I know you think I do not understand anything 
but here is something else to consider :
Google cash advance and read a few articles (just 1 example with a few valid points) especially as to how lenders might look at cash advances
http://credit.about.com/od/avoidingdebt/qt/avoid-credit-card-cash-advance.htm
@Anonymous wrote:
If I understand you correctly you don't need to spend this money, but you are willing to pay the cash advance fee just so you can show additional "usage" in hopes to get higher CLIs. Then you plan to use the cash you got from the cash advance and pay it off right away. Do I have this correct? No, that's incorrect. I would have to spend the money every month and I would simply choose to use cash from CC's instead of check writing or withdrawaling money from bank accounts to pay contractors for example, since neither of the other two options help increase one's credit scores or help a person attain higher CLI's.
If so, well, that is called Manufactured Spending, (MS for short) and it is pretty much a No-No with any Credit Card issuer. There are countless stories that the issuers have closed cardholder accounts for this reason. Don't do it. It is a bad idea. CLI will happen with time, and if they don't as your profile ages, you will get better cards with higher credit limits and then you close the ones with lower limits. This would not be manufactured spending, I wouldn't spend the money just for the sake of spending the money if that makes sense. I would just pay a person in cash for services from a cash advance instead of paying them by check or by withdrawling cash from a bank. Make sense.
Hope that answers your question.
Thanks for your response, your's was the first one that actually understood what I am asking and gave good advice.
I see what you mean. So this would be money you have to spend anyway. Theoretically, it is possible to do that - get the cash from the CC, and utilize it and then pay the cc. And the cash advance fees, you can probably absorb. The problem though is that there is no guarantee that this will result in higher CLIs. As such, with no guarantees, you are paying the fees and yet may not receive anything in return. So 2-5% (depending on the card) as a fee, for a potential of getting nothing in return, $5000 cash advance per month would cost you an additional $100-$250/month in fees alone. I'd be OK with it if the credit card issuer said "max the card 3x per month and in 6 months we will tripple your credit line" You'd have a "goal" and you can calculate your risk-to-reward (how much it would eventually cost you to tripple your limit)
Bottom line, I don't think it is a good idea and may backfirre. An article published in creditcards.com amongst other things states:
"The typical cash advance customer is a cash-crunched customer in need of a financial makeover." (http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/4-key-questions-cash-advances-1273.php)
By doing this month after month and at times more than once a month, then you may classify yourself as a typical cash advance customer.
@Imperfectfuture wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
If I understand you correctly you don't need to spend this money, but you are willing to pay the cash advance fee just so you can show additional "usage" in hopes to get higher CLIs. Then you plan to use the cash you got from the cash advance and pay it off right away. Do I have this correct? No, that's incorrect. I would have to spend the money every month and I would simply choose to use cash from CC's instead of check writing or withdrawaling money from bank accounts to pay contractors for example, since neither of the other two options help increase one's credit scores or help a person attain higher CLI's.
If so, well, that is called Manufactured Spending, (MS for short) and it is pretty much a No-No with any Credit Card issuer. There are countless stories that the issuers have closed cardholder accounts for this reason. Don't do it. It is a bad idea. CLI will happen with time, and if they don't as your profile ages, you will get better cards with higher credit limits and then you close the ones with lower limits. This would not be manufactured spending, I wouldn't spend the money just for the sake of spending the money if that makes sense. I would just pay a person in cash for services from a cash advance instead of paying them by check or by withdrawling cash from a bank. Make sense.
Hope that answers your question.
Thanks for your response, your's was the first one that actually understood what I am asking and gave good advice.
UM, you,re not listening.
Credit card companies look at cash advances as much, much more risky behavior, and are FAR less likely to give increases to those who use them. Have spoke with several underwriters, that is just the way it is.
well....some CC customers might have to learn the hard way ?
@IamB2 See you actually understand the logic I was using (brothers from a different mother perhaps? 
), no one else so far is understanding the risk vs reward concept I was simply outlining and asking about.
"I'd be OK with it if the credit card issuer said "max the card 3x per month and in 6 months we will tripple your credit line" You'd have a "goal" and you can calculate your risk-to-reward (how much it would eventually cost you to tripple your limit).." EXACTLY! This was my whole point and what my end goal would've been by doing utilizing this strategy.
That and the making business decisions for short term loss (ATM fees) vs long term gains (higher CLI) concept.
But from what I've now read and researched like I first thought cash advances to a CC company would make you look like you need the cash for whatever reason and are potentially a higher risk in CC companies eyes. So I won't try to do this strategy ever.
Thanks so much for the 2cents and to others for posting articles.
CL
This is just my opinion but I believe CC companies dislike cash advances because they don't like when they actually have to hand real cash to a customer. Money in this country, at least from the perspective of CC companies and major banks, is mostly just numbers on a computer screen. Real physical cash, at least in the amount that would equate to all of the limits handed out by a single bank, doesn't actually exist. Sadly, there are people out there who believe that if everyone went into their bank at the same time on the same day and all attempted to withdraw 100 percent of their money, it would be there. Not even close. I believe this is kind of the same for CC companies, they don't actually have the physical cash to hand out to all of their customers, so they strongly dislike when those numbers on a computer screen that they can manipulate so easily become real physical cash in their customers hand.
