planr

Even if it went to 2am but didn't stop at every station i.e. less staff in the non-used stations but passengers able to make use of it, stopping only at prominent points and end of the line ... better than not running at all

While we can all agree that the BTS is one of the best run aspects of Bangkok, I have never understood the stopping points. There was obviously some serious political persuasions going on. I just don't get stops that are 1 km from each other.

The reason is simple: Thais hate walking, and when forced to do so, walk at a snail's pace. If the stops were more than 1 km apart, only farangs would use the BTS and it would not be economically viable. To be honest, knowing Thais' attitude to walking, I'm surprised they aren't 0.5 km apart.

I don't think the people who made the final decisions on where the bts stops are were influenced in the slightest by what the thais like and don't like. The influences were most obviously all related the the amount of revenue certain stops would create. It is obvious, and also obvious there are too many stops. But, somebody here says that is not the case, so maybe I am wrong. I would think 1km apart stops with the number of motorbikes here is way overkill though. What I am saying makes perfect sense though, if the stops were configured with revenue from these businesses in mind, what would we see? We would see an excess number of stops, equaling more revenue.... and that is exactly what we see imo.

You are of course free to think as you like, but the people who made the final decisions absolutely incorporated walking trips into their demand analyses. Whether or not they were or are accurate may be debatable, but it is most certainly standard practice and I know for a fact it was taken into account here.

You're absolutely correct that in locating stations, existing and potential future built form (which translates into ridership) was taken into account along with demographics, but you must also remember that 20 years ago when plans for the BTS were being finalized, the Bangkok's built form looked much different.

In fact, the BTS (and MRT) have enabled additional development that would likely not have taken place if there were no stations. Looking at Ari and Phrom Pong as examples, which had little development 20 years ago and are now growth hot spots.

Last point... more stops doesn't necessarily equal more revenue. There are plenty of stops which under perform, such as Ratchadamri and Sanam Pao, that without, the BTS could potentially turn a higher profit (though not necessarily revenue).

Even if it went to 2am but didn't stop at every station i.e. less staff in the non-used stations but passengers able to make use of it, stopping only at prominent points and end of the line ... better than not running at all

While we can all agree that the BTS is one of the best run aspects of Bangkok, I have never understood the stopping points. There was obviously some serious political persuasions going on. I just don't get stops that are 1 km from each other. It would just run so much faster and smoother if a good maybe 5 stops were taken out of the entire system. Too late for that though.

The problem with your solution is it would be so confusing.... tourists would get on and it would pass their stop.

Spacing on the BTS system is consistent with global practice for urban transit. By spacing stations roughly 1 kilometre apart, it means that stations will typically always be within a reasonable walking distance and provide higher levels of service in areas with higher population density.

Systems like the Airport Rail Link are designed more as commuter rail, with stops spaced further apart and designed to capture riders from a wider catchment area in less dense areas, where some will park and ride, and others will connect from different pubic modes like bus.

The BART system in San Francisco is actually a hybrid of the two, with stations in suburban areas spaced far apart, but in downtown SFO, stations are quite close together.

Is that the case? Or when the ST was first being envisioned, did they think that the CP river station would always be the terminus for the Silom Line?

Original designs for the Silom Line called for one station located immediately on the Thon Buri side of the river (think near The River condo) because at the time the system was built, there was still available space on that side of the river. For whatever reason, a decision was made to build Saphan Taksin instead, probably owing to cost savings. But at the end of the day, yes, plans have always called for the line to traverse the river.

The opening of the last 2 stations will complete the Silom Line as no further exts are planned in the future.

(Aside from the 1 station ext west from National Stadium W1).

It would however be possible to extend the line further north from Bang Wah/ Phetkasem rd along Ratchapruek rd to say Taling Chan - indeed in about 2 decades I suspect that there will be some demand to do exactly this.

