What do the banks really think of churners.

[Telezacski]

I don’t disagree on the privacy act statement and that is covered in any credit application.

But what was said was the credit bureau must provide all info back to us, but I believe this is dependent on the product you sign up for. A basic credit check and they will provide the score and probably recent searches. Pay more and they will provide more.

 

[andye]

I don’t disagree on the privacy act statement and that is covered in any credit application.

But what was said was the credit bureau must provide all info back to us, but I believe this is dependent on the product you sign up for. A basic credit check and they will provide the score and probably recent searches. Pay more and they will provide more.

You should always be able to get all the info by asking for a free credit report. Can't remember if this is a annual or biannual allowance

 

[burmans]

20R Access to credit reporting information

Access

(1) If a credit reporting body holds credit reporting information about an individual, the body must, on request by an access seeker in relation to the information, give the access seeker access to the information.

Some minor exceptions mainly if it's against the law to release. As andye notes you can get it free once a year and also if you have been declined credit but you can get paid more often.

 

[Telezacski]

So what we are saying is, your credit check product should make a full search available to you, at least annually if you ask.

The credit check company should provide you a report if you ask especially if declined and this should be a full report.

Otherwise they would simply send the same old basic report.

To be fair I only deal in paid reports, and will always provide them to customers if they ask for a copy of their report.

I think the only thing most people would want to check on is the scoring of repayments

 

[theblank]

How would it be illegal?

not illegal, but unlawful. i will just hazard a guess and say that its the Privacy Act and that they are a regulated industry or both. they simply cant withhold any information they have about you from you, end of story.

 

[Telezacski]

not illegal, but unlawful. i will just hazard a guess and say that its the Privacy Act and that they are a regulated industry or both. they simply cant withhold any information they have about you from you, end of story.

Sure but my point was more about the fact they are a business and as a business I believe they are within their rights to charge for the service of providing the information they hold. As others stated above you can get the info but depending on the level of service you subscribe to will depend on how often.

Interestingly I looked at a credit report last week for someone who used to apply for two or three cards at a time, take them out, getting the points.

We had a candid chat and it was evident he used to get away saying he only took out one of the cards. I had to explain he had three un closed credit cards showing active.

His credit score was a mess as he had 30plus applications from a few years back.

 

[Mr H]

Interestingly I looked at a credit report last week for someone who used to apply for two or three cards at a time, take them out, getting the points.

His credit score was a mess as he had 30plus applications from a few years back.

Make hay while the sun is shining.

 

[Telezacski]

Make hay while the sun is shining.

Yeah but the system has caught up a bit

 

[theblank]

Sure but my point was more about the fact they are a business and as a business

the point was about, and nothing to do with them charging
"Is there information the bureaus hold on us that they're not sharing back?"

no there isnt.

 

[Pele]

I would love anyone with facts or actual evidence to chime in and correct me but my best guess: 0.3-0.5c/p with discounts based on volume.

I have worked in a couple of companies that bought QFF points. The cost was 1.5 cents per point plus GST. GST isn't 10% either as QFF got a private GST ruling from the ATO to account for the spilt between domestic spend and international spend of the points.

Anyway the cost is high. These companies weren't big four banks buying have hundreds of millions of points a month but it was in the millions of points. I would be extremely surprised if the NAB's of this world got a discount down to half a cent a point. At best it would be one cent a point. Reason for this is because QFF/Velocity run a duopoly. It's not like NAB can go buy QFF points from elsewhere. They get bent over by QFF and Velocity. This is the reason all the big four banks have made their own coughty rewards programs, so they don't have to bow down to QFF/Velocity.

And in terms of the original question of the thread- the banks wouldn't like churners but they are such a miniscule part of their customer base the cost to them is immaterial. This thread is totally unrepresentative of Australian society with respect to credit card behaviour.

