DickC wrote:
In many ways I feel bad being here on this forum, as I really am the last person to ask for advice. As I have said, I habe not applied for Credit in over 8 years and have not seen my credit reports in YEARS. I just find this forum very informative and this it provides a valuable service. I wish I had more to contribute.
But you contribute a lot!
There are different paths to get to good credit, as measured by FICO scores. One way is by rocking and rolling, pushing this, tweaking that, PC'ing cards and mooching CLI's. But another way is to just get a couple - three cards, keep them forever, never mess up, never carry debt, and let your track record show your credit-worthiness.
It's very valuable having members like you, and like psychic, and my husband (with two whole cards), and masdeocho, and others. For those who are allergic to continual fiddling around with their credit, you're a good role model.
@haulingthescoreup wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
In many ways I feel bad being here on this forum, as I really am the last person to ask for advice. As I have said, I habe not applied for Credit in over 8 years and have not seen my credit reports in YEARS. I just find this forum very informative and this it provides a valuable service. I wish I had more to contribute.
But you contribute a lot!
There are different paths to get to good credit, as measured by FICO scores. One way is by rocking and rolling, pushing this, tweaking that, PC'ing cards and mooching CLI's. But another way is to just get a couple - three cards, keep them forever, never mess up, never carry debt, and let your track record show your credit-worthiness.
It's very valuable having members like you, and like psychic, and my husband (with two whole cards), and masdeocho, and others. For those who are allergic to continual fiddling around with their credit, you're a good role model.
Thank you for the kind words. As stated, my wife and I have 4 Cards only. We are blessed we own our home free and clear, our rentals free and clear and I get a nice retirement check. LIFE has been good to us.
Even though we are in good shape now, we all have went through those phases of spend, not save, etc, so I certainly know where many are coming from on here.
It is my hope when they reach my age (62) that they are fortunate to be in the position we find ourselves.
@Anonymous wrote:Actually, from a casino standpoint taking checks is something that is done on a principle that keeps them in business and that is "ODDS".
NOW, here is where I (or the floor supervisor) makes a decision. YOU want to cash a check for $500. I KNOW you have had an ACCT for seven years,your average balance is $1000-$3000 dollars and you have no history of bad activity on your account. WHAT this tells me is that the "ODDS ARE IN OUR FAVOR" your check is good or you would make it good. VERY SIMPLE and remember, a casino runs on "odds" in its favor. ACTUALLY under the scenario I described, I would take your check up to probably $1000 or $1500.
I hope this do answer your question.
I would also like to offer my thanks for your input. The Casino perspective is a lot more relative to understanding FICO scoring than some might think.
The fact of the matter is that lenders seem to be playing the "odds" that any given consumer will pay his debts.
The FICO score explanation clearly states "How Lenders See You"
Lenders see consumers in terms of having a "Risk Rate".
A person with a FICO score between 750 and 799 has a "Risk Rate" of 2%. The risk rate is..... * Defined as the percentage of borrowers who reach 90 days past due or worse (such as bankruptcy or account charge-off) on any credit account over a two year period.
I always have felt that the banks were merely playing the odds. That presumption goes a long way when trying to understand why the individual consumer's actual character, integrity, and consumer loyalty over the years doesn't count as much as credit scores do. The bank doesn't care about the individual. It is the aggregate of all consumer data not just credit scores that generate the odds that a lender will be repaid by any particular consumer.
@CreditAble wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:Actually, from a casino standpoint taking checks is something that is done on a principle that keeps them in business and that is "ODDS".
NOW, here is where I (or the floor supervisor) makes a decision. YOU want to cash a check for $500. I KNOW you have had an ACCT for seven years,your average balance is $1000-$3000 dollars and you have no history of bad activity on your account. WHAT this tells me is that the "ODDS ARE IN OUR FAVOR" your check is good or you would make it good. VERY SIMPLE and remember, a casino runs on "odds" in its favor. ACTUALLY under the scenario I described, I would take your check up to probably $1000 or $1500.
I hope this do answer your question.
I would also like to offer my thanks for your input. The Casino perspective is a lot more relative to understanding FICO scoring than some might think.
The fact of the matter is that lenders seem to be playing the "odds" that any given consumer will pay his debts.
The FICO score explanation clearly states "How Lenders See You"
Lenders see consumers in terms of having a "Risk Rate".
A person with a FICO score between 750 and 799 has a "Risk Rate" of 2%. The risk rate is..... * Defined as the percentage of borrowers who reach 90 days past due or worse (such as bankruptcy or account charge-off) on any credit account over a two year period.
I always have felt that the banks were merely playing the odds. That presumption goes a long way when trying to understand why the individual consumer's actual character, integrity, and consumer loyalty over the years doesn't count as much as credit scores do. The bank doesn't care about the individual. It is the aggregate of all consumer data not just credit scores that generate the odds that a lender will be repaid by any particular consumer.
Yes, and I think perhaps that is why some Credit Card issuers are hiring people from the gaming industry to come in and help. of course. like I say casinos are more prone to work with other casinos in regards to credit/check cashing but I think as time passes, perhaps banks will see it is in their best interests to share more customer info among themselves.
You are right, it is an odds game. We were always told that if we took 100 checks, statistics had proven that 98 of them were good. The truth is, you make enough money off those 98 people, you can offset the loss of the two bad checks.
As for "extended credit," the last reports I saw were for the year 2008 and the loss rate on "marker acccounts " was 3.1% which is actually very good. As I say that casinos do have one advantage in the fact that since they do work together so closely, once a customer is "blacklisted" they are done gambling (on CREDIT) and to the player that can be a fate worse then death. I mean you might have marker privleges at say 4 casinos, but as soon as one cuts you off, within 5 minutes it is in the system and you are cut off everywhere. That is the benefit of sharing real time info.
