NO AMEX Sign Up Bonus for previous card holders

[Genkeim]

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

@navigatethis12 wrote:

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

---

And just remember: those who use reward credit cards are driving up costs for everyone, including those most in need that don't have sufficient credit and have to pay cash.  So don't use them.

---

I can't tell if you're being serious or just joking,as most of the cards you have seem to have rewards on them.

---

Not joking, just pointing out an equivalence of a certain sort.   As above, it really is generally true that an abuser is someone who is doing something more than you do.  Using reward credit cards really does raise costs for everyone.  Most or all of this extra cost is returned in rewards to those that have the cards, it is the most vulnerable who pay the price.  

So comments about a few bad apples ruining the game seem hypocritical to me.   Extreme churners are playing by the rules (until they are changed) and benefitting (perhaps lowering rewards overall for everyone) in much the same way as reward card users are.   

---

They're exploiting the rules or you can look it at as they're violating the spirit of the rule if not the rule itself. So the end result is the rule is changed to the detriment of everyone not just those doing the exploiting.

edit: I agree with your comment about reward card users in regards to those who go to the extreme with MS. Same concept, they're exploiting the rules.

[jahsoul357]

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

@jahsoul357 wrote:

Personally, I feel the same way "shinebock" on the link you provided does; the only people who would be affected by this is the people that dang near abuse the current setup to rack up points and bonuses. I believe a very high percentage of card holders will not be affected at all by this change and from a business standpoint, it makes 100% sense. *shrugs*

---

Depending how long the exclusion is, it will potentially impact more than the hard core churners.  (I don't use "abuse" as that usually means just someone who does something more than you!).  Cards frequently change, and new ones come along, so it is certainly possible that I get Amex card X as the best for my current spending patterns.  At some stage, X changes, or my spending patterns change, or non-Amex card Y comes along, and I can no longer justify the AF.  So I cancel X, and get another card Y.

Later on, again, my spending patterns change, or Y gets nerfed or card X adds some great features.  Now card X is the best for me, for good and valid reasons.  With the old rules, assuming this takes place over more than a year, I would get the bonus when reapplying, now I won't.

And, because of this, it may be that I don't get card X, because even though the earning rate etc may be the best for me, card Z offers a substantial bonus, enough to make up for the lower rate for several years.  So it may not even be a great decision for Amex.   If other issuers follow, then yes.

---

But it sounds like the bonus is the determining factor for you. Don't get me wrong, I understand where you are coming from and you are relating this to your situation but stepping outside, I ask the question, why should you get the bonus for being a new card user, when in reality, you aren't? Objectively speaking, and you might be the exception, but a lot of the time, people talk about closing their cards so they won't take the AF hit because they just got the card to get bonus points.Again, I don't know how you use your cards neiter will I assume, but we do have some bad seeds out there.

[compassion101]

So if I have an AMEX Costco card, does that mean that I can't get a bonus on a different AMEX card? And does it make a difference if I didn't get a bonus on the card I currently have?

[longtimelurker]

---

@Jasir wrote:

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

---

Depending how long the exclusion is, it will potentially impact more than the hard core churners.  ... So it may not even be a great decision for Amex.  

---

There's a whole lot of rationalizing a poor consumer practice in your post longtimelurker. The average person has about 3 credit cards; most people who heavily participate on these forums have 10+ credit cards and rationalize in all kinds of ways why they are absolutely essential. Amex's policy will not effect the average card user in any negative way because the average card user will keep their cards for a lifetime (baring financial difficulty), not change cards like seasonal clothing in an temperate climate region.

---

Oh, I agree that it may not impact a majority of the people, just that it is not restricted to those that others like to refer to as abusers.  Most of the posters here are, compared to the normal population,  might be considered as abusers as well (imagine having 5 credit cards, you must be up to something!)

[Genkeim]

It only applies if you've had that specific card before.  Example, open a BCE get the bonus, close the account then reapply to get the bonus a second time. 

---

@compassion101 wrote:

So if I have an AMEX Costco card, does that mean that I can't get a bonus on a different AMEX card? And does it make a difference if I didn't get a bonus on the card I currently have?