 

[Mr H]

I would be extremely surprised if the NAB's of this world got a discount down to half a cent a point. At best it would be one cent a point. Reason for this is because QFF/Velocity run a duopoly. It's not like NAB can go buy QFF points from elsewhere. They get bent over by QFF and Velocity. This is the reason all the big four banks have made their own coughty rewards programs, so they don't have to bow down to QFF/Velocity.

It's a really interesting perspective. The individual banks need QF because their rivals offer QF points and customers expect to get them - so QF could name their price. On the other hand, if a bank make a lowball offer and walked away when it was rejected, QF would be leaving free money on the table. Brinkmanship.

The supermarkets offer a direct equivalent of 1000 airline points or $10 off your shopping. That points to 1c per point so my hunch (and it is only a hunch) is that this would represent the best deal that the banks would also get for the points.

 

[exceladdict]

I have worked in a couple of companies that bought QFF points. The cost was 1.5 cents per point plus GST. GST isn't 10% either as QFF got a private GST ruling from the ATO to account for the spilt between domestic spend and international spend of the points.

Anyway the cost is high. These companies weren't big four banks buying have hundreds of millions of points a month but it was in the millions of points. I would be extremely surprised if the NAB's of this world got a discount down to half a cent a point. At best it would be one cent a point. Reason for this is because QFF/Velocity run a duopoly. It's not like NAB can go buy QFF points from elsewhere. They get bent over by QFF and Velocity. This is the reason all the big four banks have made their own coughty rewards programs, so they don't have to bow down to QFF/Velocity.

This is very informative, thank you for sharing. A cost this high, which I imagine would wipe out just about all margins from interchange fees, may explain why we are seeing points caps on monthly spend more and more.

It's a really interesting perspective. The individual banks need QF because their rivals offer QF points and customers expect to get them - so QF could name their price. On the other hand, if a bank make a lowball offer and walked away when it was rejected, QF would be leaving free money on the table. Brinkmanship.

The supermarkets offer a direct equivalent of 1000 airline points or $10 off your shopping. That points to 1c per point so my hunch (and it is only a hunch) is that this would represent the best deal that the banks would also get for the points.

It would be fascinating to know the behind the scenes calculations, like how breakage, the fact you will probably spend more than $10 when redeeming that $10 of woolies pesos, etc are accounted for.

 

[Mr H]

It would be fascinating to know the behind the scenes calculations, like how breakage, the fact you will probably spend more than $10 when redeeming that $10 of woolies pesos, etc are accounted for.

I thought about that, plus the way people will spend their Woollies vouchers to pay retail prices on stuff that Woollies buy at wholesale, but then I thought that people don't make additional purchases with the vouchers, they just offset the cost of what they would have bought anyway and paid for with cash - so should be costed at the full face value of $10 per voucher.

 

[Pele]

It's a really interesting perspective. The individual banks need QF because their rivals offer QF points and customers expect to get them - so QF could name their price. On the other hand, if a bank make a lowball offer and walked away when it was rejected, QF would be leaving free money on the table. Brinkmanship.

The supermarkets offer a direct equivalent of 1000 airline points or $10 off your shopping. That points to 1c per point so my hunch (and it is only a hunch) is that this would represent the best deal that the banks would also get for the points.

Brinkmanship indeed. Remember in 2015 Woolworths tried to cut QFF loose from their Woolworths rewards program? They folded like a wet tissue and backtracked within about 8 weeks in the face of a customer backlash.

 

[oz_mark]

Brinkmanship indeed. Remember in 2015 Woolworths tried to cut QFF loose from their Woolworths rewards program? They folded like a wet tissue and backtracked within about 8 weeks in the face of a customer backlash.

There was far more wrong with that program than the lack of QFF points....

 

[Must...Fly!]

Maybe Woolies and Coles would get a bigger discount than the banks regardless of volume.

Having the QFF/VFF logo plastered over every supermarket and half the petrol stations in the country would be worth quite a bit of contra, you'd think.