maswov

The increase there and at other parks was made in response to an announcement from the National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation Department that admission fees for foreigners should be made consistent throughout the country as of Sunday.. should read as.. admission fees for people should be made consistent throughout the country. Seriously is there any other country in the world where foreigners are required to pay more to visit an attraction than residents ??

It is done in the US, only it is a local discount although not everywhere. Disneyland gives a discount if you have a driver's licence with an Orange County address, attractions in Guam are more expensive for tourists.

For universities you can get a 12 month extension.

For language schools you can get three 90 day extensions then must leave the country to get a new visa. I did hear something that you can only get 6 months total which to me sounds like 1 extension then must leave to get a new visa but it wasn't very clear and have heard very little about it. I would say it is just rumor or misinformation.

6 months 2 extensions

Thats cuz they doubled amount of hours u study per week so u do 12 month course in 6 months.

Its in bkk and phuket already.

Wonder about pattaya

For universities you can get a 12 month extension.

For language schools you can get three 90 day extensions then must leave the country to get a new visa. I did hear something that you can only get 6 months total which to me sounds like 1 extension then must leave to get a new visa but it wasn't very clear and have heard very little about it. I would say it is just rumor or misinformation.

Six months would be one extension since the initial entry allows 90 days. If it is 2 extensions that would be 9 months.

The amount of hours has only double for the minimum to qualify for an ED visa. Some schools offered various schedules which were in excess of the minimum and now are forced to reduce hours to meet the guidelines of immigration's rules.

I don't understand how the exchange rate makes it too expensive to live here compare to places like Canada, US and many European countries. Especially in the case when you have local income to hedge against the exchange rates. I heard all these same sob stories a few years ago when the baht rallied. The cost of living is still much cheaper here even though the home currencies don't go as far as they did a year ago.

When compared to places like Philippines where the economies are similar, the fluctuations could make or break you.

For universities you can get a 12 month extension.

For language schools you can get three 90 day extensions then must leave the country to get a new visa. I did hear something that you can only get 6 months total which to me sounds like 1 extension then must leave to get a new visa but it wasn't very clear and have heard very little about it. I would say it is just rumor or misinformation.

"Finally, I enrolled again May of 2014...my school offered me for 1 year visa stamp, so I grabbed the chance. I got 1 year stamp until May 2015. I don't do extensions because its 1 year stamp already, my school do my 90day report, too."

How did you get a 1 year visa? There is no such thing, it's a 3 month visa & every 90 days you need to go an get an extension of stay. I've been doing that for all of last year & got my visa since around mid to late 2013.

1 year extensions are still given for university students.

Yes. The situation is not good. They may relax in a few month's time. On the 28th meeting with MOE. They will officially change courses to 6 months. Big headache for all schools.

How will this effect people like myself who is here on a retirement Visa, and just want to learn Thai since I live here? There are many ED Visa students in my class that work to learn the Thai language, and they are doing very well. I have yet to meet an ED Visa student that was not progressing as fast, or faster, than me. I like having the same people in my class each week. Does this mean that I now have to attend more hours per week, drop behind the other students, etc.? I am going to travel for two weeks soon and am worried about getting too far behind the other students. I don't want to be additional hours behind them. Some of us actually enjoy learning and studying Thai in a class room setting. Thanks in advance for any response from MacWalen.

The minimum days per week is to maintain eligibility for the ED visa. The only effect for you is the time schedule is changed to meet the visa requirements.

I not need 3000€ every month only in high populated tourist area with high rent , for food minimum 1500 Bhat aday

1500 baht a day!!!??? i live on 80 baht a day and live " rather well " ( 80 baht is more than enough for food in this " third world land ".....)

F.J

80 per day and live rather well?? That is only 2400 per month. I guess if you own your home and grow your own food you could survive.

I spend 3 times that on rent alone!

"If you say 15 + 75 that implies that is two applications, and two fee payments, which is not."

I'll go with the OP on this one. Maybe a language factor?

Perhaps. Here's what the OP wrote:

they will give a 15 day extension and at the end of the 15 day evaluation period you can go back for another 75 day extension

While in fact it is one only extension.