Completely ignore what I said here. The BMA has already announced in the last 72 hrs that it intends to extend the line to Taling Chan, 7km with 6 stations

The time frame would be as follows:

Design 2015

Construction 2016-2018

Open 2019

I'm not so sure that the demand and population base is there yet - the video states that there are 200k people living in the two districts that this would pass through. One would also think that they should wait a few years until the Blue, Orange and Light Red lines are all fully operational to evaluate transport patterns and pop growth. A further complication is that the BMA has stated that they want to start construction of the Grey line monorail next year - which I still think is ambitious - and thus the question of sufficient funding.arises.

However, the alternate view is that in the long term this ext makes sense and will be built eventually. Given that project time frames are always delayed and blowout, then why not make an early start? Realistically, with the normal delays the 2019 opening date would most likely run into 2021-2.

On the population front, assuming that Phasi Charoen and Taling Chan are the relevant Khet, the 2010 Census population was about 270,000...

Some very salient point here........

Thailand’s household debt grew at an alarming 13.6 percent per year since 2008, bringing the country’s household debt-to-GDP ratio to 77 percent from 55 percent, which is up radically from just 45 percent a decade ago. Total lending to Thai households increased at a 17 percent annual rate from 2010 to 2012, while household credit provided by credit card, leasing and personal loan companies rose at a blistering 27 percent annual rate. Thailand now has one of the highest household debt-to-GDP ratios in Asia:................

Credit and property bubbles go hand-in-hand, and Thailand’s current bubble economy is no exception in this regard. Thailand’s property bubble is most acute in the condo market, the predominant type of dwelling that most of Bangkok’s residents live in, and is the primary asset of choice for foreign speculators, many of whom hail from Singapore and Hong Kong (which are experiencing bubbles of their own, http://www.indopacificreview.com/sk_portfolio/thailands-bubble-economy-heading-1997-style-crash/

Copying a block of text from a blog that's been online since August that's simply reposted content from Forbes? That's some good detective work Lou.

1) Rising household debt will absolutely negatively impact the economy over the next year or two, but is neither a direct cause nor closely correlated with any sort of bubble.

2) Condos are NOT the predominant housing type in Bangkok. As of the 2010 Census, there 267,000 condos registered in Bangkok against a total of 2.8 million total housing units... less than 10%. The last three years has not changed this situation dramatically.

3) Condos are NOT the primary asset of choice for foreign speculators or investors. Property Funds offer much better returns than buying and flipping or buying and renting condos in Bangkok

4) There are no property bubbles in Singapore or Hong Kong either...

It's interesting that I didn't notice a comment about all of the empty condos and houses, many of which are financed by banks. Yes, some are financed by offshore money, but I still see a huge bubble.

I quit posting about all of this in the financial forum here some time ago because I got tired of people just defending Thailand and its marvelous economy and growth. I decided to just sit back and let them see for themselves.

I still warn. I wouldn't have more money invested in a Thai condo or in Thai stocks or in banks than I could afford to lose. The link to Forbes above is a must read. The question isn't "if" Thailand will crash, but "when."

I hate to say it, but I'm waiting for the bubble to burst. I have cash to invest.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

There is no bubble. Are prices for new condo projects too high? Yes. Is there more supply in the marketplace than there is demand? Yes. However these two facts alone do not a bubble make.

Developers are already putting the brakes on new condo projects in Bangkok and tightening their lending practices. Commercial banks are already tightening lending in both the mortgage and project finance sectors. All of this is being done because both developers and lenders realize the market is getting less liquid and cannot be sustained.

As to your point about empty condos/houses... it is certainly valid to say that a not insignificant portion of units are not currently being lived in, but again, that fact alone doesn't indicate a bubble. If you look at the rate of NPL's in the mortgage sector, it has increased slightly in recent years, but it isn't ballooning, and there is no indication that it will.

I don't browse the finance sub-forum, but if you care to share some salient, fact-based evidence of a pending bubble, I'm all ears.

