^There's anecdotal evidence of people calling in to recon after denials and getting grilled by analysts about too many new accounts/closed accounts in a short period of time (less than a year or 2).
@Simba501 wrote:
@gdale6 wrote:A word of wisdom, underwriters cannot stand accounts that are opened then closed in a short period of time (6 months or less) a year or better is best before closing a card.
I am not disputing this, but what solid evidence do we have to support this? The forum so frequently tosses things around as common knowledge and fact.
This FDIC manual on credit card underwriting (PDF document) is a pretty good read if you're particularly curious about the process.
Among the wealth of information is this tidbit:
The following items might signal current or future elevated risk and, thus, might warrant follow-up: • Excessive or rapidly rising approval rates. • Frequent or substantial changes in underwriting criteria. • High employee turnover in the department. • High or increasing exception volumes. • Extremely low or non-existent exception volumes. • High or increasing volume of accounts closed shortly after booking. • Adverse performance of multiple account holders compared to cardholders with only one account. • Few or ineffective management reports. • Trends in the credit score distribution toward higher-risk accounts. • High or increasing volume of consumer complaints. • Credit lines inconsistent with products offered or with the target market’s risk profile. • Trends showing marked changes in average assigned lines.
Granted, this is talking about risk factors within a lender's own portfolio, but if rapid closures are seen as a risk indicator on their own card, it stands to reason they also indicate risk when done with other cards/lenders.
Also, this analysis of new directions in underwriting by Experian (also a PDF) notes that scoring factors normally used in prospecting for marketing leads, such as "propensity to open a new account", can also be successfully used as predictors of risk.
So yes, underwriters are definitely looking at whether you tend to open a lot of accounts, or tend to close accounts too soon after opening them.
I sympathize with the concern about members of this forum often throwing out information without any citation or evidence, but I have also found that most of the information is solid and helpful even if it doesn't have footnotes. And I've observed that most of the time, if someone asserts something incorrect, someone else will speak up to correct it.
Ultimately, this is an informal discussion forum, so citing evidence for every claim is probably a higher bar than we can reasonably expect.
Every now and then, though, a big-time nerd like myself will still volunteer information like the documents cited in this post. 
@icyhot wrote:
As far as whether I *need* a higher CL, not at this moment, will be nice to see in the future. Most of the less recent accounts were a result of me getting a bunch of store cards since those were the only cards I could get approved for at the time. I had 3 major cards all sitting at 99% UTL, wanted more spending power because the concepts of PIF and only spending what I could pay back never entered my mind. Once I paid my cards down to zero, I wanted to get more cards, and to my misunderstanding thought that closing cards meant your AAOA would go up. So I went on a card closing spree. Then even after I learned better, I couldn't help but open cards on impulse and then close as soon as I realized they were of no use. Young and silly
I understand the urge you are talking about. It goes away after awhile. Once you have a number of cards you really like the urge to app for new cards isn't there unless its an oustanding deal etc. Its just earlier on there are soo many cards to desire. It will get easier with time.
;
@TheConductor wrote:
@Simba501 wrote:
@gdale6 wrote:A word of wisdom, underwriters cannot stand accounts that are opened then closed in a short period of time (6 months or less) a year or better is best before closing a card.
I am not disputing this, but what solid evidence do we have to support this? The forum so frequently tosses things around as common knowledge and fact.
This FDIC manual on credit card underwriting (PDF document) is a pretty good read if you're particularly curious about the process.
Among the wealth of information is this tidbit:
The following items might signal current or future elevated risk and, thus, might warrant follow-up: • Excessive or rapidly rising approval rates. • Frequent or substantial changes in underwriting criteria. • High employee turnover in the department. • High or increasing exception volumes. • Extremely low or non-existent exception volumes. • High or increasing volume of accounts closed shortly after booking. • Adverse performance of multiple account holders compared to cardholders with only one account. • Few or ineffective management reports. • Trends in the credit score distribution toward higher-risk accounts. • High or increasing volume of consumer complaints. • Credit lines inconsistent with products offered or with the target market’s risk profile. • Trends showing marked changes in average assigned lines.Granted, this is talking about risk factors within a lender's own portfolio, but if rapid closures are seen as a risk indicator on their own card, it stands to reason they also indicate risk when done with other cards/lenders.
Also, this analysis of new directions in underwriting by Experian (also a PDF) notes that scoring factors normally used in prospecting for marketing leads, such as "propensity to open a new account", can also be successfully used as predictors of risk.
So yes, underwriters are definitely looking at whether you tend to open a lot of accounts, or tend to close accounts too soon after opening them.
I sympathize with the concern about members of this forum often throwing out information without any citation or evidence, but I have also found that most of the information is solid and helpful even if it doesn't have footnotes. And I've observed that most of the time, if someone asserts something incorrect, someone else will speak up to correct it.
Ultimately, this is an informal discussion forum, so citing evidence for every claim is probably a higher bar than we can reasonably expect.
Every now and then, though, a big-time nerd like myself will still volunteer information like the documents cited in this post.
I don't find this (the first bit) AT ALL persuasive! The document is about how to examine a credit card operation. Cards being closed shortly after opening can be a sign that the process is going wrong, either because say, cards with high fees are being approved for people with lower incomes, or an underwriter is trying to meet quota by over-approving cards that the customers then can't use etc. In itself, this say nothing about whether a consumer frequently opening and closing a card is a sign of risk to an issuer
I agree that the propensity to OPEN a new account can be a sign of risk (and this is covered in FICO scoring to some extent) but not clear that then closing is bad. Now if you close so that you can get another card, sure.
@Simba501 wrote:
@gdale6 wrote:A word of wisdom, underwriters cannot stand accounts that are opened then closed in a short period of time (6 months or less) a year or better is best before closing a card.
I am not disputing this, but what solid evidence do we have to support this? The forum so frequently tosses things around as common knowledge and fact.
Here's my experience:
In 2014 I added the Delta Platinum card at $10k (had Delta Gold), got the sign up miles, then added the US Bank Travel Rewards at $17k to the two cards I already had with US Bank, and got the measly $50 bonus. I finished paying off a Chase card that was my oldest from 1998, and when they refused to reduce the APR from 29%, I closed it.
So in October, I eneded up closing all three of these cards, two of which were only a few months old. I did this to free up available credit space because the main thing about a closed credit card is, it is no longer "available credit" at that bank. I've also got several other closed cards in my file, from 2009-2011 time frame, and two of those closed cards that are still paying down balances.
Since then, I got another $10k card from US Bank, three other cards from AMEX at $10k-$15k each, while carrying an interest-charging balance on the Delta Gold card, two co-branded cards at Chase for $18k total, back in with Citi for $13k, added CapOne for $30k, and BofA for $17k.
The concerns about closing accounts, with the numbers we are talking about here, is overdone here. As long as the OP is using the cards that are open, and paying those within terms, the existence of closed accounts is a non-issue, except on a detailed manual review, which likely only turns up when someone calls for recon. Closed, zero balance accounts are not a credit risk for any bank. As long as the file is in good shape, then new approvals will happen.
Credit line increases are a different matter of course,because it depends on how the bank even allows CLI, but I would suggest that while the OP is letting the current (and closed) accounts age, don't worry about fully utilizing that Citi Forward $1k limit to get the dining benefits. Any utilization issues with a card that small are easily fixed by PIF the next month, so it's easy enough to lead up to potential apps. More importantly, Citi gets a front-row seat to heavy usage and good payment patterns, which will make the case for the CLI in 2016.
OP does need to wait, but it's more due to the volume of new apps and INQ, not the closed cards that are the issue here.
