@haulingthescoreup wrote:
Wow, your shields must be up and fully powered!
I believe the shields are 1. accounts that are aged 13 and 17 years with BoA, 2. a total credit history of 28 years, 3. an average age on ALL accounts of 12 years and 4. zero negative information on the file. I think they look at that and conclude 'Why bother? Is there really any risk there?'. I firmly believe you are inoculated with a l-o-o-o-n-g credit history, everything else being equal. I may be surprised with my CLD, but my gut feel is I won't.
Watchmann wrote:
@haulingthescoreup wrote:
Wow, your shields must be up and fully powered!I believe the shields are 1. accounts that are aged 13 and 17 years with BoA, 2. a total credit history of 28 years, 3. an average age on ALL accounts of 12 years and 4. zero negative information on the file. I think they look at that and conclude 'Why bother? Is there really any risk there?'. I firmly believe you are inoculated with a l-o-o-o-n-g credit history, everything else being equal. I may be surprised with my CLD, but my gut feel is I won't.
Well, from your mouth to God's ears.
You do realize, though, that this particular group of CLD's have nothing to do with risk, but rather with low-hanging fruit, in the form of large credit lines that are barely being used? I know you're aware that psychic has a very similar profile and history as you, and they got him a few weeks ago.
At any rate, it's pretty irrelevant for us, as we have such low util that the lost CL isn't particularly missed in total CL. My util is something like 1/100 of 1% or something crazy like that.
@Watchmann wrote:
@haulingthescoreup wrote:
Wow, your shields must be up and fully powered!I believe the shields are 1. accounts that are aged 13 and 17 years with BoA, 2. a total credit history of 28 years, 3. an average age on ALL accounts of 12 years and 4. zero negative information on the file. I think they look at that and conclude 'Why bother? Is there really any risk there?'. I firmly believe you are inoculated with a l-o-o-o-n-g credit history, everything else being equal. I may be surprised with my CLD, but my gut feel is I won't.
Well, my shields were at:
1. 25 years
2. 31 years
3. 9 years
4. 0 negatives
@Anonymous wrote:
@Watchmann wrote:
@haulingthescoreup wrote:
Wow, your shields must be up and fully powered!I believe the shields are 1. accounts that are aged 13 and 17 years with BoA, 2. a total credit history of 28 years, 3. an average age on ALL accounts of 12 years and 4. zero negative information on the file. I think they look at that and conclude 'Why bother? Is there really any risk there?'. I firmly believe you are inoculated with a l-o-o-o-n-g credit history, everything else being equal. I may be surprised with my CLD, but my gut feel is I won't.
Well, my shields were at:
1. 25 years
2. 31 years
3. 9 years
4. 0 negatives
Since none of us are privy to the modeling as to what they are looking at in detail it is all conjecture. It seems one of the newest flavors in the system is looking at where you live and who you work for. I don't live in an area that saw huge price inflation in housing nor huge decreases, unemployment in the area is lower than the national average, and I work in an industry that isn't going out of business any time soon and which has suffered very few layoffs. Does that tip me to the non-CLD side? I dunno, but it might be a factor.
Hmmm, I was CLD on one card, and CLI on the other. 
I'm actually excited about it, AND it sort of made sense. They CLD'd the card that I use a lot less and CLI'd the card that I use more and charge higher ticket items on. The card they increased is now up to $12k and that's my highest CL and the first card to reach over $10k limit, so I'm kind of glad.
I know it sounds strange, but really, I'm happy about it.
They softed me on TU in March and softed me on EX in April. Currently live on Long Island, NY and PIF every month, don't carry balances on any cards and all scores are over 750.