That's your argument, it's not mine.

Consumer protection -- if that is even it -- is as it is because of large scale consumer apathy and very intensive anti-consumer lobbying by market participants. In a supposedly open, democratic system where consumers have a right to try to get what they want to be the law of the land, consumers in the aggregate being failed by government is not just the fault of the sell-side of the marketplace.

Even if victim blaming is appropriate, your consistent line of attack is not that consumers bear "some" responsibility, but that criticism of marketing practices employed by bloggers is de facto illegitimate and "editorial dictatorship." You can't have it both ways. If consumer advocates critique industry practices, it is illogical to respond by saying criticism is illegitimate - "well it's consumers fault for not developing successful lobbying strategies." Criticism on fora like FT, and expressing dissatisfaction from members of the community, should play a role in encouraging change. Defending bad behavior by bloggers on FT tips the scale further in the favor of the party that already has the relative power

The whole point of consumer protection is that there is an informational assymetry- an informational assymetry that many of the members of Boarding Area exploit. To say that consumers should know better than to be fooled by bloggers is hardly a ringing endorsement of Boarding Area and the deceptive marketing practices many if it's "members" deploy.

That's your claim about my line, but it's not my line now or before. My line is far more nuanced than the above caricature would try to make it seem.

The whole point of consumer protection is not that there may be asymmetrical information -- the whole point of consumer protection legislation/regulation is to protect consumers. Whether or not there is asymmetrical information.

Just because muckrakers and yellow journalism have at times been helpful in filling in informational gaps that led to consumer protection doesn't mean that consumer protection's entire point is to address informational asymmetry.

It seems that some of the major FT-spawned bloggers are on a limited sort of credit card "warning to consumers" kick. Pleased?

Some of the P&M blogs are largely centered around promoting CC links and other services, with fewer posts that aren't based on inserting links. That's not good or bad, any more than being a car dealer or selling Avon is good or bad. Other P&M blogs have a more robust set of content where not every post is littered with a dozen CC links or

To me it's not about motives, which are ultimately irrelevant, but about the end results. Unfortunately some of those people would be getting more value by applying for better offers that are not mentioned by a blog that instead promotes an inferior affiliate link offer.

While "buyer beware" is always applicable, at the same time there's nothing wrong with calling out those types of blogs. People discuss and post reviews online regarding negative experiences or poor business practices with construction contractors, car dealers, hospitals, restaurants, etc. I don't think the blogs in question should be treated differently than any other business.

I can't speak for others, but I don't believe, and have never said, that "all blogs are bad" or anything of the sort. Many or perhaps most P&M blogs are reliable with being upfront about what offers are out there, encourage input from readers, etc. Again, it's no different than any other business - some great, some lousy, and everything in between!

I'm sorry that the UK doesn't have travel rewards CC offers as generous as in the US...but the above isn't true at all. Decent rewards cards certainly require a good credit profile. Even basic, non-rewards cards can be difficult to get with a lower score and/or any significant negative marks. Just peruse creditboards.com or the FICO forums, etc.

For example in this article with 2012 data, the overall approval rate for general CC applications was about 39%, with sub-primes at 17% to those in the prime range at 58%, and super-primes at 85%. Those rates have probably improved a bit since then but doubtful they have changed drastically to the point you're portraying. I'd guess that the rates for top rewards cards will be lower.

http://www.creditcards.com/credit-ca...roval-1267.php

Sure, Jan. It seems you are making up your own definition of what consumer protection is, based on your perjorative language here. But I'd direct you to the academic literature that makes quite clear that consumer protection law is in part designed to cure informational asymmetry (along with other market failures and externalities. You can start with Akerlof's seminal study, "'The Market for Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1970.


Not sure what "limited" warning you are talking about, but if it is, no I'm not pleased. I generally think all credit card marketing bloggers should abide by the principles of the FTC's native advertising and social media guidelines, as I've pointed out before ...to you.

