for stoozer's: is 2% bt charge that big a deal

steveb1967

I know that a charge for balance transfer's is a touchy subject for stoozer's, but if it's the way credit card companies have to try to stop us, with a max charge of £35 surely we can still make money out of them if we have a big enought credit limit and at least a 6mts 0% period?
I understand that if we can find a 0% cc without any bt charges then fab, but if not we must do what we can.
DISCUSS?
atb
steve b

grumbler

It is quite clear for me.
If you stooze to 5% saving account it earns 4% after tax.
To earn interest more than £35 for 6 months you must stooz more than £1750.
If you transfer £3500 you loose half of your profit, if £7000 - quarter etc…

Of course, if you have real debt or offset mortgage you can ‘make’ more money by saving on interest payments. However real moneysavers usually do not have debts besides mortgage. And offset mortgage is usually more expensive that makes it efficient only if you can offset it with a really large amount of savings.

deemy2004

As above ... Also putting savings in a non tax paying partners names also helps maximise interest

PLUS its excellant for cash-flow purposes for instance for two people you need to shuv in 12k at the start of each tax payer i.e. 6k cash isa, and £6k shares isa's

Then there are the monthly savers which consume some 2.5k per month and pay between 5.85% and 7% ! so again the 0% benefits greatly in savings cash-flow terms.

Yeh 2% or £35 or £50 is a small irritant, but barely effects the benefits of stoozing... Infact.... I have YET to pay the balance transfer fees ! Maybe on some future card it will be charged.

Offcourse if there is no economic benefit than I cancel the card on application success, I did this recently ot the monument card... offered me a useless £1500 limit WITH a balance transfer fee ....