Probably based per person and may include five years olds, grandmothers, etc. who have no debt or little debt. I have to believe it is higher with all the car purchases from the ridiculous tax free program.

Based on households, not individuals, as every other commenter noticed...

Use of the "average" statistic is useless if you want to gain any understanding. That is because neither income or indebtedness are no where near a normal distribution. Much more usefull would be to use a median or modal measure. Also, remember that this was a self report survey and most likely lacks any controls for people lying.

Agreed. Unfortunately the NSO has never provided median data in previous Household Socio-Economic Surveys, and it looks like 2013 will be no different.

What would be really telling is :

What was it 2 years ago.

Then couple that with the national debt using the same comparison.

Plus what was the countries overseas Dollar reserves 2 years ago compared to today.

Combining all the above would give a real indication of where the country is heading.

In 2011 when the last survey was carried out, it was 134,900 THB, so average debt levels have increased by 8.7% per year.

So far the NSO has only published a summary, so the full data which would allow a direct comparison to GDP and national debt (do you mean public/government debt?) is not possible (yet). I don't recall off the top of my head, but I believe that in 2011, household debt was higher than public debt by a fair margin.

In terms of foreign reserves, comparing Oct 2011 to Oct 2013, reserves are a bit lower (USD 172 billion versus USD 182 billion two years ago) according to Bank of Thailand stats.

Lakegeneve, good info. My point was that instead of promising some park at Makkasan which is more of a transit point, better to keep their promise to make the TTM into a park. Benjakitti park is nice but adding the rest of the TTM land would make it a great park. Admittedly the TTM land is nice now for a stroll except for motorcycles, cars angry dogs roaming through it.

However, more green space at Makkasan would only benefit a city that has too few parks and open recreational space. The obvious contest is that developers see the potential profits at Makkasan with projected land prices already speculated to go up from 600k per wai to 1.5m per rai for this land. That would make it some of the most expensive land in inner Bangkok.

The Makkasan Redevelopment offers a great potential if done right to have a large mixed use urban space that is well designed. Doing it right is probably a less than 30% chance but we have to wait and see...

Makkasan won't go for 1.5m per rai for quite some time even if it goes on the market sooner rather than later. Reason being is that it is leasehold land which means that condos (except ultra-luxury) will be a very difficult sell, and Bangkok currently has no need for massive office/retail/hotel construction in the short and even medium term. In the long term, say if a 20-30 year master plan is drafted to drive development in the area, it could turn into a great mixed-use area, particularly if a large share is reserved for green space as you say.

Anyone got a good "guesstimate" of journey time from the end of the dark green line to ChitLom?.

30 minutes?

RAZZ

Which end?

In non-peak periods, a good rule of thumb is to assume about 2-3 minutes per station, give or take. So yes, about 30 minutes from Bearing and maybe a little less than 20 from Mo Chit. In peak periods the times may be slightly longer as trains take longer at stations as passengers board / alight, but the difference over a long trip is probably negligible.

Impressive: http://upic.me/i/cs/bangkok_mrt_masterplan_3.jpg

Thanks for sharing... well rendered, up to date, and accurate as far as I can tell!

In my crystal balls, I see a new high-rise project.

Yes, I would agree with your crystal balls..so to speak....in allegedly the most corrupt dept in an allegedly corrupt system, anything is possible.....allegedly.

You guys are hilarious. No developer in their right mind would build a condo on leasehold land in the middle of a low-income community adjacent to an expressway far from transit even IF zoning regulations permitted it, which they don't.

A GSM phone should work on either the ATT or T-Mobile networks. Best to check with True on the roaming rates (which can be quite hefty) and if they have a preferred network partner.

Fares are have always been set to attract primarily the middle class and growth has proceeded accordingly. People pay a slight premium not be to stuck in traffic. Around 12.5%-15% of the fare is theoretically the profit for the operator. The ticketing framework is also set up as stand alone for that operator which adds to a slightly increased price.

