I keep feeling like I'm missing something. Surely there has to be something appealing that would make it interesting. But no, there simply isn't.

What the hell Barclay?

I’ve thought about this one and, to borrow a phrase from another poster, it looks like a “turd” alright.

If we operate under the assumption that the people at Barclays aren’t all complete idiots, then what happened here? (And yes, I realize that many folks here think that they are, in fact, complete idiots.)

As a person that’s been in large corporations for the better part of my life, I have a couple theories:

1. They aren’t trying to be competitive with Chase and Amex; instead, they want an offering (“See? We have transfer partners, too!”) that can be used to minimize the bleed of their high end customers to the aforementioned issuers.

2. The marketing folks were well aware that this thing is a dog and got overruled by the powers that be. Whether this was a smart decision remains to be seen.

As a Chase fan that spent over $50K on CSR last year plus additional spend on a couple other UR cards with secondary spending on Amex SPG, I am presumably the kind of customer that they want to attract.

The problem for them is that Chase has effectively built a barrier to entry since it’s a hassle for me to apply for cards, deal with a new online system, etc. These aren’t huge issues, but they are non-zero and Barclays has to create an incentive to attract someone like me.

To put it mildly, they’ve failed to create that incentive.

A previous megacorp that I worked for launched a product that was the same price, but with far less features than the competition’s product. I did not work in that division, but it surprised none of us when this thing promptly sank without a trace.

Sound familiar?

Impossible. Barclay's management is more incompetent than Citi's and AMEX's combined, and both are pretty bad.

I'm starting to come to the conclusion that a lot of established businesses are led by people who think they can tell the market what to buy instead of listening to the market. Then they also blame the market when they take their golden parachute.

There's another bank totally based on looking for people who know no better.

Perhaps they're hoping that they can hire Jennifer Garner away from Cap One to tout: "Now here's another card from another bank that gives you double miles on everything!" :rolleyes:

Ie, if one bank's whole advertising is based on "double miles for everything", why not another bank? :rolleyes:

The average Joe Blow doesn't know what miles are, doesn't know that double of meaningless miles is still meaningless, and just assumes that "double" must be much better than other cards that don't give you "double".

I'm surprised Capital One and Discover haven't been sued for misleading customers. "Miles" are airline points. Credit cards do not earn miles unless they're co-branded with an airline. At least after they get sued, they'll wake up and change the name of their cards to something like "double points."

If so it would be a frivolous lawsuit. There isn't anything that limits the use of "miles" to airline loyalty programs just because that's the most common usage. Some airlines don't even call their loyalty currency "miles". Cap1's T&Cs clearly spell out how their scheme works in terms of earning and redemption values, so the moniker they apply is irrelevant. Sure their ads make an apples-to-oranges comparison to "those airline cards" but it's no worse than some of the marketing done by the airlines or the differences in redemption rates and availability compared between any two airline programs.

I take back the part about suing them. On the other hand, the courts could decide the marketing is ridiculously misleading and force Capital One and Discover to change their terms and conditions since the courts interpret the ways the law should be enforced. If the courts and the general public do not like this type of marketing while it's being reviewed by the government, the courts could make Capital One and Discover change it to something that isn't misleading. Laws are not always black and white despite many people believing so. If people are signing up for a card they believe can transfer to airline companies, then I could see the courts deciding that these two companies change the name on their card, even if buried down in size 6 font at the bottom it explains how the "miles" work.

I think the bigger fraud is that they market that garbage Venture card for $95 a year when most cards are better, more particularly before C.O starting giving 10x/dollar at Hotels.com.

As predicted, this card is a dud. 1.4-1.7:1 transfer ratio to airline partners is laughable. I would like to see anyone defend this card now because this is one of the worst premium cards to get for a whopping $150 AF.

But that's after earning 2 miles per dollar on everything. So relative to dollars spent, isn't it a decent 0.7-0.85:1, which is a bit better than 1:1? :confused:

OTOH, it's a very weird group of airlines, with AA and JetBlue (the domestic airlines for which Barclay issues cards) so notably absent. (Not that Citi TYP's transfer partner list is that much better, but the Citi TYP Premier card only has a $95 AF and full transferabliity.)

Depends on how much value you put on "all purchases". I would rate CFU as the gold standard at 1.5miles/$ for all purchases and no AF. For a lot of people who have multiple cards (one card for travel/dining, another for grocery/gas), we earn 2-3miles/$ for most of our purchases and have a wider range of airline partners at 1:1 to choose from.

You also need to factor in the $150 AF hit and you already have a pretty big whole to dig yourself out of before this become beneficial with marginally side benefits. CSR is effectively $150 ($450 AF-$300 annual travel credit) and gives more benefits. I can go on, but the math just doesn't add up for the average spender.

CFU + CSP earns you at least 1.5 miles per dollar with $95 AF. More than that, Amex BBP earns you 2 miles per dollar with no AF.

Only up to 50k pa though. Not good enough for serious Ms.

Another strike against this card...If I'm going to use up one of my 5/24s, it has to be a rock solid deal. This is not.
5/24, however, isn't probably be a factor for John Q. Public, just those of us playing the game.

Neither is good choice for foreign transactions.