I've been playing with requesting credit line decreases over the past two years and have found that it has not hindered my credit score or ability to acquire new CC's. Reasoning: I had been denied a new CC due to the fact the issuer felt I was at or exceeded my overall existing credit they felt comfortable with, total or within the issuers family. ,
By reqesting CLD's I have made room for adding additional CC's, especially within a single issuer. Also, I reduce or zero out the cash advance feature (note: many issuers don't allow for reducing the cash advance to zero, BUT, they can reduce the cash advance limit, often determined by a percentage of overall CL). I like to churn for SUB's for the ultimate return. I keep a core group of cards for the best return when not churning and for maintaining good age of credit. Separately, GC's, debit/checking/savings accounts interplay for further returns. I am not a big spender, only what's necessary, if I can use a card to finance a new checking account with SUB, better.
My guideline,
1. Keep at minimum one CC at an elevated CL for emergencies but also to demonstrate to issuers that you have that access. This card would be a general flat rate fee card with your best return. If traveling you might want to have a second one with no FTF's and as a backup.
2. For all other CC's set your CL accordingly, so as your normal max spend doesn't exceed 30% of your CL. If you exceed that number just pay part of it off early before end of billing cycle. This isn't set in stone, play with it, you can always lower again later after fullfilling the sub if keeping the card, so be conservative.
Example: Citi Custom Cash, 5% return on category most used, up to $500 spend per billing cycle, which is the number I know I'm not going to normally exceed, since I'll only designate and spend in one category . CL, 3 to 4 times of $500 spend, so $1500 to $2000 credit limit is all I need. Am I going to normally use $500 per month, probably never, other than during the initial spend for the SUB. (In fact, just checked, I have two Citi Custom Cash Cards set at CL of 1000 each, and I rarely go over $100 per billing cycle.) (Issuer gave me something like 15 to 20k to start CL, ridiculous)
3. Do not exceed the overall credit utilization of 9% for keeping a good Fico score, lower is better.
4. Do not carry a balance or seek to do so even at an introductory offer (At least not one you can't pay off immediately). You are in charge, don't let the issuer be in charge or give them the opportunity.
Note YMMV:
I have a long CC history with an exceptional Fico score maintained in high 700's. Don't fret over hard pulls or opening/closing accounts. These are minor hits that bounce back fast. SUB's are your greatest return, period. Use and abuse to whatever means you can. You will be surprised at how often issuers come back for more. To them it's just a numbers game. You control where you fall into those numbers. Be the exception. If an issuer won't let you play, move on to the next, more than enough issuers to keep you playing. Can always take a rest when you tire of it, reset.
Cheers, happy churning!!!
I'll try to update this outline as new information/experiences come to light. 9/9/24
Please feel free to respond with counter or pro arguments. Look forward to feed back.
edited on feedback from @Aim_High, thank you!!
I feel like you are the polar opposite to @Aim_High, lol.
You want more cards with low limits. That's a... different... approach. But hey, if it works for you 🤷♀️ we all have different tactics to the hobby.
Biz - 
Authorized User - 
Debit Cards - 
Note: As referenced by the footnote on the original posting, this reply was written before OP made numerous edits to that posting. Some changed parts of that original post include adding the 30% reference, bolding on normal, and paying it off early along with the example paragraph; added the 9% utilization reference; removed the 'never' from carrying a balance; modified the wording regarding SUB spending.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Well, that's one way to do it. 
There's <some> great universal advice that would apply to all of our membership, but there's also a lot I would not recommend to everyone. And some to no one.
I've had credit for over 40 years and I've never felt the need to voluntarily reduce a credit limit. Lenders have done it for me, at times, when I was under distress. But I can't say I've ever been denied a new card for having too high of a total revolving credit limit. Yes, I've heard of a handful of lenders out there who might do such a thing (First Tech CU comes to mind) but most do not. If a lender has felt I'm at a limit with total exposure with them, they have reallocated existing lines to approve a new one. That has happened with several major lenders for me in the past few years. When members ask if they should reduce an open credit limit voluntarily, I almost always tell them it's not necessary. Higher credit limits can be beneficial to credit scores and there may come a day when they will be needed. One of the only situations I would recommend reducing a credit limit is if someone reported they were having problems keeping themselves from over-spending.
Setting a credit limit at 2-3 times normal monthly spend isn't ideal for people who want to use their cards and pay them in full monthly. That means they will be running a 33% to 50% utilization in a normal month, and even higher in non-normal months. For optimizing FICO, keeping utilization between 1% and 8.9% is recommended. If someone told me they were running 50% utilization on their card regularly, I'd tell them they need a CLI or to add another card. I know we've had a few members simplify and voluntarily reduce their credit limits but I'm pretty sure they didn't choose such a low ratio on their cards.