For example:
- Referencing "affiliate links" is not enough - "Consumers might not understand that “affiliate link” means that the person placing the link is getting paid for purchases through the link."

- Disclosures "[s]hould be easy to read and in a shade that stands out from the background."

For more tips that bloggers should follow, the FTC has a helpful FAQ page, with a whole section on affiliate marketing: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/busi...ple-are-asking

What pejorative language? As someone very familiar with the history of consumer protection developments in the US, I would say that muckraking and yellow journalism weren't all that bad -- that's even indicated in my earlier post.

About informational asymmetry, your post even seems to confirm my point that the whole point of consumer protection isn't that there is informational asymmetry.

For those who think there is illegal activity being engaged in by FT-spawned bloggers, have you reported the suspected activity to the legal authorities? If so, what has the response been?

If this is right, then isn't there some sort of market failure here? Where are the sites aimed at these people?

If I was a 40-year old professional, university educated, in a big US city, earning $150k and doing a lot of travel, what site is aimed at me?

Such person has their choice of the miles/points blogs hawking credit cards with $100+ annual fees. The miles/points bloggers with the bigger audiences try to cover a range of people that goes beyond just a narrow target market.

A US person need not be in the top 5-6% of income earners to have a high chance to qualify for a premium credit/charge card.

I have no doubt that there are lots of US persons with taxable individual income even well below $40k who have credit/charge cards with annual fees well over $400/year. What's primarily required to qualify for some such card is to be a US adult person with a good credit history -- and that's not all that hard to have in the US if such adult pays all their charges/debts on time to the lender's satisfaction.

All true, but you missed my point - where is the blog for your average NYT / New Yorker reader? Frequent Miler seems to be the most 'intelligent' US site but that is a fairly low bar.

The average NYT and The New Yorker magazine readers are a dying breed in ways; and the average NYT reader in the US isn't really all that high brow either.

There's way more money to be made by not narrowing down to a tiny, shrinking niche market than there is in narrowing down to a tiny, relatively shrinking sliver of the overall market. The same FT-spawned blogs that cater to the NY Daily News crowd also are used by even The Economist and New Yorker subscription crowd that is in this game. This isn't a market failure, it's the market at work.

Noted: "Take this into account for the next update of the glorious TBB Blogs I like list".

Yellow card! #tbbexit

:D

Except for the "big city" part that's basically me:p My main site is right here and a few other blogs on a regular basis, but then I pick and choose other sources as I come across bits and pieces that are useful to me. Of course I'm just one dude so who knows.

I get the impression that some of the "titan" blogs are trying to aim for a certain higher-end demographic of sorts...whether they're really hitting the mark or not, I don't know. Seems to be getting harder and harder to find a unique niche in the P&M world, though.

Given program devaluations, the open availability of info, and the copycat behavior of info suppliers, targeting a very narrow niche market would soon mean there isn't much of a niche market left as the bulk of the niche market audience would either migrate around anyway or be so lazy as not to be as profitable as a more common audience.

We've realized the diminished value of 'the game' and are bright enough to walk away from sunk cost in terms of piles of miles and lifetime statuses and focus instead on discounted premium class and luxury products while taking advantage of P&M only when it makes good sense.

But that's a paragraph, not an ongoing blog much less a potential business concern. @:-)

This is where I am. Six years ago, when I was just out of college, churning was great. The game was still lucrative. I didn't have the money to buy even discounted premium cabins but I had a great credit score and churned my way to a couple premium vacations a year.

Now I'm further into my career and make enough money to just buy discounted J when it shows up. I still churn occasionally when there's a good deal or I get targeted for a lucrative offer, but other than that I just buy what I want.

There'd be good money is someone creating Scott's Cheap Flights for premium cabins. Maybe that exists and I just don't know? I'd pay for that subscription.

The days of churning AA miles by the bucketload were great but it's also nice to no longer care what Citi's current rules might be.