The main way to reduce fares would be to have a proper integrated, multi-model ticketing platform so that people could travel on a bus, ferry & metro line or two and use the same ticket with a reduced cost than buying separate tickets for each journey. This has been promised but we are many years away from that. Think about the first visitor to BKK who decided to take the ARL, then the MRT and then the BTS to get to a hotel and ends up buying 3 different tickets!! A single operator, pref govt agency, running an integrated network would also be much more efficient.

1) Fares are absolutely apporpriate and could be higher. In the last five years, BTS ridership has increased by more than 12% per year and is now at record highs, MRT is similar.

2) OTP has funded a common ticket program. The original ETA for implementation was 2016, but the consultants have been asked to speed it up. My former boss who is leading this projects suggests they are aiming for late 2014... whether it happens at all is still anyone's guess, but the proper planning will at least be in place.

Perhaps carriages should be purchased until it is possible to occasionally sit when riding. Your global argument that the price is perfectly right because the train is always crowded so therefore it is not too expensive will then have to be replaced by something different.

That's simply not going to happen, as much as you or I might like it.

It boils down to economics. If the train isn't full, there is a mismatch between demand and pricing. If BTSC and BMCL had full control over their revenue management, prices in peak periods on both systems would be higher and then lower during mid-day, late and night, and perhaps weekends, to stimulate demand.

We tried the Roadhouse BBQ bar today on the corner of Silom and Suriwong. Really excellent Singaporean beer including Black Pig Bitter and a fine IPA. Expensive at 265 + but at 8% ABV you don't need too many! The atmosphere on a Sunday lunchtime could best be described as like a morgue. But as they are one of only two venues in Bangkok currently to have these excellent beers (the brewery is called Brewerkz), we may return. I don't think the Beer Garden would impress my wife very much - I used to enjoy going there in my single days mind! I'll certainly try Jools bar, maybe tie it in with Chequers and perhaps Bully's. Still no ideas for good places away from Sukhumvit- is the rest of BKK a Brit/Irish free zone?

Roadhouse is great for good beer and quality grub. It's not really a weekend place though except Saturday evenings, and even then usually only the 3rd floor sports bar is rocking. That said, if you go at lunch time or dinner time during the week, the ground floor and 2nd floor are usually quite full as well, a good mix of both Thai and expats.

1) TOT is reliable in terms of the hard product in my experience, however the soft product is terrible... unless you speak Thai. My contract was only available in Thai and the customer service (phone and in person) is only Thai-speaking. Having my Thai gf call on my behalf always worked like a charm in resolving the few small issues I've had (maybe 2-3 over a 3.5 year period)

4) Paying rent to the landlord's bank account may or may not be "normal," but it's certainly not unheard of and I have done it from time to time, though I usually just pay in cash at the front office.

5) My experience has been that when the contract lapses, you start going month-to-month, but I imagine this can certainly vary depending on the landlord / management company.

For pretty obvious reasons, no one could possibly tell you which is the best condo for internet and, as you've been told, using a condo's communal Wi-Fi is fraught with pitfalls.

If you want to set up your own private connection - best option -

This and only this.

If you need a reliable connection, you need to find a condo / apartment that will allow you to bring in your own dedicated line from True / TOT / 3BB. At my building, the management charged 2000 baht to run a new landline into my apartment and I pay TOT something like 800 THB a month for a VERY reliable 10up/1down connection (though speeds dip a little during the day, but nothing to prevent from Skype / streaming video).

UPDATE.

No issues whatever at 3PM up the expressway to Bang Pun then 347 to Chiang Rak.

Left the office a wee bit early did ye?

Aside from the previously mentioned "American thing" and "the household registration database is wholly inaccurate," both of which are true -- Thailand has a very limited formal definition of what constitutes a "city," along with zero data gathering efforts that would track population and/or economic development at said "city" level.

