Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site grkermi.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!grkermi!andrew
From: andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers)
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Re: Amex card fees
Message-ID: <489@grkermi.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 1-Jul-85 18:00:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: grkermi.489
Posted: Mon Jul  1 18:00:20 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 5-Jul-85 04:38:46 EDT
References: <5946@duke.UUCP> <465@grkermi.UUCP> <1485@utah-gr.UUCP> <137@whuts.UUCP>
Reply-To: andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers)
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 61
Summary: 

In article <137@whuts.UUCP> bccarty@whuts.UUCP (CARTY) writes:
>What advantages does a $250/yr Platinum card give you that you can't get
>with a $65/yr Gold one?  And out of curiosity, how many folks out in
>netland are going to dump their "old" AMEXes for a more prestigious one?

a) The right to flash it ostentatiously!  What else did you expect??

b) Count me out...in fact, I've been toying with the idea of discontinuing
   the *green* one and feeding some Africans with the $45.  And I don't
   mean treating them to cold pasta salad w/quail sausage at the latest trendy
   exposed fern/hanging brick Yuppie hangout (like in the AMEX ads)!

In article <42@peora.UUCP> jer@peora (J. Eric Roskos) writes:
>What is the difference between these "green", "gold", and "platinum" cards,
>anyway?

That's what I say - "what's the difference?".  I believe it has something
to do with:

	a) wavelength of reflected light

	b) cost (as in "a fool and his money...")

	c) wording of the ad campaigns to convince the gullible and/or
	   insecure to trade up to the "right" card or else forget about 
	   advancing beyond pond scum on the ladder to social success.

	   (Future shuck: In a couple years, we'll probably see a campaign
	   implying that the Platinum Card is about to become declasse
	   (too many hoi polloi flashing it ostentatiously), and that any 
	   Yuppie worth his/her BMW should immediately apply for the new
	   AMEX Plutonium to avoid being mistaken for those tacky masses...)


You wanted a serious answer?  OK... the AMEX green is not technically a 
"charge card" since the holder is expected to pay the balance in full each
month (exception: airline tickets, which may be paid in installments).  More
accurately, it's a "credit card", which is why it's actually one of the 
easiest cards to get (despite the implicit snobbery in the ads).  AMEX
actively courts recent graduates ("Don't leave school without it!"); MC/VISA
usually require 1+ years of work experience.  

The AMEX Gold and Platinum are true credit cards, backed by a "line of credit
from a prestigious financial institution", which the applicant (supplicant?
sucker?) must be - hold onto your hats - APPROVED FOR!  WOW!  (Drop the word
"prestigious", of course, and you have the definition of MC/VISA.)  They do
throw in such social-climber bait as "guest privileges at private clubs"
(subject to a long list of restrictions, such as location > 100 miles from
your home), etc. for you to brag about (even though they're counting on
hardly anyone taking advantage of them).

Oddly enough, the income requirements for AMEX Gold have actually been
dropping in recent years (see what I mean about "planned declasse-essence"?);
the latest application I saw required only $20K/yr (down from $30K in 1980).
There was, in fact, a recent article in Business Week | Fortune | Forbes (I
forget which) about the delicate balance AMEX's ad agency has had to maintain 
in order to convey the appropriate "exclusive" image without appearing so
snobbish as to discourage the desired audience from applying.


Andrew W. Rogers