@NRB525 wrote:My explanation of how a $1,500 limit is not something the bank is particularly concerned about is a key part of understanding why a cardholder should not lose sleep over this card. Follow the logic to see where this is true. The bank computer algorithm is the key to nearly all credit decisions anymore. Once one understands this situation in cards: that a basic limit is not one to be concerned about, it is rather irrelevant to suss out more about the cardholder history.
There are too many alarm posts around here where people claim they need to walk on eggshells to avoid AA. There ARE certain sets of activities that can trigger AA. Saying the bank will care about a $1,500 limit as one of those triggers fuels that alarm, but is unlikely to be the trigger for AA.
And, though you may not be willing to admit it, the sentence "yes Citi will care if you get the card and immediately max it out" is predicting AA. There is simply no other conclusion to be drawn from this unqualified sentence.
Hah. I think you and I can go on and on all day and all week. I think OP will draw his conclusion from both posts as to what is best for him/her. I think we have made our points.
My sentence to you maybe a meta discussion as you say but how that predicts AA is a new one. Again, typical dionysian frenzy from you- I know it is hard for you to admit it.. But that is what I get from your posts you know. Really lacking and convincing. You are trying though.
Hopefully, if OP felt it was predicting AA then he/she would have said something if that one sentence on mind bothers him. So good day to you and hope your week is off to a lovely start
I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing any other result from this sentence: "Yes, Citi will care if you get the card and immediately max it out."
Please help me to understand what conclusion should be drawn from your sentence. In what way would Citi care? How would Citi react, if they care?
