No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
@Anonymous wrote:
Seems like everyone is getting rid of price protection.
Perhaps they were worried about an influx of "benefit vampires" (like myself) from other banks.
They also may have wanted to get rid of it for a while, and decided the best time to do so is when other banks are dropping it, too.
As long as they don't mess with the rewards on the Limitless Visa!
Just kidding, I know any benefit nerf is lousy, and I'm glad two of the three changes were customer-positive.
@UncleB wrote:As long as they don't mess with the rewards on the Limitless Visa!
Just kidding, I know any benefit nerf is lousy, and I'm glad two of the three changes were customer-positive.
What was the old limit on the car value? And how are they defining "exotic"?
@wasCB14 wrote:
@UncleB wrote:As long as they don't mess with the rewards on the Limitless Visa!
Just kidding, I know any benefit nerf is lousy, and I'm glad two of the three changes were customer-positive.
What was the old limit on the car value? And how are they defining "exotic"?
I'll have to defer to someone else on that, since I never bothered to check before.
The only things I use their cards for are the cash rewards and the occasional BT promo.
@FinStar wrote:
That's one card I wish would have been available or expanded to most markets, but I digress 😜 I would trade any of my 2 USAA CCs for that one!
@UncleB, you so lucky with that Limitless!
LOL... yep, for once I actually timed things just right!
Ironically, since I got the card in early 2017 I've often been either working on a sign-up bonus for another card or I have another card that beats it slightly, so I haven't use it as often as I had expected.
I did use it recently for some impromptu car work (tires and brakes), which is a category I don't have covered by a card with a higher rewards rate.
I never quite understood the rationale that price protection should be axed for "low usage". Is it because the third party claims administrator charges a fixed fee for handling all that back-end operations and so it's not economical when the bank has to pay for the service but no one uses it? I'm assuming the cost structure is something like cost of the actual claim payouts plus a fixed percentage or fee for the overhead?