Originally Posted by shoodawg

Why do you doubt such a thing? Why would AA not want to sell those additional miles to a second bank?

Originally Posted by ffflllyyyeeerrr

Not at all true. This is how a lazy programmer would implement it.

Originally Posted by Col Ronson

Sabre is older than most people here; i wouldn't say lazy more like extremely old and limited computer system. And why should they program it to stack benefits? i doubt they intended the benefits to be stackable otherwise anyone could just get 10 credit cards and get 100% of their miles back everytime... lol

Originally Posted by sdsearch

Btw, there is more than one way that this benefit could theoretically be stackable. While neither seems likely to me, keep in mind that it could be a stacking of the 100k cap, rather than a stacking of the 10%. Ie, it could be 10% back on a max of 100k if you have one bank's card, but 10% back on a max of 200k if you have both banks' cards. That would be a stacking that fewer people would run into or be able to take advantage of, and so that might be a stacking they'd be less opposed to.

Originally Posted by sdsearch

I extremely doubt it.

You need to understand how the computer programming works on such automatically-given benefits, and then you'd see why they won't stack.

Here is how the code currently works at AA with the Citi AA cards:

There is a Boolean (yes/no) variable called something like "10_percent_rebate_enabled".

It gets initialied to "no" when an AA account is created (or when this feature was first added, for older AA accounts).

If it sees you've got a Citi AA card, it sets that variable to "yes".

If it sees you've got another Citi AA card, it again sets that variable to "yes". (It can't set it to "more yes"; the only possible states for the variable are "yes" or "no".)

Ie, there's no addition involved; however many cards you have, they all set the same variable to "yes".

In turn, once you redeem miles, it checks that variable, and if it's set to "yes", it gives you the 10% bonus (limited to the 10k cap); if it's set to "no", it doesn't.

And thus there's nothing else for a Barclay card to do but set that very same variable to "yes". And have the same effect as a second or third or fourth Citi AA card setting it to "yes".

That's the way any decent programmer would implement it, that's clearly the way it's implemented for Citi AA cards, and I see no reason for it to be implemented any other way when Barclay AA cards come into the mix.

Originally Posted by shadesofgrey1x

The question here , which I am presenting is since Barclays and Citi are two different entities would each give you 10% with a total between the 2 of 20K?

Originally Posted by shadesofgrey1x

Well they could use something like



if Citi_rebatecardholder = TRUE then
max_citi_rebate:=10;

else

max_citi_rebate:=0;

endif;

if barclay_rebatecardholder = TRUE then
max_barclay_rebate:=10;

else

max_barclay_rebate:=0;

endif;

max_total_rebate:=max_citi_rebate+max_barclay_reba te;

Originally Posted by sdsearch

It's AA, not the cards, that give you the rebate. The cards just enable the rebate. (For example, you don't have to pay the fees on the award booking with the enabling card to get the rebate.)

Originally Posted by Stripy

Are you sure about this? I always thought that the miles were purchased from AA by the card issuers (and therefore given to the CC holder by the card issuer via AA). Why would these miles work in a different way to the sign up miles one can collect?

Originally Posted by sdsearch

I wasn't talking about who pays for it, I was talking about who actually puts it in your account. It's AA who does, whether you used a Citi card for the fees on that award redemption or not. There's no way that AA notices an award redemption, sends it to Citi, Citi calculates 10%, sends it back to AA. It's all handled within AA, simply based on you having (not you using) a Citi AA card.

Now, AA may (on a monthly, or yearly, or whatever) basis take all those 10% rebates, add them up, and then deduct them from Citi's miles account, who knows. But that's irrelevant to how it posts, and how it posts is the only issue relevant to the question in this thread, whether the upcoming Barclay's 10% benefit would "stack" in any way with Citi's existing 10% benefit.

But, if you want to focus on it, here's an issue: What if these don't stack, and either a Barclay AA card and/or a Citi AA card enable this feature. Since you don't have to use either card on the award reservation to get the rebate, to which bank would AA attribute the rebate cost, if you have both the Barclay AA and Citi AA cards? So the very fact that AA has agreed to Barclay also having an AA card (even if only "grandfathered") makes me wonder if Citi pays anything for these rebates.