CapOne drinking Disco flavored Koolaid?

[Anonymous]

---

@Curious_George2 wrote:

---

---

I was on the verge of posting a similar thought earlier, but here's the problem I'm having with it: How could the addition of one month of zero spend improve any measurement of average spend over any number of months? I guess if OP somehow had a month with negative spend that aged out of the relevant window, then replacing it with a zero would be a net improvement, but that seems pretty unlikely. I'm not even sure negative spend is a thing; credits seem to generally be categorized separately from spending.

If we were talking about a new card, then maybe adding a month of history -- even with zero spend -- might open some doors, but OP's card is nearly three years old so that seems inapplicable here.

I couldn't think of any other scenario where a zero-dollar month would improve average spend. Can you?

---

I was thinking something along the lines of a 6 month snapshot.  For example, someone spends $200/mo for the first 6 months of the year ($1200 total spend) and requests a CLI, denied.  Then for the next 6 months they spend $1000 one month, $0 the next, $1000 the next, $0 the next, $1000 the next, $0 the last.  $3000 total spend, but coming off of a $0 month spend.  They request a CLI and it's granted.  In this example perhaps it was the increased total spend over the 6 month snapshot that resulted in the CLI.

[Curious_George2]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Curious_George2 wrote:

---

---

I was on the verge of posting a similar thought earlier, but here's the problem I'm having with it: How could the addition of one month of zero spend improve any measurement of average spend over any number of months? I guess if OP somehow had a month with negative spend that aged out of the relevant window, then replacing it with a zero would be a net improvement, but that seems pretty unlikely. I'm not even sure negative spend is a thing; credits seem to generally be categorized separately from spending.

If we were talking about a new card, then maybe adding a month of history -- even with zero spend -- might open some doors, but OP's card is nearly three years old so that seems inapplicable here.

I couldn't think of any other scenario where a zero-dollar month would improve average spend. Can you?

---

I was thinking something along the lines of a 6 month snapshot.  For example, someone spends $200/mo for the first 6 months of the year ($1200 total spend) and requests a CLI, denied.  Then for the next 6 months they spend $1000 one month, $0 the next, $1000 the next, $0 the next, $1000 the next, $0 the last.  $3000 total spend, but coming off of a $0 month spend.  They request a CLI and it's granted.  In this example perhaps it was the increased total spend over the 6 month snapshot that resulted in the CLI.

---

Right, but our Devlish OP requested CLIs monthly. So if we use your example a month ago the average spend would have been $3200/6mo = $533/mo. Whereas now it is $500/mo. 

ETA: The unstated assumption I made is that CapOne looks at spend on a rolling basis. In other words, when a CLI request is made, I assume they look at the last six (or however many) months. It's possible they could instead analyze  fixed periods such as January through June, and July through December. That could explain outcomes like OP's, but I doubt a modern FI would choose to ignore large chunks of recent data already in its possession. 

[fsalsa2]

Congrats 

[Anonymous]

---

@Curious_George2 wrote:

---

---

Right, but our Devlish OP requested CLIs monthly. So if we use your example a month ago the average spend would have been $3200/6mo = $533/mo. Whereas now it is $500/mo. 

ETA: The unstated assumption I made is that CapOne looks at spend on a rolling basis. In other words, when a CLI request is made, I assume they look at the last six (or however many) months. It's possible they could instead analyze  fixed periods such as January through June, and July through December. That could explain outcomes like OP's, but I doubt a modern FI would choose to ignore large chunks of recent data already in its possession. 

---

My take on that is that there are likely multiple metrics in place that must be satisfied in order to obtain the CLI.  Could be anything really, including spend, passage of time, utilization thresholds, credit-seeking thresholds, who knows what else.  For example since like you said OP was requesting monthly, the previous month his rolling six-month spend would have been higher yes, but the element of time metric [since last CLI] would have been 1 month less.  Perhaps satisfying that metric in combination with the trend of increased overall spend did the trick.