phuketjock

2 hours ago, CharlieH said:

You could transfer from your UK account direct to  Thai account. The banks charges will vary depending on who you are with. If you transfer via Bangkok Bank London you will pay £25 plus upto a max 500 baht in Bangkok dependin on the amount.

 

Halifax UK charge 9.50

 

Shop around the banks for charges.

I used to do this with my 2 banks in UK but a couple of years ago, out of the blue, they informed me that 

they will no longer be making standing order transfers to overseas banks and that i would have to give

notice to them, by way of a bank transfer form, every time i wished to transfer money from my UK accounts

to my Thai accounts. Luckily my UK pension provider does send my pension to my Thai account.

The Banks concerned were Natwest and Clydesdale, and neither saw fit to tell me why this inconvenience

had been thrust upon me?? I don't know but I would think this change would probable affect all banks? 

3 minutes ago, blorg said:

@phuketjock I'm just giving some suggestions on what you can do if you feel it's an issue. I haven't run a coffee shop, no, but I have been in hundreds of them. Thailand is not short of coffee shops, there are probably as many if not more now as there are 7-11s and there are plenty that are perfectly happy to serve digital nomads. So if you don't like these customers there will be another shop that is happy to take them.

 

You need to look at your business model and what sort of customer you are targeting and then design your offering around that. If you find you are attracting the wrong sort of customer, tweak your offering to dissuade them.

 

I have seen other shops, that were in the very small percentage that they actually are really busy actually follow this, there was a really excellent bakery near me in Bangkok and when they started they had sofas and people would stay there a while. They got very busy and popular and they took active steps to design their space to *encourage* people not to linger. They covered all the power outlets and rearranged the seating to get more people in but reduced the amount of more "comfortable" chairs to lounge in. They got rid of private tables and replaced with long shared tables. It was about designing the space for what they were aiming for, which was more turnover, as they were genuinely busy to the point that more often than not every seat in the place would be taken. And it worked... people still went there for the bread and pastries as it was excellent but they were more likely to eat and get out, rather than lounge around all morning. Nobody in the place ever cracks out a laptop, it's just not that sort of place.

 

If you design your cafe so as to encourage turnover, I honestly don't understand why any digital nomad would go there in the first place. If your cafe is attracting them, and you don't want them, you need to look at why people go there and take active steps to discourage lingering. It's not rocket surgery. Do you provide power outlets? If so, WHY? Digital nomads are drawn to power outlets like flies to excrement, if you don't want them why are you offering power outlets? Cover them. Why are you offering unlimited wifi? There's another similar bakery I can think of here in Chiang Mai that is in a similar situation, plenty of customers, no power outlets and they just don't do wifi AT ALL. And Chiang Mai is digital nomad Mecca and this is a great cafe but you know, I have NEVER seen anyone with a laptop in that cafe. Never. It's not difficult to get rid of customers you don't want, the problem is when you actually need those customers and so can't take these steps to dissuade them but prefer to whinge about them behind their back instead.

Blorg thank you very much for your, totally no experience of running a restaurant/coffee shop,

sage like advice but had you taken the time to actually read ALL the posts on the subject you

would have seen that the problem has been solved for now.

3 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Good post. Even Starbucks' idea of discouraging students was quickly withdrawn!

5 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Very true. Not to mention two or three customers in a place is often more of a draw for people walking past than a place completely devoid of people. True of cafes and bars both. 

11 hours ago, blorg said:

I suspect from his name it is in Phuket. I don't get the antipathy towards digital nomads, many cafes welcome them and are specifically set up to attract them. Or indeed, Thai university students- in any town with a large university there are a load of "study cafes" specifically oriented at students who want to come and use the WiFi and study for hours.

 

If you feel your business doesn't benefit from Thai students, or digital nomads, it is pretty trivial to discourage them, don't have any electric outlets (cover them if they are there) and limit the wifi use (give an hour with a purchase) and that is probably going to dissuade most of them. If necessary you could start having minimum spends, but simply not providing these services and I doubt they will come in the first place.

 

Frankly MOST cafes in Thailand have very low customer traffic and welcome what they can get, and don't mind someone sitting there for hours whether a Thai student or a digital nomad, as long as they spend some reasonable minimum.

 

There are a few places that are popular and have high traffic, but they are very much the exception. In fact in years here I can only think of a handful of cafes which were constantly busy with customers coming and going all day. Most cafes sit virtually empty all day, and a customer is a customer. The ones that were genuinely that busy I couldn't possibly see someone trying to work in anyway, people looking to work are going to look for quieter places... and if you are empty most of the time anyway, who are you trying to free the seat up for exactly?

From your posts it is fairly obvious that none of you have or run a restaurant/coffee shop

or have the faintest idea what you are talking about.

My wife's shop is no where near a school or university nor does it sit "virtually empty" all day

so when the parasites invade they occupy seats that paying customers cannot, and believe it

or not this has an adverse affect on her business, please don't post nonsense when you don't

know what you are talking about. Thank you.