Assuming you mean Praram 9 Hospital - http://www.praram9.com/en/ - it really depends on the time of day you're planning to go. If you go mid-day, the absolute fastest, though most expensive way to go would be to get on the expressway between Nana and Ploenchit BTS and get off right near the hospital (there is an off-ramp basically within a stonesthrow. Might take you 20 minutes or so.

If you go in the morning or evening peak periods, take the BTS to Asoke, change to MRT and then get off at Petchaburi and take a taxi from there. Budget at least 30 min, maybe a little longer.

Yes, Praram 9.

Is the option in the first paragraph by taxi i presume?

Thanks.

You are correct...

Assuming you mean Praram 9 Hospital - http://www.praram9.com/en/ - it really depends on the time of day you're planning to go. If you go mid-day, the absolute fastest, though most expensive way to go would be to get on the expressway between Nana and Ploenchit BTS and get off right near the hospital (there is an off-ramp basically within a stonesthrow. Might take you 20 minutes or so.

If you go in the morning or evening peak periods, take the BTS to Asoke, change to MRT and then get off at Petchaburi and take a taxi from there. Budget at least 30 min, maybe a little longer.

One gets the impression this railway was designed by someone who doesn't know anything about railways. The stations are ridiculously huge, no thought was given to linking with other railways (eg makkasan). The trains are overcrowded in the rush hours (wait 15 mins for yhe next train at peak times). i would have thought srt would know something about railways !

With respect to the pedestrian connection at Makkasan (and Phaya Thai), it is not that the issue went ignored during the initial planning process, but rather that the connections, particularly to the MRT at Petchaburi, require inter-organizational cooperation (e.g., between the SRT, BMA, BTS, MRTA, etc). The real problem is that there is little to no cooperation as most often, these orgs see themselves in competition.

In terms of station architecture, they may seem huge and overbuilt, but you must consider that they have been built with the future in mind, just as BTS and MRT stations are, with long platform lengths to accomodate longer trains 5, 10 and even 20 years from now.

The overcrowding is essentially due to miscalculations in demand forecasting. In short, planners underestimated demand by a little bit on the City Line and WAY overestimated demand for Express services. As initial rolling stock (carraige) orders were based on these forecasts, the system doesn't have enough City Line trains and its Express trains are empty (which is why one Express train is being put into use on the City Line). Unfortunately the SRTET (airport link operator) doesn't have a budget of its own, it must rely on allocations from the SRT, which has no money. Thus no new rolling stock has been ordered. Given that there is a typically a 2-year lead time for new rolling stock orders, peak hour congestion on the City Line will continue for a few more years.

According to the passenger usage figure quoted of 1,400,000 people per month it would seem as if based upon a hourly rate over a period of 24 hours some 3,800 passengers or thereabouts are using this service each hour.

I am not sure of the operating frequency of rail trips per hour and as such I find the figures somewhat suspect.one needs to consider the passenger carrying capacity of the rolling stock , and yes according to the figures reached I feel that whoever may have worked out the usage statistics probably did not major in Math

One is inclined to ask just how many of those trips are for the full length of the journey and how many are short inter station trips.

Yet again I am under the impression that the decimal point has in reality slipped to the left and a zero has been added in error thus the figure in the real world we live in is probably more like 140,000 passengers per day.

Isn't the quote, "Lies, dammed lies and statistics." alt=whistling.gif>

So you estimate 140,000 a day - so about 4,200,000 a month? You are saying their numbers are low?

Have you not considered the fact that they have electronic ticked gates and so can count very accurately how many passengers they have? There's no need to do an estimate, they have actual numbers.

Looks right to me - I use the airport link in the mornings and evenings and it's packed. At many stations passengers can't get on and have to wait a considerable amount of time for the next one.

I know a few people who tailor their working hours in such a way to avoid getting crushed on it.

The numbers are right (1.4 million for the month), directly counted by the electronic fare gates.

That figure translates (roughly) into 50,000 per weekday and 39,000 per weekend day... or 47,000 daily.

You sound like a PTP spokesperson.

