Originally Posted by
sdsearch
Have you considered that maybe it's actually:
Why doesn't EQ price its pulls competitvely with EXP?
Ie, it could simply be that EXP has the best pricing for hard pulls. It's not a free service, and i see no reason to expect it to always be the same price from every supplier. (I also see no reason for a bank to use the most expensive bureau for pulls if they can use the least expensive one.)
In fact, there've been very strange quirks in pull patterns in the past because of pricing quirks. Some years ago, Citi used to get a "bulk" price on N pulls from bureau A per month, and so early in the month they would always use bureau A. But they typically used up their quota of N pulls at that price before the month was out, so for the rest of the month they'd use bureau B (which gave them a better "piecemeal" price for pulls). Then the next month the same pattern would repeat. (I'm not sure if this happened everywhere or only in certain states. Nor am I sure how many years this went on.)
interesting. is this based on public knowledge/fact or just speculation?
never thought about that part of the equation. does that mean Barclays and BofA get cheap pulls/good rates from TU then? if so its hard to see why other banks wouldnt get similar deals if not bundles since we are fairly early in the month here.
I wonder what EQs pricing structure is -- to the extent that no one ever seems to use em. well cept Chase when they pull 2 etc.