When you go to immigration they will stamp your passport allowing you to stay for an additional 15 days, in other words extending your stay or an extension of stay. Then you must go to immigration a second time at which time they will stamp your passport allowing you to stay for an additional 75 days. again in other words extending your stay. So yes, for each 90 day period you must go 2 times, each time getting a stamp allowing you to stay for an extended period of time.

well said , these guys are students so i take it they have matter between the ears right ? why didnt they just say this at the start of the topic. god give me strength

I did say that at the beginning, someone just assumed that extension meant filling out an application and paying a fee which it does not.

I don't see any reason for Thailand to devalue its' currency, as trade will more than make up for any deficit from tourists. So, if you aren't getting any more than a government pension, yeah, you might be in trouble.

Trade drops off when the baht is strong. A couple years ago when the baht rallied and there was a exodus of expats, exporters were worried to as sales were dropping off. People import goods from Thailand not because of the quality but because they are cheap. China was such a strong exporter because they artificially kept the yuan low making their goods attractive at the low cost.

"If you say 15 + 75 that implies that is two applications, and two fee payments, which is not."

I'll go with the OP on this one. Maybe a language factor?

Perhaps. Here's what the OP wrote:

they will give a 15 day extension and at the end of the 15 day evaluation period you can go back for another 75 day extension

While in fact it is one only extension.

When you go to immigration they will stamp your passport allowing you to stay for an additional 15 days, in other words extending your stay or an extension of stay. Then you must go to immigration a second time at which time they will stamp your passport allowing you to stay for an additional 75 days. again in other words extending your stay. So yes, for each 90 day period you must go 2 times, each time getting a stamp allowing you to stay for an extended period of time.

I'm sure this is good for all these eager Thai language students...they should complete their courses in half the time and then return home.

Actually this is less time for many people. My school offers 3 days per week/3 hours per day. Immigration just wants people in class more days per week to interfere with them working.

It is up to 90 days added to the end of previous permitted stay. Under consideration period may or may not be give and does not change total duration.

OK so 15/75, that's what I said. Wasn't aware was optional, I thought that was going to be standard in Pattaya for the time being.

If you say 15 + 75 that implies that is two applications, and two fee payments, which is not.

After 15 days they just stamp the passport and that's it.

Yep, thats what I was saying, didn't mention anything about payment or application. But you will get 2 stamps, the first being for 15 days then returning to immigration at that time for another stamp for 75 days. That is what was implied.

It is up to 90 days added to the end of previous permitted stay. Under consideration period may or may not be give and does not change total duration.

OK so 15/75, that's what I said. Wasn't aware was optional, I thought that was going to be standard in Pattaya for the time being.

so its 15 and 90?

Starting next week Pattaya will be following the lead of Phuket and BKK.

Also, starting yesterday, they will give a 15 day extension and at the end of the 15 day evaluation period you can go back for another 75 day extension.

Now farang is really going to complain.

No other land transport charge extra for baggage.

Not train, not bus, not car rental; why on earth Thai taxi going to charge for baggage is beyond my logic.

Perhaps the happy Thai people's logic is a world different from mine.

The logic is that to move more mass, more energy is required thus more fuel used.

I am going to buy a water pump because this is getting unbearable.

Wouldn't waste money on a waterpump, because as the word says, you need water for that.

That's what tanks are for genius.

You could apply for the extension of stay (it is not a visa) now if you have the documents from the school. You can apply up to 30 days early (45 days at some offices).

Is this still accurate? I was told by the staff at my school that now it must be done on the day of expiration or the last working day prior if it expires on a weekend or holiday.

There is no such immigration rule or policy. You can still do it up to 30 days early.

Thanks. That's what I thought.

You could apply for the extension of stay (it is not a visa) now if you have the documents from the school. You can apply up to 30 days early (45 days at some offices).

Is this still accurate? I was told by the staff at my school that now it must be done on the day of expiration or the last working day prior if it expires on a weekend or holiday.

Maybe you should see the doc for your paranoia.

The HHV of ethanol is 84,000 BTU/gal and benzene is 124,000 BTU/gal so that puts ethanol closer to 68% the efficiency of straight benzene. I don't doubt your results but 2 tanks in an uncontrolled environment can hardly be considered a satisfactory test. The loss of power for a daily driver is negligible unless you have something to prove to the countless morons on the road trying to keep up with them.

Fossil fuels won't last forever, that stuff should be saved hot rods.