Never carrying a balance is great ideal for which to strive; however, from practical experience, I know that it may sometimes be necessary. Life happens, and isn't that flexibility one reason we have credit cards in the first place? They are a tool to use for enhancing our finances. Sometimes, that may mean rewards or SUBs. But other times, we may need a hand-up. And if we do, that's okay too. So I'd soften on the "NEVER" advice.
It's true that hard pulls and new accounts do fade from an account. However, for younger and thinner profiles, the hits are harder than they are for an aged profile like yours. And I wouldn't call the aging truly fast, since it can take 12 months for a HP not to affect FICO while some lenders hold new accounts against you for 24 months. For someone with new credit, that is forever, not fast. I recommend to our members that a target of no more than one new account every six months allows good credit profile progression and minimizes denials or low limits. Don't be afraid of taking a hard pull or new account, but plan for it and respect the impact on FICO and credit file.
It's true that SUBs offer the potentially-highest rewards return on credit cards. Of course, the downside is what you describe where you're always remaking your credit lineup and in a constant state of change. We all have to choose where we want to fall on that spectrum between simplicity and highest rewards. Some of our members have downsized their profiles and make few if any changes or pursue few if any SUBs. Others like myself pursue the occasional SUB, but it's more for cards for which I find a long-term use and believe I might keep after evaluation. We have some on My FICO like yourself who more aggressively churn SUBs for short-term gain, but it's not a big part of our community. Nothing wrong with your doing that if you enjoy it and the lenders tolerate it, of course, but it comes at a cost of credit file stability and complexity that I just wouldn't recommend to many of our members, especially those new to credit or building/rebuilding. I have four credit cards that are between 24 and 31 years old which I still find very valuable for multiple reasons including the positive effect of age on FICO. Maintaining cards like that for the long-haul is difficult if a credit lineup is constantly changing.
Finally, I know you're fairly new to our forums (Welcome, by the way!) 
but this post and another recent one talks around the topic of MS. That is something we don't do on this forum and is against our Terms of Service. I know some other card forums openly discuss these topics, but My FICO prohibits us from doing it here.
- Discussion of illegal or unethical activities or providing links to other websites containing such information;
@unsungivy wrote:I feel like you are the polar opposite to @Aim_High, lol.
You want more cards with low limits. That's a... different... approach. But hey, if it works for you 🤷♀️ we all have different tactics to the hobby.
Too funny, @unsungivy! 
You replied and tagged me while I was typing my reply. Yes, very polar opposite to some of my strategy and advice, as I laid out above.
@unsungivy wrote:I feel like you are the polar opposite to @Aim_High, lol.
Unlike most of us, I suspect Aim_High has enough income and assets that the banks are not too worried about how much open credit he has available!🤣
@Aim_High wrote:Well, that's one way to do it.
I've had credit for over 40 years and I've never felt the need to voluntarily reduce a credit limit. Lenders have done it for me, at times, when I was under distress. But I can't say I've ever been denied a new card for having too high of a total revolving credit limit. Yes, I've heard of a handful of lenders out there who might do such a thing (First Tech CU comes to mind) but most do not. If a lender has felt I'm at a limit with total exposure with them, they have reallocated existing lines to approve a new one. That has happened with several major lenders for me in the past few years. When members ask if they should reduce an open credit limit voluntarily, I almost always tell them it's not necessary. Higher credit limits can be beneficial to credit scores and there may come a day when they will be needed. One of the only situations I would recommend reducing a credit limit is if someone reported they were having problems keeping themselves from over-spending.
Setting a credit limit at 2-3 times normal monthly spend isn't ideal for people who want to use their cards and pay them in full monthly. That means they will be running a 33% to 50% utilization in a normal month, and even higher in non-normal months. For optimizing FICO, keeping utilization between 1% and 8.9% is recommended. If someone told me they were running 50% utilization on their card regularly, I'd tell them they need a CLI or to add another card. I know we've had a few members simplify and voluntarily reduce their credit limits but I'm pretty sure they didn't choose such a low ratio on their cards.
Never carrying a balance is great ideal for which to strive; however, from practical experience, I know that it may sometimes be necessary. Life happens, and isn't that flexibility one reason we have credit cards in the first place? They are a tool to use for enhancing our finances. Sometimes, that may mean rewards or SUBs. But other times, we may need a hand-up. And if we do, that's okay too. So I'd soften on the "NEVER" advice.
