@Anonymous wrote:
@kdm31091 wrote:
When you hear of people obtaining high AF cards like Ritz just to have that piece of metal with no concern about benefits, its gone too far IMO
Show me one example where someone said that. Once again you're [sic] projecting your opinions onto other people's motivation.
Perhaps not the exact same words, but there are actually plenty of threads here that talk primarily or exclusively about card aesthetics. Examples:
- Here's one thread where the question posed in OP was about - and ONLY about - which Chase cards are metal. Nothing in the original question about benefits, AFs, APRs, rewards, nothing. Just "metal cards."
- Here's another recent thread exclaiming that a AU card for the Ritz card may not have come in metal - again, no changes in benefits, fees, etc., just that one of the few AU cards weren't in metal.
- Here's a thread asking if the Quicksilver comes in metal - that's the sole question. Just aesthetics and build.
- Here's speculation solely on whether Capital One will launch a lead card (rather than what the benefits of such a card may be).
- Here's a member asking if the Citi Prestige was made of metal before adding it to their collection, suggesting that its construction plays at least a decisive role.
And I can't even count the posts here that follow the pattern "Omg I just got the X card and dropped it just to hear the metal cling on the floor", or my personal favorite, "girls like it!"
So while we're not going to find a thread that says aesthetics is the sole purpose of getting card, tons of evidence exists to suggest that it is at least a tipping point and perhaps a decisive factor to get a card, and most certainly a bragging point after getting it. The point about overfocus on aesthetics isn't exactly invalid, even if it weren't artfully made.
