[ajhurliman]

If a third of consumers _should_ have been denied because they were not credit-worthy, then there were no errors. You need to look at the false negative rate, not the absolute number of people denied for financial products.

[actually_a_dog]

There are no "false negatives." The models implemented by the card issuers are the literal source of truth as to whether a consumer does or does not qualify for the card. Anybody who applied and was rejected did not qualify by definition.

[smsm42]

I think the misleading part was representing it as that person specifically had 90% chances, even though 90% may be aggregated probability and this person's chances based on personal history may be much lower. Given CK does have access to personal history, one might easily get an impression that the prediction is a precise calculation based on it and thus imply more accuracy than warranted.