cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

First Major Cut From The Roster.

tag
longtimelurker
Epic Contributor

Re: First Major Cut From The Roster.


@CreditMagic7 wrote:

 

By contrast, if any one thing stands out most in the experience with US Bank in those 5 years, it is those repeated posts of others who were early on told that they were approved for the Cash+ (back when it was all the rave) but to their utter shock a plain jane 1% cash rewards was mailed out instead.

 

Remember those? I also had even called in to be 100% certain and even picked my categories!!! only to have that excitement completely washed out to find it wasn't the Cash+ after all but the alternative card.

 

It's one thing to be told you don't qualify for Signature Version and quite another to have been told that you "are approved!" for it and even go as far as calling in to confirm this but only to find it wasn't the case at all.

 

 


I agree that that practice did no good for US Bank's image here at least.  I think the additional insult was that the alternative card, "plain jane 1%" as you put it, was so weak.   Going from apparently offering "Wow, 2 5% categories and a 2% I can choose!" to giving a card that wasn't even a "standard by now" 1.5% was a very bad choice!

Message 11 of 12
CreditMagic7
Mega Contributor

Re: First Major Cut From The Roster.


@longtimelurker wrote:

@CreditMagic7 wrote:

 

By contrast, if any one thing stands out most in the experience with US Bank in those 5 years, it is those repeated posts of others who were early on told that they were approved for the Cash+ (back when it was all the rave) but to their utter shock a plain jane 1% cash rewards was mailed out instead.

 

Remember those? I also had even called in to be 100% certain and even picked my categories!!! only to have that excitement completely washed out to find it wasn't the Cash+ after all but the alternative card.

 

It's one thing to be told you don't qualify for Signature Version and quite another to have been told that you "are approved!" for it and even go as far as calling in to confirm this but only to find it wasn't the case at all.

 

 


I agree that that practice did no good for US Bank's image here at least.  I think the additional insult was that the alternative card, "plain jane 1%" as you put it, was so weak.   Going from apparently offering "Wow, 2 5% categories and a 2% I can choose!" to giving a card that wasn't even a "standard by now" 1.5% was a very bad choice!


Agree

 

However it's no real biggie since if nothing else it did help establish a fair enough history with that lender that could prove useful for some future product down the line.

 

 

Message 12 of 12
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.