Citi AA Platinum, Gold and Business cards (2015)
Aug 1, 2015, 2:48 pm
#1981
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,767
65 days is safer than 60 (since Citi can't count correctly), but you're ok, 65 days is only the timing to your third application from your first application. The minimum timing for your second application from your first application is 8 days.
Or put another way:
No more than 1 application in any 8 day period.
No more than 2 applications in any 65 day period.
Since you only have one application in the past 65 days and zero applications in the past 8 days, you sound good to go for another Citi application right now.
Or put another way:
No more than 1 application in any 8 day period.
No more than 2 applications in any 65 day period.
Since you only have one application in the past 65 days and zero applications in the past 8 days, you sound good to go for another Citi application right now.
Aug 1, 2015, 11:59 pm
#1982
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,632
EDIT: There are now two new 50K business card landing pages with an expiration date of 10/31/15 (which date should probably be taken seriously at this point):
http://creditcards.citicards.com/usc...cards4&BT_TX=1
with a new app page:
https://www.citicards.com/cards/cred...MA&B=A&ID=3006
And another landing page:
http://creditcards.citicards.com/usc...cards5&BT_TX=1
with slightly different app page:
https://www.citicards.com/cards/cred...MA&B=A&ID=3006
It's too late at night for me to edit the wiki and get it right. I hope another kind soul will add these.
Last edited by SeeBuyFly; Aug 2, 2015 at 12:32 am
Aug 2, 2015, 5:34 am
#1983
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: home = LAX
Posts: 25,934
Has been proven not necessary. Read back the posts of successes and the explanation from IkeEsq who said the 8 days might be just a creation. Definitely not on the same day for more than 1, but definitely no need to be 8 days apart. Go back to find the small discussion a couple weeks or more ago.
The whole 8 days is a "Citi can't count" buffer addition from 7 days, first of all, just like 65 days is a "Citi can't count" buffer addition from 60 days.
Isn't it simpler to explain what always has worked, than to every time mention one or two exceptions?
How is "not same day, but not 8 days" useful guidance for someone who wants to be sure that they'll not be denied for applications too close together? It seems like a distinction without a purpose. If you're not going to replace "8" with a proven definite lower number, I don't see the point of saying "it might not always be that long". We all always knew it might not always be that long, because of the fact that it was padded to deal with Citi's intermittent counting problems! But we didn't know of a better number to super-safely provide.
How do you know that those exceptions (like the person who got it after 5 days) weren't just Citi's counting problems in reverse???
If Citi can't count, why should we expect that it's only one direction in which they count wrong?(In case you've forgotten, there were documented cases of people getting denied at at least 62 days for "no more than 2 cards in any 60 day period". That's where the whole "Citi can't count" thing started as I recall, but they've demonstrated they can't count in other ways since.)
Last edited by sdsearch; Aug 2, 2015 at 5:41 am
Aug 2, 2015, 7:06 am
#1984
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: On strike
Posts: 8,135
Has been proven not necessary. Read back the posts of successes and the explanation from IkeEsq who said the 8 days might be just a creation. Definitely not on the same day for more than 1, but definitely no need to be 8 days apart. Go back to find the small discussion a couple weeks or more ago.
Aug 2, 2015, 7:31 am
#1985
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,055
The 60-day rule is well documented, as is the 90-day rule for business cards. There are tons of data points on both of them over the course of years.
The '7-day' rule was completely made up . . . by me. It was based on a simple experiment that my wife and I performed in order to figure out what Citi's latest rule was. We knew that you could not do two applications in the same day anymore and we figured out that 24 hours did not work either. So I applied after 2 days (6/29/2013 and 7/1/2013) and my wife applied after 8 days (7/2/2013 and 7/10/2013). We both got the first card and she got the second but I was denied the second.
To my knowledge, between then and reasonably recently, no one has tested and documented the range between 2-8 days. So, generally we tell people that you should be fine after 7/8 days, just like we tack on a few days to the 60/90-day rules, but it is not a solid rule based on lots of data points. So saying that there are now some 'exceptions' to this rule makes no sense because we never really knew what Citi's magic number of days between applications was.
