topic Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender? in Credit Cards

Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

DigitalArk — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:38:16 GMT

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

Anonymous — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:44:14 GMT

There's no such thing as a "prime" lender for credit cards. There are however credit products targeted towards people with "prime" and "subprime" credit, for example.

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

coldnmn — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:48:33 GMT

In my opinion they are a lender that will grow with you. Unlike Cap1's rebuilding cards. If I had to make a call middle

of the road would be my choice.

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

lg8302ch — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:52:19 GMT

+1 @ enharu..sorry cannot quote on ipad
Also I think we should select the cards that fit our needs and profiles and not because of the lender....

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

DigitalArk — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:57:30 GMT

@lg8302ch wrote:
@+1 @ enharu..sorry cannot quote on ipad
Also I think we should select the cards that fit our needs and profiles and not because of the lender....

Lenders are pretty important to me. It's one of the elemnets that I will consider when I apply for cards. Good customer service is another element for me to consider.

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

Anonymous — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:06:58 GMT

How do you differentiate between a good and bad lender, especially if they have products that cater to people with not-as-good credit? Even American Express has product(s) that cater to people who have downright horrible credit (oasis program). Does this mean Amex is a subprime lender?

Another thing to note is that most lenders have a tiered customer service system. Depending on your internal score, which is influenced by many factors including profitability, spending, risk, etc. and also the type of product you have, that will influence the tier, and sometimes location, of customer service reps that will be answering your calls. One may have horrible customer service experience with chase, citi and Amex simply because they have a cheaper, not-as-good product and low internal score which in turn resulted in horrible misinformed improperly trained CSRs.

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

Jutz — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:10:51 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
How do you differentiate between a good and bad lender, especially if they have products that cater to people with not-as-good credit? Even American Express has product(s) that cater to people who have downright horrible credit (oasis program). Does this mean Amex is a subprime lender?

Another thing to note is that most lenders have a tiered customer service system. Depending on your internal score, which is influenced by many factors including profitability, spending, risk, etc. and also the type of product you have, that will influence the tier, and sometimes location, of customer service reps that will be answering your calls. One may have horrible customer service experience with chase, citi and Amex simply because they have a cheaper, not-as-good product and low internal score which in turn resulted in horrible misinformed improperly trained CSRs.

This, all of this.

Cap1 gets flaunted as a sub prime lender, but they also serve the prime crowd. If the Venture is right for you, is it not socially acceptable to use the Venture? We tend to try and differentiate between bad and good too often here. There are way too many variables in both product and customer to determine something so black and white.

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

Anonymous — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:14:05 GMT

@Jutz wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
How do you differentiate between a good and bad lender, especially if they have products that cater to people with not-as-good credit? Even American Express has product(s) that cater to people who have downright horrible credit (oasis program). Does this mean Amex is a subprime lender?

Another thing to note is that most lenders have a tiered customer service system. Depending on your internal score, which is influenced by many factors including profitability, spending, risk, etc. and also the type of product you have, that will influence the tier, and sometimes location, of customer service reps that will be answering your calls. One may have horrible customer service experience with chase, citi and Amex simply because they have a cheaper, not-as-good product and low internal score which in turn resulted in horrible misinformed improperly trained CSRs.
This, all of this.

Cap1 gets flaunted as a sub prime lender, but they also serve the prime crowd. If the Venture is right for you, is it not socially acceptable to use the Venture? We tend to try and differentiate between bad and good too often here. There are way too many variables in both product and customer to determine something so black and white.

Agreed. I don't care if it's "socially acceptable" to use my Venture; if it gives me the best bang for my buck from making a purchase, than that's what I use.

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

Anonymous — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:32:09 GMT

While it doesn't impact "prime or non-prime" question (which as others have said doesn't really mean anything), I guess a lot of US people aren't aware of what Barclays is.

In 2012, it was the world's 7th biggest bank by assets, bigger than any US bank (JP Morgan Chase and Bank of America were 9th and 10th). There are many other measures of bank size, such as market capitalization, which puts Barclays lower, but by any standard it is a major global bank, not a First Premier or Credit One type of operation.

http://www.gfmag.com/tools/best-banks/11986-worlds-50-biggest-banks-2012.html#axzz2RlGUpWAO

(It has also been involved in a number of major wrong doings, such as LIBOR rigging and manipulating CA energy futures, but that is to be expected!)

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

lg8302ch — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:35:02 GMT

@ digitalark
then you have answered your own question

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

Anonymous — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:36:14 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@Jutz wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
How do you differentiate between a good and bad lender, especially if they have products that cater to people with not-as-good credit? Even American Express has product(s) that cater to people who have downright horrible credit (oasis program). Does this mean Amex is a subprime lender?

