@kdm31091 wrote:I've always been in the less is more camp. In terms of everyday spending, beyond a sign on bonus, the more cards you spread your spend across, the longer it's going to take to realize meaningful rewards on each. You can only spend so much on things like groceries, gas, dining, etc. It can also lead to overspending in the pursuit of rewards.
I do honestly think part of the reason you see a "less is more" trend is that several banks have locked people out of repeated sign on bonuses at this point, which takes away a lot of the appeal of constant applications for some.
KDM, I do believe you have a valid point. With Chase being a top credit card issuer, and them sticking with there self-imposed 5/24 rule, they have essentially stopped a lot of people from continously growing there portfolio. According to cardrates.com, Chase is the largest credit card issuer. http://www.cardrates.com/news/credit-card-companies/
In essence, they can have a significant impact on the "less is more" movement.
Remember, reducing credit is fun. 
@Anonymous wrote:
I understand the viewpoint, but two confounding factors:
1) In a "hostile" environment caused by a recession, having too many cards (or too big total CL) MIGHT make you more of a priority for AA than otherwise, i.e. in an effort to avoid it, you actually become more of a target.
2) If the recession is big enough, lenders will more or less move in lthe same direction: i.e. you won't get get to keep the 4.9% APR on one card for very long while your other cards go up to 22%, they will all go high.
Outside of extreme conditions though, some redundancy is worthwhile, then it's just a question of the degree needed!
Thanks for your valuable input and feedback, what you had mentioned above are indeed very valid and excellent points. One example you had mentioned in the second bulleted item above did in fact happen to me, where in 2008 during CARD Act, my now-Discover IT card was ratejacked from from a then-5.24% V APR to 15.99% V or thereabouts; I was eventually able to after some years to negotiate it back down with Discover to a current rate of 10.49% V, taking into account the Fed's Dec. 14th rate hike. And so yes, it's certainly true that if rates go high enough, extremely-low APR cards in the range of say 4.xx% - 5.xx% could easily have their variable-rate margins increased, or their fixed rates converted to high variable rates (I also had a then-5.99% F DPR card closed out after I declined a RJ to 15.99%-ish V, for instance). One distinct advantage that fixed-rate cards have is that even if they are ratejacked, the existing balance prior to the RJ remains at the old, pre-RJ APR, as per CARD Act legislative requirements.
The other point I wanted to briefly mention was, sometimes cards that are in-between the upper-lows and lower-highs of APRs may be able to remain intact, depending on the range you're looking at. For example, while my 5.99% F DPR card was closed and my Discover More (now IT) doubled from 5.24% V to presently 10.49% V, my now-BoA Cash Rewards WMC has stayed at exactly the same rate it has been for the past 10 years and where it first started out at, at 9.99% F. It was the only fixed-rate card I had at that time that survived CARD Act, and my theory as to why it wasn't also RJ'd is possibly b/c it was higher than the lowest lows, but in range with the lowest-highs to remain intact; i.e., it was closer to 10%+. Then again, I have known people who have been able to keep very low APRs of 4.xx% - 5.xx% F even after CARD Act, so who knows, I may be 100% wrong in my premise here, lol.
As to the first bullet point, j/c do you recommend closing out some redundant cards that are no longer used much, to reduce one's risk footprint for AA? For example, I have several other low-APR cards not presently listed in my signature, such as my BoA TR VS at 9.74% V, and my Ring card, at 8.50% V, that I hardly ever actively use. I also rarely use my high-APR Chase Freedom and Slate cards. Do you think it might make sense to close out some or all of the above? Also is it ever a good idea to request an intentional CLD during a recession-like environment, on cards that one knows one wants to keep long-term?