The '7-day' rule was completely made up . . . by me. It was based on a simple experiment that my wife and I performed in order to figure out what Citi's latest rule was. We knew that you could not do two applications in the same day anymore and we figured out that 24 hours did not work either. So I applied after 2 days (6/29/2013 and 7/1/2013) and my wife applied after 8 days (7/2/2013 and 7/10/2013). We both got the first card and she got the second but I was denied the second.
To my knowledge, between then and reasonably recently, no one has tested and documented the range between 2-8 days. So, generally we tell people that you should be fine after 7/8 days, just like we tack on a few days to the 60/90-day rules, but it is not a solid rule based on lots of data points. So saying that there are now some 'exceptions' to this rule makes no sense because we never really knew what Citi's magic number of days between applications was.
"Definitely"? I don't remember a zillion data points, I remember one or two exceptions.
The whole 8 days is a "Citi can't count" buffer addition from 7 days, first of all, just like 65 days is a "Citi can't count" buffer addition from 60 days.
Isn't it simpler to explain what always has worked, than to every time mention one or two exceptions?
How is "not same day, but not 8 days" useful guidance for someone who wants to be sure that they'll not be denied for applications too close together? It seems like a distinction without a purpose. If you're not going to replace "8" with a proven definite lower number, I don't see the point of saying "it might not always be that long". We all always knew it might not always be that long, because of the fact that it was padded to deal with Citi's intermittent counting problems! But we didn't know of a better number to super-safely provide.
How do you know that those exceptions (like the person who got it after 5 days) weren't just Citi's counting problems in reverse??? If Citi can't count, why should we expect that it's only one direction in which they count wrong?
(In case you've forgotten, there were documented cases of people getting denied at at least 62 days for "no more than 2 cards in any 60 day period". That's where the whole "Citi can't count" thing started as I recall, but they've demonstrated they can't count in other ways since.)
The whole 8 days is a "Citi can't count" buffer addition from 7 days, first of all, just like 65 days is a "Citi can't count" buffer addition from 60 days.
Isn't it simpler to explain what always has worked, than to every time mention one or two exceptions?
How is "not same day, but not 8 days" useful guidance for someone who wants to be sure that they'll not be denied for applications too close together? It seems like a distinction without a purpose. If you're not going to replace "8" with a proven definite lower number, I don't see the point of saying "it might not always be that long". We all always knew it might not always be that long, because of the fact that it was padded to deal with Citi's intermittent counting problems! But we didn't know of a better number to super-safely provide.
How do you know that those exceptions (like the person who got it after 5 days) weren't just Citi's counting problems in reverse???
If Citi can't count, why should we expect that it's only one direction in which they count wrong?(In case you've forgotten, there were documented cases of people getting denied at at least 62 days for "no more than 2 cards in any 60 day period". That's where the whole "Citi can't count" thing started as I recall, but they've demonstrated they can't count in other ways since.)
Aug 2, 2015, 7:39 am
#1986
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: On strike
Posts: 8,135
In connection with that, I'm thinking it may be time to slightly modify the organization of the links in the wiki. For a very long time, links for personal and business 50K offers have all been commingled in a single section. One disadvantage of this arrangement is that business card links, which tend to be fewer in number, are harder for inexperienced readers to find, especially when they are buried at the very end of the list.
As a result, I'm wondering whether it makes sense to split out the 50K business card offers into a separately labeled subsection. In turn, that presents a question about how to label/enumerate offers in any such separate section. We could do this in a number of ways:
- Add a letter prefix (P or B) to avoid having 2 links with identical labels.
- In the alternative, start labeling business card offers in their own separate section using letters instead of numbers. Once you reach Z, restart the series with AA and so on.
- The current system is fine. Don't change a thing.
Thoughts? Feel free to PM me if you wish instead of posting comments to the thread.
Aug 2, 2015, 9:36 am
#1987
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,055
I think splitting them up is a good idea, I think it used to be setup that way.
I am not sure if we really need to number links anymore as they are all basically the same terms. It made sense when things were changing around the beginning of this year because some had 18-month language and others did not. Now, all the language is the same.
If we want to continue numbering, just continue numbering personal apps, with a following letter to differentiate subsequent app pages, and use letters for business apps (leave the current one as 15), with a following number to differentiate subsequent app pages.
