I've been wondering this...the CC company can see if we PIF or if we give them money (interest). So why would they RJ someone that never pays interest? I mean I understand the people here have been upset about a rate going from 10% to 29.99% (CITI, Chase, etc) but if you always PIF and never pay interest, it doesn't REALLY matter to you, financially. And they know that even with the new rate, chances are you STILL won't be paying interest, so why do it and make the customer mad?
Wouldn't it make more sense to add an AF or a "minimum of $2,500 per year or you'll be canceled" to the cards for those that PIF (not that I am trying to give anyone an idea!)?
Just my thoughts... 
Starting Score: 799
@Peach8321 wrote:I've been wondering this...the CC company can see if we PIF or if we give them money (interest). So why would they RJ someone that never pays interest? I mean I understand the people here have been upset about a rate going from 10% to 29.99% (CITI, Chase, etc) but if you always PIF and never pay interest, it doesn't REALLY matter to you, financially. And they know that even with the new rate, chances are you STILL won't be paying interest, so why do it and make the customer mad?
Wouldn't it make more sense to add an AF or a "minimum of $2,500 per year or you'll be canceled" to the cards for those that PIF (not that I am trying to give anyone an idea!)?
Just my thoughts...
Both those ideas have been talked about around here. We'll just have to see if either is implemented.
It could be an across the board RJ meaning whether you PIF or not. Also, there's not a saying, "once a PIFer, always a PIFer." Unfortunately, some PIFs eventually do end up paying interest down the line or worse, end up defaulting. Lastly, if the customer always PIF, why would they be mad?
Starting Score: 648
The stratospheric RJ's are not intending to make more profit. They are intended to keep you from carrying a balance.
So, for those RJ's that are 29.99 and higher....they don't want you to carry a balance and have priced it accordingly. If they wanted a balance, they would offer to BT with no fees, offer promo rates, offer lower interest rates or other incentives to obtain balances.
If they wanted balances from purchases, then they woudl offer promo rates, rewards or rebates, extra protections or incentives to get you to feel inclined to make larger ticket purchases that you won't be paying off at the end of the month.
Free markets are free markets. Increased prices or taxes reduce consumption, increase value (including reduced prices) increases consumption.
When the rates are double "normal rates" you know they are not looking for balances. And if you carry one, you may find AA at some point. Why? Because it does not make sense for a prime customer to pay 30% interest on balances. This seems as a sign of financial issues, that you need the money and can't afford to pay it back quickly, meaning you are leveraged and have done so at extremely high interest.
IMO.
@MarineVietVet wrote:
@Peach8321 wrote:I've been wondering this...the CC company can see if we PIF or if we give them money (interest). So why would they RJ someone that never pays interest? I mean I understand the people here have been upset about a rate going from 10% to 29.99% (CITI, Chase, etc) but if you always PIF and never pay interest, it doesn't REALLY matter to you, financially. And they know that even with the new rate, chances are you STILL won't be paying interest, so why do it and make the customer mad?
Wouldn't it make more sense to add an AF or a "minimum of $2,500 per year or you'll be canceled" to the cards for those that PIF (not that I am trying to give anyone an idea!)?
Just my thoughts...
Both those ideas have been talked about around here. We'll just have to see if either is implemented.
Citi has already implemented such a program for a select (large) number of cards on a test basis.