No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
This is why I like most hotel cards. Sure they have annual fees, but many offer an annual free night that more than pays the annual fee without you having to spend a certain amount, thus making everything else pure profit
If I get a CSP it'll be purely for the signup bonus.
I was thinking about this card, but not now.
Mine was $95 when I got it. If that should change next year, I will open the Marriott card and have my limit split between it and my Freedom.
I had previously thought of apping for the CSP, and didn't for a number of reasons. I am not too big of a traveller (but rent cars and reserve hotels every once in a while). I thought the signup bonus sounded quite generous. However, the annual fee kept me from doing so. In a way, I'm glad it did. I decided to apply for the plain ol' CS (to use towards restaurants) and got a denial. Maybe that was for the better.
@xerostatus wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
@longtimelurker wrote:
@jon22guitar wrote:
Everyone here needs to realize that if your spend gives you over 150$ worth of Chase UR points in a year (or lower, depending on your AF) then it IS in fact worth having the card, because the points are paying for it.
It all depends on how much you can spend/put through the card.
Plus, travelers like myself love the dozen transfer partners.No, don't know why this keeps coming up. The goal isn't to just make back the AF, you need to consider alternatives. So even if all the spend was 2x, $7.5K spend on CSP would net 0 (assuming using as cash) and would get you $150 on the Citi Double Cash (Fidelity Amex) and just over $100 on the QS.
Compare with the LTL Card, which pays 0.1% on everything with an annual fee of just $1. After $1000 spend, it pays for itself! Is this a good card? No, because there are much better alternatives.
TL;DR: The metric shouldn't be if rewards pay the AF, have to consider what else you could have done.
That's quite subjective, everyone has different goals.
Actually, it's actually pretty straight forward and objective. It's called opportunity cost.
Let's imagine a card has $100 annual fee, gives back 10% cash back (using easy numbers for sake of mental math).
If you spent $1000 on this card, you'd break even with $100 cashback to offset the $100 annual fee. Net benefit: $0
Imagine a second card, no annual fee, and gives you 5% cash back.
If you were to instead spend the $1000 on this card, you'd only get $50 back, but you didn't have to pay the AF. Net benefit: $50
So, you can already see how lowering or increasing your "spend" on one card, the other card, or a combination of the two can lead to different outcomes.
So longtimelurker is correct, the goal isn't to "break even." That is silly.
You're completely right when you factor in opportunity cost.
My point was that some people avoid cards with annual fees, even though the rewards can MORE than pay for the AF if you are specifically looking for travel rewards.
Of course there will always be other cards, some even better. Hence why a large percentage of the myFico community has 10 or more cards. Everyone's goals and strategies are personal and unique.
Please consider changing the thread title to CSP AF now $150 for some".
This has been around forever. There have always been muliple landing pages for cards. Usually the higher AF page is accompanied by more points though. This isn't nothing new.
It's still $95. I did see the $150 one though. It happened in the past, $125, $145. Chase marketing team is testing to see who is willing to pay more than $95.
so what happens to those who paid 95 for their first year, what do they pay in their second year ? Would it 150 or still 95 ?