Either way, we can probably * the existing two paragraphs under each personal app as they are all the same and just put a footnote at the bottom of the section. That should make all of the apps fit on one page and make it easier to find things.
Ike
I am not sure if we really need to number links anymore as they are all basically the same terms. It made sense when things were changing around the beginning of this year because some had 18-month language and others did not. Now, all the language is the same.
If we want to continue numbering, just continue numbering personal apps, with a following letter to differentiate subsequent app pages, and use letters for business apps (leave the current one as 15), with a following number to differentiate subsequent app pages.
Either way, we can probably * the existing two paragraphs under each personal app as they are all the same and just put a footnote at the bottom of the section. That should make all of the apps fit on one page and make it easier to find things.
Ike
I will update the wiki with these in the next day or two.
In connection with that, I'm thinking it may be time to slightly modify the organization of the links in the wiki. For a very long time, links for personal and business 50K offers have all been commingled in a single section. One disadvantage of this arrangement is that business card links, which tend to be fewer in number, are harder for inexperienced readers to find, especially when they are buried at the very end of the list.
As a result, I'm wondering whether it makes sense to split out the 50K business card offers into a separately labeled subsection. In turn, that presents a question about how to label/enumerate offers in any such separate section. We could do this in a number of ways:
Thoughts? Feel free to PM me if you wish instead of posting comments to the thread.
In connection with that, I'm thinking it may be time to slightly modify the organization of the links in the wiki. For a very long time, links for personal and business 50K offers have all been commingled in a single section. One disadvantage of this arrangement is that business card links, which tend to be fewer in number, are harder for inexperienced readers to find, especially when they are buried at the very end of the list.
As a result, I'm wondering whether it makes sense to split out the 50K business card offers into a separately labeled subsection. In turn, that presents a question about how to label/enumerate offers in any such separate section. We could do this in a number of ways:
- Add a letter prefix (P or B) to avoid having 2 links with identical labels.
- In the alternative, start labeling business card offers in their own separate section using letters instead of numbers. Once you reach Z, restart the series with AA and so on.
- The current system is fine. Don't change a thing.
Thoughts? Feel free to PM me if you wish instead of posting comments to the thread.
Aug 2, 2015, 7:18 pm
#1988
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,767
Interestingly, we now have a report from the past week of an applicant applying and being approved for two Citi cards on the same day. I grant that this is the first-time FT poster without a credible track record, but it is possible that Citi has once again switched up its policies.
<<I applied for a Citi ThankYou card the next day, then a Citi HHonors card two days later...was approved for both. >>
Last edited by Happy; Aug 2, 2015 at 7:51 pm
Aug 2, 2015, 7:25 pm
#1989
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,767
The 60-day rule is well documented, as is the 90-day rule for business cards. There are tons of data points on both of them over the course of years.
The '7-day' rule was completely made up . . . by me. It was based on a simple experiment that my wife and I performed in order to figure out what Citi's latest rule was. We knew that you could not do two applications in the same day anymore and we figured out that 24 hours did not work either. So I applied after 2 days (6/29/2013 and 7/1/2013) and my wife applied after 8 days (7/2/2013 and 7/10/2013). We both got the first card and she got the second but I was denied the second.
To my knowledge, between then and reasonably recently, no one has tested and documented the range between 2-8 days. So, generally we tell people that you should be fine after 7/8 days, just like we tack on a few days to the 60/90-day rules, but it is not a solid rule based on lots of data points. So saying that there are now some 'exceptions' to this rule makes no sense because we never really knew what Citi's magic number of days between applications was.
The '7-day' rule was completely made up . . . by me. It was based on a simple experiment that my wife and I performed in order to figure out what Citi's latest rule was. We knew that you could not do two applications in the same day anymore and we figured out that 24 hours did not work either. So I applied after 2 days (6/29/2013 and 7/1/2013) and my wife applied after 8 days (7/2/2013 and 7/10/2013). We both got the first card and she got the second but I was denied the second.
To my knowledge, between then and reasonably recently, no one has tested and documented the range between 2-8 days. So, generally we tell people that you should be fine after 7/8 days, just like we tack on a few days to the 60/90-day rules, but it is not a solid rule based on lots of data points. So saying that there are now some 'exceptions' to this rule makes no sense because we never really knew what Citi's magic number of days between applications was.
