you come out with more credit than you started with???? 3 steps forward 1 step back???

For sure, I have way more access to credit now. BofA seems to have the right approach. A credit analyst called me a few minutes ago about my business app. She reviewed my other BofA accounts carefully. Discussed my business, my income, etc. for several minutes. Made some high level assessments of my capacity to continuing generating business income with a few pointed questions. Then made the judgement call to approve the card with 3/4 of my requested credit. Very reasonable approach in my view. Did I apply for 8 BofA accounts, no. But the process they use seems about right and they have extended about as much new credit to me as had Citi.