Most of the plans for roads and the upgrading of the current rail network are in place. The problem is that PTP has hijacked the funding to include the pie in the sky HSR, for which no feasibility studies - let alone plans - have been carried out.

The current railways are in urgent need of upgrading but the HSR is a distant future dream. The love of huge budgets & loans has blinded the party to get their priorities totally wrong. When Kittirat has to spend so much time defending the loan, it should raise a large red flag.

How much of the funding is going towards the HSR?

THB 783 billion // 39% of the total planned spending.

The transport ministry did a large presentation on the infrastructure plan at the Conrad a couple of weeks ago and it was very impressive, albeit you would expect it to be given what they are requesting.

What is not widely known is that much of the actual road network improvements were actually drawn up under the Chavolit Government in 1997, with the assistance of Japanese consultants- the road infrastructure plans are just putting into action what was developed 15 years ago. I think all parties agree that large scale infrastructure development needs to be carried out, its just a question of the source of funding.

You sound like a PTP spokesperson.

Most of the plans for roads and the upgrading of the current rail network are in place. The problem is that PTP has hijacked the funding to include the pie in the sky HSR, for which no feasibility studies - let alone plans - have been carried out.

The current railways are in urgent need of upgrading but the HSR is a distant future dream. The love of huge budgets & loans has blinded the party to get their priorities totally wrong. When Kittirat has to spend so much time defending the loan, it should raise a large red flag.

Everything smutcakes said is true, regardless of politics. FWIW, I was at the presentation at the Conrad and Dr. Chadchart speaks clearly and concisely in a no BS fashion. He's actively parading the last ten years as the "Lost Decade," in terms of infrastructure and investment, which is both absolutely true but also pretty ballsy for someone in his position to admit.

That said, your comments are definitely not off the mark either...

But they still havent said what this massive loan will be spent on. There are no plans for any infrastructure. They havent had time for such things. We know where a lot of the money will go but do the Thai people ?? They will never see any benefit only poverty.

Actually, they have broken it down broadly speaking - http://www.thai-japanasso.or.th/download/130425part1_p1_42.pdf

Nearly all of the projects in the bill have been in various planning stages for up to 20 years. The only "brand new" items that might be considered truly pie in the sky are the HSR routes to Chiang Mai, Isaan, and the South (the Chonburi / Rayong route was first studied in the mid-1990s under Chuan and the Democrats).

Will it be transport that can reduce the amount of accidents here by about 99%?

Since a plurality of accidents, if not a majority are caused by alcohol and/or inattentive driving, probably not.

Any plan the Democrats put forth will have some, if not all of the same projects. It will just be repackaged in a more palatable (and perhaps logical) fashion in terms of financing. No Democrat is against double-tracking the existing SRT network, speeding up implementation of new transit lines in Bangkok, let alone other projects, except perhaps some of the HSR lines.

My guess is they will put forward a smaller, revised package of projects that are "shovel ready" (to steal a phrase from Obama) and propose that they be paid for through normal budgetary processes.

This might be a silly question but is there a reason to use a monorail over something compatible with the existing system? It looks as if the BTS and MRT use the same equipment, is that the case? Just seems like the ability to connect everything together at some point, use the same depots, parts, training, etc would be desirable but I have no idea how such things work and may be quite wrong in my assumptions.

Reasoning is two-fold.

1) Some planned routes will not require the capacity that heavy rail (current BTS / MRT) solutions offer, thus a lower capacity solution must be considered (e.g., BRT, LRT, and Monorail)

2) BRT is working reasonably well on the Sathorn-Ratchaphruek route, but the BMA got a lot of flack for taking lanes away from cars, so, as far as I know, previously planned BRT routes by the BMA are dead in the water, leaving Monorail and LRT. Simply put, Monorail special interests (specifically Malaysian manufacturers) have more tea money to splash around than anyone else, which is behind the strong push for it on the Pink Line, Yellow Line, and the BMA's Gray and Azure lines...