Thanks for the newbies who have not paid enough attention and accidentally "violated" the 7/8 days "rule" but succeeded in getting approvals, now we know that 2 to 3 days might be all it needs. We'll know more as more people take the shortened route.
Now onto another important subject - IIRC your wife has a card that does not get the correctly worded approval letter, and you haven't decided to meet the spend yet when at the end of 2nd month. Could you update the situation on that card? (forgive me not going back to find the original posts as I am short of time with a 40 days trip coming up in less than 10 days.)
Aug 2, 2015, 7:51 pm
#1990
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,055
<SNIP>
Now onto another important subject - IIRC your wife has a card that does not get the correctly worded approval letter, and you haven't decided to meet the spend yet when at the end of 2nd month. Could you update the situation on that card? (forgive me not going back to find the original posts as I am short of time with a 40 days trip coming up in less than 10 days.)
Now onto another important subject - IIRC your wife has a card that does not get the correctly worded approval letter, and you haven't decided to meet the spend yet when at the end of 2nd month. Could you update the situation on that card? (forgive me not going back to find the original posts as I am short of time with a 40 days trip coming up in less than 10 days.)
Closed that card and 3 others, applied for Business card using link #15 and got rejected (business too new). Closed three open business cards and sent letter to reconsideration. We'll see what they have to say. 
Just shed 52K worth of CL.
Aug 2, 2015, 7:57 pm
#1991
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,767
Called in, no bonus 'because you closed a Business card in Sept. 2014.' Ignoring that she opened a MC 10 days earlier and got the bonus, not to mention one in January. Closed that card and 3 others, applied for Business card using link #15 and got rejected (business too new). Closed three open business cards and sent letter to reconsideration. We'll see what they have to say. Just shed 52K worth of CL.
Closed that card and 3 others, applied for Business card using link #15 and got rejected (business too new). Closed three open business cards and sent letter to reconsideration. We'll see what they have to say. Just shed 52K worth of CL.Dont know if it makes any difference - but read somewhere a while ago that reducing CL returned quicker than canceling CL. I found some folks practicing lower the CL a few weeks before cancelling the cards.
In any case, having a lower total CL seems to remove one potential block for getting auto-approval, at least in the case of personal cards for almost all banks.
Aug 2, 2015, 9:34 pm
#1992
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 699
link 11 appears to be down 
just instantly approved for a family member using link 4c.
i used link 11 successfully for another family member a little over a week ago (received confirmation of 50K bonus with spend with card). both family members had been approved for AA MC cards in late january 2015 and were upgraded shortly after receiving their first cards.
thanks to everyone for all the datapoints!
just instantly approved for a family member using link 4c.i used link 11 successfully for another family member a little over a week ago (received confirmation of 50K bonus with spend with card). both family members had been approved for AA MC cards in late january 2015 and were upgraded shortly after receiving their first cards.
thanks to everyone for all the datapoints!
Aug 3, 2015, 1:06 am
#1993
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 100
Don't quite remember if this was covered before. I just cancelled a Business card and am about to apply for another one. I usually wait about 2-3 weeks after cancelling before reapplying for another one. How long do you all wait before applying again (I'm already well over 95 days since my last application)?
Thanks.
Thanks.
Aug 3, 2015, 5:58 am
#1994
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: On strike
Posts: 8,135
I've updated the wiki. Noteworthy changes:
Many thanks to SeeBuyFly for prospecting for new offer URLs & to IkeEsq for useful input on the wiki re-org.
- added new biz card links identified by SeeBuyFly
- deleted offers 14 (no valid app page) & 15 (fully dead)
- placed 50K personal & biz offers under separate headings
- streamlined the resulting sections by placing restriction language (18-months; "first-time only") once in the intro instead of repeating it in each entry
- labeled biz offers with a separate sequence (capital letters) to avoid overlap with personal card offers
- expanded FAQ #16 to document known Citi shortcuts for new offers
Many thanks to SeeBuyFly for prospecting for new offer URLs & to IkeEsq for useful input on the wiki re-org.