@Anonymous wrote:Yes indeed. If real TD end up being widely reported by all CC issuers (which would include the amount paid each month) then CC issuers would absolutely use them to detect which customers have little or perhaps even negative profitability. Though it's worth observing that a particular CC issuer has always had the ability to detect people who had established unprofitable behavior with its own cards, and yet they still kept approving these people for more cards and signup bonuses. I've always been a big baffled by that, but whatever.
I think it is highly unlikely that Trended Data will be picked up by any significant banks. It is a marketing ploy by FICO and the credit bureaus to try to get the banks to pay for "more quality" information.
The flaw in the marketing is, the larger banks have the ability to track their own customers. I've been with Citi and BofA for a very long time. They've seen my payment history. They are not phased when i take a $7k balance transfer.
Banks that would prefer you do not carry a balance, such as AMEX, simply make it more difficult to do so. In certain cases I have gotten promotional interest rates, but getting a balance transfer onto AMEX is impossible after the first few months with selected cards. Why does AMEX need Trended Data reports if they don't have to decide whether a customer will be a Transactor or Debtor? If the cardholder runs up some balance AMEX doesn't like, they use a CLD to limit their risk. For the most part, they just only allow people to be Transactors, or else very profitable Debtors.
Thus, any attempt by cardholders today to try to game "transactor status" for possible future use, is a waste of time. What would be the outcome? You think you would get a card you otherwise would not, just because you have a pattern of "Transactor" ? I really doubt it will make any difference at all.
Trended data is history. Future activity, and current risk, and the possibility of a profitable customer are what banks look for.
If a bank really cares about making their customers be more like a Transactor, you would see more banks acting like AMEX. Barclays may be a faux Transactor bank, due to their quick reaction to any carried balances. So there you go, rather than pay FICO extra for "Trended Data" that is Swiss Cheese today and for the forseeable future, a bank will simply react to the situation with the actual cardholder, once the cardholder joins their ranks.
Intersting discussion, lots of theories, but really not going to go anywhere significant in the future. Sorry 
@Anonymous wrote:
@NRB525 wrote:Trended data is history. Future activity, and current risk, and the possibility of a profitable customer are what banks look for.
But isn't a Transactor a lock in terms of profitability? While they may not generate the most profit in dollars for a lender, relative to their risk (which is as close to zero as you can get without being zero) they are extremely profitable.
Sure, low risk, as iv pointed out above. What was the NFL coach's saying? "No Risk It, No Biskit".
Now think about it from the side of the bank where this Transactor is Transacting. In the current world, the bank, call it Bank A, knows this customer trends toward Transactor status. May even pay before statement cuts. This person is a low risk customer, and the bank knows it from their own data.
Why would Bank A choose to broadcast that to Bank B and Bank C? Bank B and Bank C are then more likely to try to poach this customer from Bank A, so what interest does Bank A have in broadcasting that information? Bank A wants to grow their relationship with this Transactor Customer, not give them away to the world.