---

[longtimelurker]

---

@jahsoul357 wrote:

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

@jahsoul357 wrote:

Personally, I feel the same way "shinebock" on the link you provided does; the only people who would be affected by this is the people that dang near abuse the current setup to rack up points and bonuses. I believe a very high percentage of card holders will not be affected at all by this change and from a business standpoint, it makes 100% sense. *shrugs*

---

Depending how long the exclusion is, it will potentially impact more than the hard core churners.  (I don't use "abuse" as that usually means just someone who does something more than you!).  Cards frequently change, and new ones come along, so it is certainly possible that I get Amex card X as the best for my current spending patterns.  At some stage, X changes, or my spending patterns change, or non-Amex card Y comes along, and I can no longer justify the AF.  So I cancel X, and get another card Y.

Later on, again, my spending patterns change, or Y gets nerfed or card X adds some great features.  Now card X is the best for me, for good and valid reasons.  With the old rules, assuming this takes place over more than a year, I would get the bonus when reapplying, now I won't.

And, because of this, it may be that I don't get card X, because even though the earning rate etc may be the best for me, card Z offers a substantial bonus, enough to make up for the lower rate for several years.  So it may not even be a great decision for Amex.   If other issuers follow, then yes.

---

But it sounds like the bonus is the determining factor for you. Don't get me wrong, I understand where you are coming from and you are relating this to your situation but stepping outside, I ask the question, why should you get the bonus for being a new card user, when in reality, you aren't? Objectively speaking, and you might be the exception, but a lot of the time, people talk about closing their cards so they won't take the AF hit because they just got the card to get bonus points.Again, I don't know how you use your cards neiter will I assume, but we do have some bad seeds out there.

---

Actually, I never churn for bonuses, my "non-intended use" is in a completely different direction.    But: I view choosing a card as a purely financial decision.  Given my spending, and my desired rewards, will this card return the best total reward out of all the cards I could reasonably get?"    Being part of the X familly, or ability to grow CL don't come in to it.  So bonus would be part of the equation.

And if it becomes a problem, then the issuers change the rules as here.   But they will also evaluate the impact.   As has been pointed out elsewhere, this "new" rule is exactly the way Amex used to be.  They then changed the rules for whatever reason, and now are changing back.  If other issuers continue to offer high repeat bonuses, Amex may enforce more lightly.

So it's not that I expect a bonus as a new user.  It is just part of my calculation versus other choices I may have.  If the bonus isn't available, then I will may make different decisions.

Such people may well be a tiny minority, but then you have to wonder why Amex bother with the change.

And no, there are not bad seeds out there.  Just people making different risk-benefit decisions from those you would make.

[Jasir]

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

 As above, it really is generally true that an abuser is someone who is doing something more than you do. 

---

You kind of got stuck on this fallacious idea that abusers are simply people "doing something more often" than others. If that's the case, if I play sports more often than the average guy my age I am either abusing the sport or my body (or both!). No, abuse is something determined primarily by its detriment and secondly its duration. Here's a link to the proper definition of abuse (and thus an abuser):

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abuse

Churners are credit card abusers. They know it, we know it, Amex knows it. Even as stated to constantly apply for an AF card, cancel before AF hits, then reapply again is abusive conduct because it is detrimental to the issuer and industry. Just simply having more of or doing more of is not abusive.

I have 7 cards -- if you go through my posts you'll see i always intended no more than 5. You will also see I plan to close 2 at the anniversary of having received them--and I never plan to have them again. That's understandable. Now, if after I close my Walmart and a Chase card, I decide to reapply I shouldn't be granted one lick of incentive to do so--I had my chance & I chose to squander it. If I close them with the idea to reap sign-up bonuses upon re-opening or avoid AF by closing and re-opening, that's abuse of the system.

[longtimelurker]

---

@Jasir wrote:

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

 As above, it really is generally true that an abuser is someone who is doing something more than you do. 

---

You kind of got stuck on this fallacious idea that abusers are simply people "doing something more often" than others. If that's the case, if I play sports more often than the average guy my age I am either abusing the sport or my body (or both!). No, abuse is something determined primarily by its detriment and secondly its duration. Here's a link to the proper definition of abuse (and thus an abuser):

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abuse

Churners are credit card abusers. They know it, we know it, Amex knows it. Even as stated to constantly apply for an AF card, cancel before AF hits, then reapply again is abusive conduct because it is detrimental to the issuer and industry. Just simply having more of or doing more of is not abusive.