Another thing to note is that most lenders have a tiered customer service system. Depending on your internal score, which is influenced by many factors including profitability, spending, risk, etc. and also the type of product you have, that will influence the tier, and sometimes location, of customer service reps that will be answering your calls. One may have horrible customer service experience with chase, citi and Amex simply because they have a cheaper, not-as-good product and low internal score which in turn resulted in horrible misinformed improperly trained CSRs.
This, all of this.

Cap1 gets flaunted as a sub prime lender, but they also serve the prime crowd. If the Venture is right for you, is it not socially acceptable to use the Venture? We tend to try and differentiate between bad and good too often here. There are way too many variables in both product and customer to determine something so black and white.
Agreed. I don't care if it's "socially acceptable" to use my Venture; if it gives me the best bang for my buck from making a purchase, than that's what I use.

+1.

If the fidelity Amex is going to give me the best bang of my buck, I'll even overlook how hideous and disgusting that card looks and use it. At the end of the day it's really just a credit card. No need to overthink about it. It's not like you're choosing your significant other or that you're being forced to sleep with the ugliest chick in the club.

Good customer service may be nice to have, but how often do you actually call them for anything? And if you rarely ever do call them, why does it really matter then? A lot of basic info can be found on the internet, and CSRs are really just there to help you with basic problems. Complex problems usually require analysts / underwriters / managers to look at it anyhow simply because most CSRs do not have the authority to override the system.

The only time good / bad CS matters is with regards to concierge. A good concierge department can help make life much easier. But the "best" concierge services are also usually restricted to the top of the line cards, such as Centurion, Palladium, JPM backed cards, etc. So for most cards this isn't something to even worry about because it's almost non-existent. The internet probably can help you out in a much better way than a subpar concierge service can.

And if you do call CS a lot, that's something you need to re-evaluate. Each time you contact CS, it dings your internal score. I'm not saying you shouldn't contact them at all, but you shouldn't do it over the smallest issue or over something that you think is or could be an issue but really isn't. Call centers are not cheap to set up and maintain, even if they are overseas. Most companies do not like it when customers keep contacting CS. Even Amazon, the "best" customer-centric company, will ban your account if you are contacting them excessively for nonsensical stuff and/or claims.

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

DomoNomo — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:38:17 GMT

@DigitalArk wrote:
??

Yes

Re: Is Barclays considered a prime lender?

FinStar — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 19:27:07 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
@Jutz wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
How do you differentiate between a good and bad lender, especially if they have products that cater to people with not-as-good credit? Even American Express has product(s) that cater to people who have downright horrible credit (oasis program). Does this mean Amex is a subprime lender?

Another thing to note is that most lenders have a tiered customer service system. Depending on your internal score, which is influenced by many factors including profitability, spending, risk, etc. and also the type of product you have, that will influence the tier, and sometimes location, of customer service reps that will be answering your calls. One may have horrible customer service experience with chase, citi and Amex simply because they have a cheaper, not-as-good product and low internal score which in turn resulted in horrible misinformed improperly trained CSRs.
This, all of this.

Cap1 gets flaunted as a sub prime lender, but they also serve the prime crowd. If the Venture is right for you, is it not socially acceptable to use the Venture? We tend to try and differentiate between bad and good too often here. There are way too many variables in both product and customer to determine something so black and white.
Agreed. I don't care if it's "socially acceptable" to use my Venture; if it gives me the best bang for my buck from making a purchase, than that's what I use.
+1.
If the fidelity Amex is going to give me the best bang of my buck, I'll even overlook how hideous and disgusting that card looks and use it. At the end of the day it's really just a credit card. No need to overthink about it. It's not like you're choosing your significant other or that you're being forced to sleep with the ugliest chick in the club.

Good customer service may be nice to have, but how often do you actually call them for anything? And if you rarely ever do call them, why does it really matter then? A lot of basic info can be found on the internet, and CSRs are really just there to help you with basic problems. Complex problems usually require analysts / underwriters / managers to look at it anyhow simply because most CSRs do not have the authority to override the system.

The only time good / bad CS matters is with regards to concierge. A good concierge department can help make life much easier. But the "best" concierge services are also usually restricted to the top of the line cards, such as Centurion, Palladium, JPM backed cards, etc. So for most cards this isn't something to even worry about because it's almost non-existent. The internet probably can help you out in a much better way than a subpar concierge service can.

And if you do call CS a lot, that's something you need to re-evaluate. Each time you contact CS, it dings your internal score. I'm not saying you shouldn't contact them at all, but you shouldn't do it over the smallest issue or over something that you think is or could be an issue but really isn't. Call centers are not cheap to set up and maintain, even if they are overseas. Most companies do not like it when customers keep contacting CS. Even Amazon, the "best" customer-centric company, will ban your account if you are contacting them excessively for nonsensical stuff and/or claims.

Everything that needed to be said, has ben said already DigitalArk.