Originally Posted by
jackal
Anyone considered the possibility that it's just their own stupidity--that is, their systems aren't set up to detect or prevent it?
I mean, we all take advantage of loopholes with airlines and other providers because they're just too big to notice the little things we can do...I'd assume the same could be true of a giant bank.
Another possibility is that they haven't found a cost-effective way to do it, given the several types of cards that they do want you to get. They currently allow only one bonus per account, and it would be "too drastic" for them to allow only one bonus per customer, but they havent' figured out a good in-between restriction that they can communicate clearly.
It's simpler at Chase: For UA, you either get the UA Visa or nothing. So it's easy for them to say "if you had a UA card before, you won't get another bonus."
But AA has MC
and Amex
and (if you look hard enough!) also Visa, and they want you try
each of these. And coming up with legal language which entices users to try each of these while only allowing them to try
one of each of these is an issue.
There's already enough confusion at other programs about Platinum vs World vs Signature, and whether the bonuses can be gotten just
once more when they introduce a new "degree" of the same type of card. Citi may realize that wording such as Chase's cuts down on appllications by people who say "I won't bother, I might not get a bonus", and figures the lost customers with Chase-type language would cost them more than the churners currently do.
Meanwhile, Citi's lawyers are probably too busy with other stuff to spend much of their time figuring out how to come up with clear lanuage about when you would and wouldn't get the bonus.
Also, there are seemingly fewer and fewer humans available to deal with this. Every month more is done by automation. The computers decide who gets a new card, the computers decide how much they get, and the humans are dwindling so much they don't even spend time to pitch add-on products as much any more! (I guess they found the return on add-on products wasn't worth the extra minute per card activation call?) It's remarkable that card activation still involves a human (but for how many more months) when at other card companies that too is automatic.
Finally, keep open the possibilty that Citi may have found that churners are more loyal. The close relationship between the amount of cards you can get by churning only Citi and the point at which your inquiries in 6 months max out is very tight. So Citi may have realized that this keeps people from applying for as many cards from the competition. (Look at how many posts -- even threads -- there have been in the Other Credits Forum about stuff like "can you still apply for a Chase card if you're churning Citi?"!)