I have 7 cards -- if you go through my posts you'll see i always intended no more than 5. You will also see I plan to close 2 at the anniversary of having received them--and I never plan to have them again. That's understandable. Now, if after I close my Walmart and a Chase card, I decide to reapply I shouldn't be granted one lick of incentive to do so--I had my chance & I chose to squander it. If I close them with the idea to reap sign-up bonuses upon re-opening or avoid AF by closing and re-opening, that's abuse of the system.

---

The point is: who gets to decide what is abuse?  Only the issuer, which is why I am calling out those who label others as abusers.   Is getting $300 cashback a year on a credit card abuse?   While many here would think that is acceptable, it is abuse  if the issuer decides it is, and closes the card or, introduces caps for everyone.

Reading a lot of forums lead to my characterization of abuse, not really "What is abuse" but "What do people call abuse?" and if you don't think that is relative, well...

Now, if after I close my Walmart and a Chase card, I decide to reapply I shouldn't be granted one lick of incentive to do so--I had my chance & I chose to squander it.

This makes very little sense!  The issuers aren't giving you incentives out of the goodness of their hearts, they are doing it because they believe that you will earn them more money than they pay out if they have you as a customer.   If they believe that the next time, then of course they may wish to incent you.   Amex may have decided, for now, that the value proposition isn't there, that enough cancellers will cancel again, losing them money, and that there are enough of them to outweigh other factors.

Basically we don't need to look out for the credit card companies, they are more than capable of taking care of their interests.

[yudeology101]

---

@Jasir wrote:

---

@longtimelurker wrote:

---

 As above, it really is generally true that an abuser is someone who is doing something more than you do. 

---

You kind of got stuck on this fallacious idea that abusers are simply people "doing something more often" than others. If that's the case, if I play sports more often than the average guy my age I am either abusing the sport or my body (or both!). No, abuse is something determined primarily by its detriment and secondly its duration. Here's a link to the proper definition of abuse (and thus an abuser):

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abuse

Churners are credit card abusers. They know it, we know it, Amex knows it. Even as stated to constantly apply for an AF card, cancel before AF hits, then reapply again is abusive conduct because it is detrimental to the issuer and industry. Just simply having more of or doing more of is not abusive.

I have 7 cards -- if you go through my posts you'll see i always intended no more than 5. You will also see I plan to close 2 at the anniversary of having received them--and I never plan to have them again. That's understandable. Now, if after I close my Walmart and a Chase card, I decide to reapply I shouldn't be granted one lick of incentive to do so--I had my chance & I chose to squander it. If I close them with the idea to reap sign-up bonuses upon re-opening or avoid AF by closing and re-opening, that's abuse of the system.

---

Great point, completely agree.  However, looking at the standpoint of those churners-  they're not violating any rules, they are simply abusing the award system to the fullest that the lender has given.  Morally what they are doing....well that's very subjective because don't we also want to benefit to the fullest in every card?  Now since this system has been going on for a while now in most recent years, I don't think AMEX would wait this long to implement this new policy, whereas they should've done it a while back.  But why didn't they?  My assumption is very simple:  making $$$.  AMEX is a business afterall, they exist to make every dime from those swipe fees and such.  While all of us here are butting heads trying to do the math for MR/UR/Miles point conversion to how much it is worth, in the end we pay to get those rewards...AMEX is still the winner getting every dime out of us. 

[enharu]

---

@Genkeim wrote:

It only applies if you've had that specific card before.  Example, open a BCE get the bonus, close the account then reapply to get the bonus a second time. 

---

@compassion101 wrote:

So if I have an AMEX Costco card, does that mean that I can't get a bonus on a different AMEX card? And does it make a difference if I didn't get a bonus on the card I currently have?

---

---

Current Amex members are also not supposed to receive the full sign-up bonus in most circumstances, even if they never had that particular product before. People, myself included, just get away with it by abusing a loophole in their systems.