@wacdenney wrote:You guys know there are credit cards designed for carrying balances that start out with low APRs right. With no need to call in asking over and over...
You are negating the benefits of your rewards cards by carrying a balance. It's a waste of time working this hard to fit a square peg into a round hole. Just get a round peg...
I think you're wrongly assuming people are doing this to carry balances. I know that I'm not.
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:You guys know there are credit cards designed for carrying balances that start out with low APRs right. With no need to call in asking over and over...
You are negating the benefits of your rewards cards by carrying a balance. It's a waste of time working this hard to fit a square peg into a round hole. Just get a round peg...
I think you're wrongly assuming people are doing this to carry balances. I know that I'm not.
So if you do not carry a balance then what difference does it make what the rate is? What are these lower rates being applied to? What is the difference between 8% of 0 and 19.9% of 0?
I gladly concede that I am likely wrong, but what I'm asking is to understand where I'm going wrong.
It matters because it matters to me. There doesn't have to be a reasoning behind it. 
I just want to see if it's possible. I don't understand the confusion regarding why people are doing this. And I don't carry balances on cards that don't have a 0% rate.. let's be clear on that. Didn't say I didn't carry balances. And there is no difference regarding the two. I realize that I give myself a 0% rate when I PIF. It's just a curiosity to see what would be the result of asking for the APR reduction.
You don't have to be right/wrong.. there is no right/wrong here. It's simply different ways that people manage their profile. That's it. 
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:You guys know there are credit cards designed for carrying balances that start out with low APRs right. With no need to call in asking over and over...
You are negating the benefits of your rewards cards by carrying a balance. It's a waste of time working this hard to fit a square peg into a round hole. Just get a round peg...
I think you're wrongly assuming people are doing this to carry balances. I know that I'm not.
So if you do not carry a balance then what difference does it make what the rate is? What are these lower rates being applied to? What is the difference between 8% of 0 and 19.9% of 0?
I gladly concede that I am likely wrong, but what I'm asking is to understand where I'm going wrong.
It matters because it matters to me. There doesn't have to be a reasoning behind it.
You don't have to be right/wrong.. there is no right/wrong here. It's simply different ways that people manage their profile. That's it.
The confusion is coming in because it doesn't really make any sense. What sparks a curiosity in one person may or may not in another and like you mentioned, there doesn't seem to be any reasoning behind it which further contributes to making it confusing.
I was more directly addressing the cards being discussed in the thread. The assumption that a balance was being carried was directly related to the focus on the APR. Obviously an APR reduction wouldn't be possible on a card with a 0% intro APR. You can't get a negative APR.
Also, I think your assertion that I was wrong was applied specifically to my assumption. Your assertion is correct. I was wrongly assuming if all these people were worried about their APR that they must be carrying balances.
So ok. Thank you for your responces. Either feel good stuffs or curiosities is easy enough to understand. It just seems like a lot of people and a lot of pages over something like this but I concede that it's not exactly unusual. There is thread after thread about World and Signature cards also with just as many people seeking them that do not use the benefits. I myself seek CLIs that I do not really need on a regular basis with only minimal utilization benefits. It helps keep me from getting bored and apping. Maybe that is another benefit of seeking lower APRs? A diversion to help keep people in the garden. That would make a lot more sense to me personally.
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:You guys know there are credit cards designed for carrying balances that start out with low APRs right. With no need to call in asking over and over...
You are negating the benefits of your rewards cards by carrying a balance. It's a waste of time working this hard to fit a square peg into a round hole. Just get a round peg...
I think you're wrongly assuming people are doing this to carry balances. I know that I'm not.
So if you do not carry a balance then what difference does it make what the rate is? What are these lower rates being applied to? What is the difference between 8% of 0 and 19.9% of 0?
I gladly concede that I am likely wrong, but what I'm asking is to understand where I'm going wrong.
It matters because it matters to me. There doesn't have to be a reasoning behind it.
You don't have to be right/wrong.. there is no right/wrong here. It's simply different ways that people manage their profile. That's it.
The confusion is coming in because it doesn't really make any sense. What sparks a curiosity in one person may or may not in another and like you mentioned, there doesn't seem to be any reasoning behind it which further contributes to making it confusing.
I was more directly addressing the cards being discussed in the thread. The assumption that a balance was being carried was directly related to the focus on the APR. Obviously an APR reduction wouldn't be possible on a card with a 0% intro APR. You can't get a negative APR.
Also, I think your assertion that I was wrong was applied specifically to my assumption. Your assertion is correct. I was wrongly assuming if all these people were worried about their APR that they must be carrying balances.
So ok. Thank you for your responces. Either feel good stuffs or curiosities is easy enough to understand. It just seems like a lot of people and a lot of pages over something like this but I concede that it's not exactly unusual. There is thread after thread about World and Signature cards also with just as many people seeking them that do not use the benefits. I myself seek CLIs that I do not really need on a regular basis with only minimal utilization benefits. It helps keep me from getting bored and apping. Maybe that is another benefit of seeking lower APRs? A diversion to help keep people in the garden. That would make a lot more sense to me personally.
I don't carry any balances but I may need to carry multiple balances in the future. Lower APR is never a bad thing.
@Kostya1992 wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:You guys know there are credit cards designed for carrying balances that start out with low APRs right. With no need to call in asking over and over...