Those HHV facts are interesting. Thanks for sharing.

I do agree that my tests wouldn't pass scientific merit but both tanks had almost exactly the same fuel efficiency by the end and are more or less in line with everything I've read about E20. Just sharing my results, not ironclad conclusions.

My car is so badly underpowered as is. Driving around town with just me in it is one thing. But pulling 7 people with a 1.5L engine is just painful, there's no reason I'd ever want to willingly decrease my power, even if it's by 3-4%. My fuel tank is small so decreasing the range is another unwanted setback. Finally, the very noticable drop in fuel efficiency mostly negates any significant savings I might come up with. I have to fill up more often with E20. I'm not sure what's so ecological about consuming larger quantities of fuel.

I really think it's just a nice thought to put eco friendly fuel at the pump when in reality, it's doing a whole lot of nothing and saving you very little money.

I can see when you have a full load you will need to squeeze out every ounce of power you can.

You may use more fuel with bio-blends but the idea is to reduce the amount of fossil fuels being used. If you compare a tank of E20 to straight benzene and for example you can travel 100 km on the benzene and 80 on the E20, there is no benefit as you would be using the same amount of benzene to go the same distance. If the distance is less than 80 km you would be using more fossil fuel to go the same distance, but the goal is to get higher than 80 so anything above that mark would be essentially kilos run on fossil fuel free fuel.

For those that subscribe to the theory of anthropogenic global warming cost wouldn't be an issue since the bio portion of the fuel is carbon neutral. I fully support biofuels since our resources are limited, Conserve what we can now so future generations enjoy the raw power of a 1970 Boss 429 or a 1968 Dodge Superbee.

Our resources are indeed limited which is why I for one don't want the whole of Sumatra to be sterilised so the oil palms can be cultivated. At the same time, less land becomes available for food production, as they have discovered in South America.

There is still plenty land available for food production, the main problem is that food farmers prefer to use the land for higher valued crops.

Also, since the first cultivated crops, man has sought ways to improve and increase food production and currently there have been breakthroughs with indoor farming and turning barren wasteland into fertile farmland. I read a story a few months back about a single man in India, who for the last 40 years has been building a forest in once desolate land. The forest has grown lush and now inhabits wildlife including elephants and tigers. This obviously is not farmland but it shows the amazing things that can be accomplished even by just one man.

Dealership and mechanics say I have to use 95 for the Benz. Is this true? Before the price dropped I was spending 3000 baht per fill up.

Possible. Normally high performance engines will need a higher octane to prevent pre-ignition.

Temperature increases with pressure therefore in a higher compression engine the air/fuel mixture will get hotter than in a lower compression engine during the compression stroke. The flash point for higher octane fuel is higher than lower octane. Typically ignition will occur 4 degree before top dead center, however if the compression is high and the octane is low, the fuel may ignite before the spark. This usually results in knocking and pinging.

I'm not sure if different countries use different methods in rating fuels, but in the US 87 is the low octane which most cars run on, 89 and 91 are available as higher octane alternative with the occasional 93 or 94. I do remember 104 or 105 Cam II racing fuel, but that was extremely rare and not available at typical gas stations.

So is it true that German car should not use E10 or E20 ? Sorry i didn't get it.

I was talking about the octane rating and the effects on higher compression engines.

E10 and E20 refer to the ethanol to benzene blend, 10/90 and 20/80 respectively. The problems you may have with gasahol is that over time, ethanol deteriorates rubber seals and lines on some older cars, E20 should only be used if it is recommended by the manufacturer or you have had the proper modifications done. You can normally get away E10 use with just about any car although I have heard of possible problems with floats in carburetor engines.

The HHV of ethanol is 84,000 BTU/gal and benzene is 124,000 BTU/gal so that puts ethanol closer to 68% the efficiency of straight benzene. I don't doubt your results but 2 tanks in an uncontrolled environment can hardly be considered a satisfactory test. The loss of power for a daily driver is negligible unless you have something to prove to the countless morons on the road trying to keep up with them.

Fossil fuels won't last forever, that stuff should be saved hot rods.

Those HHV facts are interesting. Thanks for sharing.

I do agree that my tests wouldn't pass scientific merit but both tanks had almost exactly the same fuel efficiency by the end and are more or less in line with everything I've read about E20. Just sharing my results, not ironclad conclusions.