It's true that hard pulls and new accounts do fade from an account. However, for younger and thinner profiles, the hits are harder than they are for an aged profile like yours. And I wouldn't call the aging truly fast, since it can take 12 months for a HP not to affect FICO while some lenders hold new accounts against you for 24 months. For someone with new credit, that is forever, not fast. I recommend to our members that a target of no more than one new account every six months allows good credit profile progression and minimizes denials or low limits. Don't be afraid of taking a hard pull or new account, but plan for it and respect the impact on FICO and credit file.
It's true that SUBs offer the potentially-highest rewards return on credit cards. Of course, the downside is what you describe where you're always remaking your credit lineup and in a constant state of change. We all have to choose where we want to fall on that spectrum between simplicity and highest rewards. Some of our members have downsized their profiles and make few if any changes or pursue few if any SUBs. Others like myself pursue the occasional SUB, but it's more for cards for which I find a long-term use and plan to keep. We have some on My FICO like yourself who more aggressively churn SUBs for short-term gain, but it's not a big part of our community. Nothing wrong with your doing that if you enjoy it and the lenders tolerate it, of course, but it comes at a cost of credit file stability and complexity that I just wouldn't recommend to many of our members, especially those new to credit or building/rebuilding. I have four credit cards that are between 24 and 31 years old which I still find very valuable for multiple reasons including the positive effect of age on FICO. Maintaining cards like that for the long-haul is difficult if a credit lineup is constantly changing.
Finally, I know you're fairly new to our forums (Welcome, by the way!)
- Discussion of illegal or unethical activities or providing links to other websites containing such information;
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback and welcome @Aim_High. I agree on the credit limit one would want to maintain so as to not go afoul of overall utiization, but individually it's not what I've experienced, more like 30% is okay. I wasn't stone set on this ratio and was still playing around with the perfect one, thank you. 2 to 3 times would of been the maximum spend, like for the SUB, not normal. But I can see where this number could be higher although I haven't noticed any hit to my credit score. As far as new accounts, I've done 6 in the last 4 months, 5 for subs and all seems well. Obviously a break is needed but they keep offering me new CC's, the issuers. Can't say no to a nice SUB.
As far as MA, my interpretation or means would only go so far as to use CC's to finance new checking accounts. Nothing nefarious. But I will be mindful of the rules set forth here in the forum. In fact, I'll just drop this terminology and go with the financing of checking accounts. I picked up this language from another members post here obviously not fully knowing it's meaning.
Cheers!!
@Aim_High wrote:
Finally, I know you're fairly new to our forums (Welcome, by the way!)
- Discussion of illegal or unethical activities or providing links to other websites containing such information;
This is another of those rules that has largely gone away since the moderator change.
@Anonymous wrote:
@Aim_High wrote:
Finally, I know you're fairly new to our forums (Welcome, by the way!)
- Discussion of illegal or unethical activities or providing links to other websites containing such information;
This is another of those rules that has largely gone away since the moderator change.
I wouldn't exactly say the rules have gone away. They are still present. It's just that this rule and some others are much less strictly enforced than they were previously since our moderators don't actively participate in the forums. It's like two small rural towns with a brief 30 mph zone. The one with a police presence gets a reputation to be taken seriously and the one without a police presence tends to become ignored. So at this point, absent a rules change, it's up to us to police ourselves to maintain the previous decorum. 
@Anonymous wrote:Requesting CLDs is a time-honoured approach for those who want to maximize AUTOMATED approvals, who want to avoid "eyes on the account" for whatever reason. This is certainly true for frequent churners, a human reviewer might take note of a pattern of new cards that soon don't have any reported balance, automated approval algorithms are often less fussy. As OP fits into this, it makes perfect sense.
Just as much as the opposite, the endless "growing" the cards for padding with no end in sight!
I see, @Anonymous. Something tells me the last sentence was directed at the approach of myself and some others on the forums. That's okay. I think I enjoy the high limits strategy as much as some enjoy churning or maximizing 5% rewards or finding low fixed APR cards or pushing a card collection into the hundreds. And I do have some rationale, beyond the pure gamesmanship of high limits. Most practically, for many years I didn't understand how much my utilizations were affecting my FICO and creditors. Once I understood more fully, I decided to basically blow that metric out of the water as far as possible so that it would never count against me again. Revenge? Perhaps, but I see it more as protection and being smart. Secondly, I'm in my high earning years and approaching retirement. My limits were much lower before I started aggressively pushing them. My goal is to have many high limit cards and lenders for financial flexibility in retirement where I may have more difficulty qualifying for high limits once my income is lower. Third, of course, is that it's fun to see how far I can push each limit and learn more about each lender's limitations, which I can report back to the community for data points.