You are negating the benefits of your rewards cards by carrying a balance. It's a waste of time working this hard to fit a square peg into a round hole. Just get a round peg...
I think you're wrongly assuming people are doing this to carry balances. I know that I'm not.
So if you do not carry a balance then what difference does it make what the rate is? What are these lower rates being applied to? What is the difference between 8% of 0 and 19.9% of 0?
I gladly concede that I am likely wrong, but what I'm asking is to understand where I'm going wrong.
It matters because it matters to me. There doesn't have to be a reasoning behind it.
You don't have to be right/wrong.. there is no right/wrong here. It's simply different ways that people manage their profile. That's it.
The confusion is coming in because it doesn't really make any sense. What sparks a curiosity in one person may or may not in another and like you mentioned, there doesn't seem to be any reasoning behind it which further contributes to making it confusing.
I was more directly addressing the cards being discussed in the thread. The assumption that a balance was being carried was directly related to the focus on the APR. Obviously an APR reduction wouldn't be possible on a card with a 0% intro APR. You can't get a negative APR.
Also, I think your assertion that I was wrong was applied specifically to my assumption. Your assertion is correct. I was wrongly assuming if all these people were worried about their APR that they must be carrying balances.
So ok. Thank you for your responces. Either feel good stuffs or curiosities is easy enough to understand. It just seems like a lot of people and a lot of pages over something like this but I concede that it's not exactly unusual. There is thread after thread about World and Signature cards also with just as many people seeking them that do not use the benefits. I myself seek CLIs that I do not really need on a regular basis with only minimal utilization benefits. It helps keep me from getting bored and apping. Maybe that is another benefit of seeking lower APRs? A diversion to help keep people in the garden. That would make a lot more sense to me personally.
I don't carry any balances but I may need to carry multiple balances in the future. Lower APR is never a bad thing.
No not at all. I don't mean to imply that there is any negative impact that would result from a lower APR. Only that if the intention is indeed to hedge against the desire or need to carry a balance at some point that it would make more sense to just add an appropriate card to your portfolio.
I'm honestly not opposed to whatever method of credit management anyone decides to pursue. Whatever works for you is what's best for you as far as I'm concerned. I just get confused every time I see threads like this and I see them all the time.
To each their own and I'm not here to judge. I was just trying to understand. Do what you do and I wish you all the best of luck and good fortune in your endevors!
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kostya1992 wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:
@Kenny wrote:
@wacdenney wrote:You guys know there are credit cards designed for carrying balances that start out with low APRs right. With no need to call in asking over and over...
You are negating the benefits of your rewards cards by carrying a balance. It's a waste of time working this hard to fit a square peg into a round hole. Just get a round peg...
I think you're wrongly assuming people are doing this to carry balances. I know that I'm not.
So if you do not carry a balance then what difference does it make what the rate is? What are these lower rates being applied to? What is the difference between 8% of 0 and 19.9% of 0?
I gladly concede that I am likely wrong, but what I'm asking is to understand where I'm going wrong.
It matters because it matters to me. There doesn't have to be a reasoning behind it.
You don't have to be right/wrong.. there is no right/wrong here. It's simply different ways that people manage their profile. That's it.
The confusion is coming in because it doesn't really make any sense. What sparks a curiosity in one person may or may not in another and like you mentioned, there doesn't seem to be any reasoning behind it which further contributes to making it confusing.
I was more directly addressing the cards being discussed in the thread. The assumption that a balance was being carried was directly related to the focus on the APR. Obviously an APR reduction wouldn't be possible on a card with a 0% intro APR. You can't get a negative APR.
Also, I think your assertion that I was wrong was applied specifically to my assumption. Your assertion is correct. I was wrongly assuming if all these people were worried about their APR that they must be carrying balances.
So ok. Thank you for your responces. Either feel good stuffs or curiosities is easy enough to understand. It just seems like a lot of people and a lot of pages over something like this but I concede that it's not exactly unusual. There is thread after thread about World and Signature cards also with just as many people seeking them that do not use the benefits. I myself seek CLIs that I do not really need on a regular basis with only minimal utilization benefits. It helps keep me from getting bored and apping. Maybe that is another benefit of seeking lower APRs? A diversion to help keep people in the garden. That would make a lot more sense to me personally.
I don't carry any balances but I may need to carry multiple balances in the future. Lower APR is never a bad thing.
No not at all. I don't mean to imply that there is any negative impact that would result from a lower APR. Only that if the intention is indeed to hedge against the desire or need to carry a balance at some point that it would make more sense to just add an appropriate card to your portfolio.
I'm honestly not opposed to whatever method of credit management anyone decides to pursue. Whatever works for you is what's best for you as far as I'm concerned. I just get confused every time I see threads like this and I see them all the time.
To each their own and I'm not here to judge. I was just trying to understand. Do what you do and I wish you all the best of luck and good fortune in your endeavors!
Yeah, I definitely don't connect an account having a lower APR to a higher likelihood to carry a balance for me personally. Possibly at the beginning of my building of my credit, but at this point.. there is no reason that I should ever carry a balance unless it's a 0% rate with no fee. I can understand that promoting this for every user might send the wrong message, but definitely not trying to promote any of that. Just sharing my own experience. I like to have the best APR available. That's just me as a Type A personality.. if I can work on it, I'm going to work on trying to make something that I have better if it's possible/somewhat easy to do.
My ideal credit portfolio is a few cards with high limits and lowest possible APRs.