My car is so badly underpowered as is. Driving around town with just me in it is one thing. But pulling 7 people with a 1.5L engine is just painful, there's no reason I'd ever want to willingly decrease my power, even if it's by 3-4%. My fuel tank is small so decreasing the range is another unwanted setback. Finally, the very noticable drop in fuel efficiency mostly negates any significant savings I might come up with. I have to fill up more often with E20. I'm not sure what's so ecological about consuming larger quantities of fuel.

I really think it's just a nice thought to put eco friendly fuel at the pump when in reality, it's doing a whole lot of nothing and saving you very little money.

I can see when you have a full load you will need to squeeze out every ounce of power you can.

You may use more fuel with bio-blends but the idea is to reduce the amount of fossil fuels being used. If you compare a tank of E20 to straight benzene and for example you can travel 100 km on the benzene and 80 on the E20, there is no benefit as you would be using the same amount of benzene to go the same distance. If the distance is less than 80 km you would be using more fossil fuel to go the same distance, but the goal is to get higher than 80 so anything above that mark would be essentially kilos run on fossil fuel free fuel.

For those that subscribe to the theory of anthropogenic global warming cost wouldn't be an issue since the bio portion of the fuel is carbon neutral. I fully support biofuels since our resources are limited, Conserve what we can now so future generations enjoy the raw power of a 1970 Boss 429 or a 1968 Dodge Superbee.

The HHV of ethanol is 84,000 BTU/gal and benzene is 124,000 BTU/gal so that puts ethanol closer to 68% the efficiency of straight benzene. I don't doubt your results but 2 tanks in an uncontrolled environment can hardly be considered a satisfactory test. The loss of power for a daily driver is negligible unless you have something to prove to the countless morons on the road trying to keep up with them.

Fossil fuels won't last forever, that stuff should be saved hot rods.

Those HHV facts are interesting. Thanks for sharing.

I do agree that my tests wouldn't pass scientific merit but both tanks had almost exactly the same fuel efficiency by the end and are more or less in line with everything I've read about E20. Just sharing my results, not ironclad conclusions.

My car is so badly underpowered as is. Driving around town with just me in it is one thing. But pulling 7 people with a 1.5L engine is just painful, there's no reason I'd ever want to willingly decrease my power, even if it's by 3-4%. My fuel tank is small so decreasing the range is another unwanted setback. Finally, the very noticable drop in fuel efficiency mostly negates any significant savings I might come up with. I have to fill up more often with E20. I'm not sure what's so ecological about consuming larger quantities of fuel.

I really think it's just a nice thought to put eco friendly fuel at the pump when in reality, it's doing a whole lot of nothing and saving you very little money.

I can see when you have a full load you will need to squeeze out every ounce of power you can.

You may use more fuel with bio-blends but the idea is to reduce the amount of fossil fuels being used. If you compare a tank of E20 to straight benzene and for example you can travel 100 km on the benzene and 80 on the E20, there is no benefit as you would be using the same amount of benzene to go the same distance. If the distance is less than 80 km you would be using more fossil fuel to go the same distance, but the goal is to get higher than 80 so anything above that mark would be essentially kilos run on fossil fuel free fuel.

For those that subscribe to the theory of anthropogenic global warming cost wouldn't be an issue since the bio portion of the fuel is carbon neutral. I fully support biofuels since our resources are limited, Conserve what we can now so future generations enjoy the raw power of a 1970 Boss 429 or a 1968 Dodge Superbee.

Dealership and mechanics say I have to use 95 for the Benz. Is this true? Before the price dropped I was spending 3000 baht per fill up.

Possible. Normally high performance engines will need a higher octane to prevent pre-ignition.

Temperature increases with pressure therefore in a higher compression engine the air/fuel mixture will get hotter than in a lower compression engine during the compression stroke. The flash point for higher octane fuel is higher than lower octane. Typically ignition will occur 4 degree before top dead center, however if the compression is high and the octane is low, the fuel may ignite before the spark. This usually results in knocking and pinging.

I'm not sure if different countries use different methods in rating fuels, but in the US 87 is the low octane which most cars run on, 89 and 91 are available as higher octane alternative with the occasional 93 or 94. I do remember 104 or 105 Cam II racing fuel, but that was extremely rare and not available at typical gas stations.