4 ms·
> All they saw was a $450 annual fee. I read the article [1] because I was dubious about the potential cost/benefit given that I pay zero dollars in interest o
by Programmatic 10y ago
> All they saw was a $450 annual fee.
I read the article [1] because I was dubious about the potential cost/benefit given that I pay zero dollars in interest on my cards (I pay the statement balance every month), and I found that the benefit is for rewards programs.
My understanding is that rewards programs are an arms race: the merchants cover the extra rewards amount. That means that they're bundling the cost of rewards into their products anyhow and charging you for the "pleasure" of getting your money back. If you can get in on it before the costs rise to the full amount of the reward, then other people subsidize your reward by purchasing the cost-adjusted product without getting rewards. I'll pass on paying $450 to further that, no cost-benefit required.
1) http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/business/dealbook/credit-card-rewards-chase-sapphire-reserve-annual-fees.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/business/dealbook/credit-c...
- withdavidli 10y agoIrony that you did cost benefit on a much broader scale (merchants and consumers as a whole) instead of a personal finance level. And you are right about merchants paying more. Didn't make sense when I was running a store until I read a paper on reward points and transaction fees. This type of subsidizing happens around us, one that comes to mind is taxes. 401k and other tax shelters. People that are taking the greatest advantage of these have money to spare, and read up on the advantages (or hired someone that has). Also, since you pay off your statement every month, reward cards make a lot of sense. Haven't seen one that requires a revolving balance. For me it's about optimizing returns on spend I already have.