AXP
#In terms of the case, I'd say we could hear anywhere from tomorrow morning to a year from now.
There's just no way to know really what the time line is.
The appellate court finished their hearing some months back.
As you recall, very importantly and very unusually after or around the hearing, they chose to reinstate a stay on the district judge's order.
That's quite unusual for a court to do.
But we'll have to see where the opinion comes out.
And as I said, we really just have no insights into the timing.
Is it contemplated in our 2016 and 2017 outlook.
Obviously we'll have to see what the judge says.
I guess I would make a couple of comments.
One, the district judge's order was fully implemented for some number of months until the appellate court put a stay back on it.
So it's not ---+ you certainly didn't see any immediate impact in that instance.
And clearly, we wouldn't be fighting this case and going to court with the federal government if we didn't think there was a very important and fundamental issue at stake here.
I would say it's a very important and fundamental long-term issue.
Well, that was some weeks ago, and we haven't heard a word.
And you truly we have no insights into when the court might issue ---+ I'm not even sure we had any advanced notice.
I think they just post it to their website.
We see it as others see it, so ---+
<UNK>, I think you got it just right.
Just to confirm, I'll play back what you said using slightly different words.
Yes, we expect the Costco gain to come in, in June, approximately $1 billion.
Unlike previous years, we are spreading across evenly throughout the year our investment or growth-oriented spend, the biggest chunk of which appears in marketing and promotion.
So to be very granular, that means that if you just look at our marketing and promotional line for all of 2016, you should expect it to look about like it did in 2015.
And in fact, you just saw us in Q1 raise Q1 closer to an average level that you will see across the next three quarters.
So that's what you'll see on the marketing and promotional line.
And so really, the gain will mostly, to your point, fall to the bottom line in the second quarter.
Although, I do think there's one other important caveat to remind people of, which is we do expect more restructuring charges, including some hard to quantify right now in the second quarter.
And those would be some incremental offset to the gain as well.
And those restructuring charges, just to be crystal clear, because of our ---+ the challenge in trying to estimate them, we have as we provided our $5.40 to $5.70 EPS outlook, said that excludes all restructuring charges this year, just to give you a clearer, cleaner view into the performance of the Company.
A way to think about that, <UNK>, would be to I say if you go to Investor Day, I made the point that as you roll into 2017, you should expect to see our marketing and promotional costs come down $200 million to $400 million.
And most, though not 100%, but most of our customer acquisition costs appear in that line.
And so that gives you maybe some rough sense of the level of elevation, that line ---+ if that line is $3.5 billion this year and you're talking about a $300 million, let's pick a midpoint, decrease, that says maybe you're coming down 10% next year, which also implies that you're sort of elevated 10% this year.
So it's an important increment in light of the goal we have around the spend and lend of the Costco co-brand card members.
It's an important percentage in terms of the competitive environment.
But I think sometimes people overplay just how big that increment is as we get ever more efficient with our acquisition efforts every year and I made the point that two-thirds of our consumer acquisitions in Q1 were digital.
It's those kind of statistics though that give us confidence that we can continue to edge that number down without seeing a significant impact on our acquisition efforts.
Well, I'm going to go back a little bit, <UNK>, to some of my earlier comments about what we try to do at American Express with all of our products is leverage all of the attributes of the Company and our brand.
And so we are not particularly trying to target, to use your term, the gamers.
And in fact will work a little bit to specifically not attract the gamers.
So we feel pretty good, I would say on balance, about the economics of the Blue Cash card.
And certainly one of the things we watch is the overall portfolio of consumer cards that we have in the US, or for that matter in any market.
And so when you look at our card acquisitions, yes, the Blue Cash card has been a particular important acquisition engine in recent quarters.
But I'd point out to you that's because part of what we're trying to do is put replacement cards in the hands of people who formerly had a Costco co-brand card.
And so the Blue Cash card tends to appeal to that segment of the market.
Meanwhile, we've continued our historical acquisition efforts with Gold, with Platinum, the Delta card is going tremendously well.
And I think you've heard Delta make some comments about that as well.
So we have a range of products and Blue Cash is just one of them which appeals to a particular segment, is lend-oriented, and is producing perfectly fine economics for us.
In terms of an overall rewards rate, we don't really look at it that way.
I guess what I'd say is certainly rewards cost ---+ the cash rebate reward costs are growing faster than our Company average, because those products are growing faster than the Company average.
You see me calling that out a little bit in my discussion earlier about the calculated discount rate.
There's still a very modest piece of the overall Company's cards and economics, though, is one important thing to keep in mind.
So look, I'd say this is all part of our strategy of having the broadest product line and offering lots of different value propositions.
We made sure that all of the value propositions are economic for our shareholders, while providing good value to customers.
And I think the Blue Cash card fits right into that vein.
Thanks, <UNK>.
