No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Hello all...
I believe that the inquiries for credit apps that end in denials should be soft pulls. I don't think this would harm lenders, since they are not extending any credit. It would certainly benefit the consumer. I think most people are apprehensive in applying for credit in fear of the denial and the hard pull penalty for 2 years. Perhaps, even having the hard pull lasting one year instead of 2 would be beneficial. Granted, if you are offered the credit and accept, a hard pull seems justified under the current rules. Soft pulls exist, so I see no harm in utilizing them with the exception of approvals. Thanks for any clarification if I am not taking some parameter into consideration.
You're preaching to the choir, here. Those with reliable preapproval go along with this idea. I guess amex is the best, once you're in, no hps.
Too bad bumpage doesn't work anymore.


























@FicoMike0 wrote:You're preaching to the choir, here. Those with reliable preapproval go along with this idea. I guess amex is the best, once you're in, no hps.
Sometimes the choir is the only one that will listen...lol.
So, in Jurassic Park, the gamekeeper was really watching the animals that were probing the fences looking for breaks and weaknesses. The ones that just grazed all day by the lake were not concening. Isn't that what the HP ding does for lenders? It tells them the ones that are dangerous, vicious, and clever? They are more risky because they are probing the boundaries?
Oh, who am I kidding. I don't know what I'm talking about. I just thought the analogy might work.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()

FICO® 8: 844 (Eq) · 838 (Ex) · 812 (TU)
@indiolatino61 wrote:Perhaps, even having the hard pull lasting one year instead of 2 would be beneficial.
Hard pulls stay on your report for 2 years but everything I've read here says they only affect FICO scores for 1 year.
Denials should absolutely remain as HPs. Credit seeking is a huge red flag and indicator of deteriorating finances.
@dfwxjer wrote:Denials should absolutely remain as HPs. Credit seeking is a huge red flag and indicator of deteriorating finances.
It's not that black and white. I am seeking a couple of new cards not because my finances are deteriorating but rather because I want more cash back. Fidelity 2% > Quicksilver 1.5%, Max Cash 5% > Voice 3.15%.
By your logic everyone should only have one card: the very first card they ever started with.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()

FICO® 8: 844 (Eq) · 838 (Ex) · 812 (TU)
@dfwxjer wrote:Denials should absolutely remain as HPs. Credit seeking is a huge red flag and indicator of deteriorating finances.
This is the reason it would never happen. Hard pull denials are one of the few ways lenders can detect credit seeking.
@Varsity_Lu wrote:It's not that black and white. I am seeking a couple of new cards not because my finances are deteriorating but rather because I want more cash back.
It's not your 2 HPs they're worried about. It's the guy with 25 HPs last month with 24 denials. Without the HPs, this huge red flag would be invisible to them. It just looks like a dude who got one credit card instead of dude frantically seeking any and all credit he can get his hands on.
@Patient957 wrote:
It's not your 2 HPs they're worried about. It's the guy with 25 HPs last month with 24 denials. Without the HPs, this huge red flag would be invisible to them. It just looks like a dude who got one credit card instead of dude frantically seeking any and all credit he can get his hands on.
I completely agree with you. My example was just trying to point out the fallacy in his logic.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()

FICO® 8: 844 (Eq) · 838 (Ex) · 812 (TU)