Chase 5/24 on co-branded cards soon?

[Anonymous]

---

@willwar14 wrote:
This has been posted before, but oh well if it actually does happen, their high APRs and no apr reduction policy will make me stay away from them once I get a better APR that 14.49% and a **bleep**ty 1k CL, and the reps have been quite rude to me also..

---

They're so big that a bad rep is bound to happen here and there.

[FinStar]

I would highly caution this is not official - likely a possibility.  Obviously Chase isn't going to publish a Memo of some sort for the public, but for now this is simply something that has been published on multiple sites and different sources and has not been thoroughly vetted.

So, time will only tell when (and if) it is officially enforced.  Admittedly, banks are going to do what's best for their bottom line so for those who feel it's appropriate and their profile supports a specific Chase product then by all means evaluate your profile or line up to determine whether applying sooner than later might prove beneficial.

[pizza1]

I really don't see how the 5/24 "rule" could really pass with the co-brands. Chase may be the creditor for a particular company say...Zappo's or Amazon, but they themselves would have to be 'Ok" with it.

I don't really see the partners being ok with Chase limiting options of credit to future cardholders. They may back the card, but they dont make all the rules. The partners may not even know Chase is doing this on the co-brand side.

eh...

[Anonymous]

---

@pizza1 wrote:

I really don't see how the 5/24 "rule" could really pass with the co-brands. Chase may be the creditor for a particular company say...Zappo's or Amazon, but they themselves would have to be 'Ok" with it.

I don't really see the partners being ok with Chase limiting options of credit to future cardholders. They may back the card, but they dont make all the rules. The partners may not even know Chase is doing this on the co-brand side.

eh...

---

I think they will use their discretion, this seems like an effective way to curb bonus chasers in a uniform way. I also would imagine that the better customer you've been to them and the more funds on deposit, interest they might've earned off you would play a role. I was reading on some site that they signed a multi-year renewal deal with United recently, so if someone is otherwise eligible and the computer system doesn't throw a major red flag, I find it hard to believe they'll be sticklers about this rule especially on co-branded cards.

[FinStar]

---

@pizza1 wrote:

I really don't see how the 5/24 "rule" could really pass with the co-brands. Chase may be the creditor for a particular company say...Zappo's or Amazon, but they themselves would have to be 'Ok" with it.

I don't really see the partners being ok with Chase limiting options of credit to future cardholders. They may back the card, but they dont make all the rules. The partners may not even know Chase is doing this on the co-brand side.

eh...

---

Keep in mind that banks and partnerships, while there is exclusivitiy in their bi-lateral agreements, have leverage with regard to changes in their loyalty programs and CC attrition.  This would be no different for Citi, BOA, etc.

By and large, Chase can cite shifts in economic conditions (gains/losses) and statistical information that is frequently shared with their partnerships that could leverage these changes.  These are executive decisions made at the top whenever portfolios are evaluated on a frequent basis.  So, I can honestly tell you that since business partnerships have dual growth revenue goals, they would likely go along with Chase's decisions to forge stronger loyalty program returns.  At the end of the day, business is business and it's about ROI.

Also, Zappos and Amazon, accept all other major bankcards, not just exclusively Chase for their respective programs.  Chase has definitely very sohisticated software and predicitve algorithms that can essentially share limited transaction information with their partners to determine shopping behaviors, usage, profitability, etc., which in turn determines whether a portfolio is right-sized, stagnant, profitable or poorly performing.