17 minutes ago, BritTim said:

I am not very good at dropping pointless arguments. I allowed your last reply to pass, but I will briefly respond to this one.

 

I would never be so stupid as to challenge an immigration official's ability to make my life miserable. I agree Thai immigration officials do sometimes arbitrarily exclude people from the country, allowing no appeal. The point I tried to make (which no one has properly debunked) is that, under Thai law, they do not have the legal right to do so. They exclude people in the manner of a banana republic by preventing the law from being followed.

 

I am sorry, but I do not find the argument about what happens in other countries to have any bearing on Thai immigration law. At no place does that law defer to practice (however common) in other countries.

Tim There are multiple laws in Thailand that are continually ignored on a daily basis, often by the very law enforcers themselves

You may or may not be correct in your summation of Thai immigration law but it doesn't really matter does it?

I notice UJ is keeping very quiet on this but I think I recall on more than one occasion he has said that an IO has the power to

refuse or admit anyone as he sees fit, i am open to correction on that.

8 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

This is a constant threat of the nature of power, which must be checked by proper supervision and adherence to law.  Being right does not always mean "you win" in a power-game.  Does that mean we should abandon law, and just go with who has more firepower in every situation?  Should that be celebrated?  I do agree it must be recognized as a threat, and conflict avoided whenever possible.  In this case - many would be advised: don't fly in.

 

First, Thai immigration law is not written they way as described by "mvdf" - and each country makes its own laws.  The Thais can change theirs in the future if they choose.  See my post here on why cheering for a 'crackdown' which warps laws is foolish - even if you agree with the objective/goal:
https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/993006-a-thank-you-to-thailand-immigration/?do=findComment&comment=12094544

 

Anyone who thinks "being asian" makes it harder to enter the USA or Europe is deluded.  Asian people are the highest-performing demographic in the USA, in education, financially, lowest-crime rates, etc.  If anything, not "being white" means you will get easier treatment, because of the fear of a racism charge.  When white people get the shaft, no one makes a news-story about 'racism' - we just get shafted, quietly.  Money is the only real 'privilege' factor; with that, you can go anywhere - and even buy a passport that is less-scrutinized.  But, if your country of origin has low-wages - yes, you may be suspected of traveling to a higher-wage nation for illegal employment. 

 

Setting aside national security concerns, the reason countries have different policies, is primarily because of people entering some for reasons of obtaining illegal employment.  In the case of those entering Thailand, people whose passport-country offers lower wages than are available in Thailand - people from poorer nations.  There is a defined list of countries in this group, whose citizens Cannot Obtain Visas in Vientiane, Penang, etc (there is a list of them).

Jack I am sorry your posts get longer each time I get fed up after the first few lines.

I did not post to entice argument merely to show a different point of view as i said

in the previous post to yours " Some food for thought " nothing more.

You sound like you were once a politician or lawyer before Thailand??

11 hours ago, BritTim said:

I have  researched this myself (unlike you who assumes Thai I immigration law, as written, must be the same as US immigration law). In total, the Immigration Act of 1979 has 92 Sections. I have read all of them multiple times, as much BS on the subject is cited all over the place. Let's see if anyone can cite an actual Thai law that gives immigration officials the right to deny entry other than according to Section 12. Only one person is given the authority to deny entry arbitrarily, and that is the Minister. Further, the law implies that anyone should be able to appeal denial of entry, and prescribes the procedure to be followed. Nowhere are any conditions stated within the law where officials are allowed to prevent the appeal.

I urge you to tell an IO who refuses you entry that he cannot do that then come on here and tell us all about it.

Some food for thought taken from another thread on a similar subject.

Written by mvdf in reply to a post by Jack Thompson.

" I'm struggling to understand why you and others on this forum WONDER why IOs behave in a manner you deem inappropriate! 

I am Asian and when I travel to Schengen countries, the U.S., Australia etc I am occasionally interrogated, my travel history scrutinised, itinerary analysed...

Why is it that you think or expect westerners to be treated preferentially, kowtowed even, just because you come from first world countries? Immigration authorities in this region are entitled to interrogate, analyse, admit or expel, scrutinise all arriving human beings at ports of entry in the same exact manner we Asians are treated when we arrive at your airports! "

I wholeheartedly agree with the above.

9 hours ago, BritTim said:

I have  researched this myself (unlike you who assumes Thai I immigration law, as written, must be the same as US immigration law). In total, the Immigration Act of 1979 has 92 Sections. I have read all of them multiple times, as much BS on the subject is cited all over the place. Let's see if anyone can cite an actual Thai law that gives immigration officials the right to deny entry other than according to Section 12. Only one person is given the authority to deny entry arbitrarily, and that is the Minister. Further, the law implies that anyone should be able to appeal denial of entry, and prescribes the procedure to be followed. Nowhere are any conditions stated within the law where officials are allowed to prevent the appeal.

Well done Tim but why would i assume anything would be the same as US law, i know nothing about US immigration or any other US law and I am not the American you seemed to have assumed I was???

Sorry to all of you who were trying to follow the op we seem to have veered way of topic

please accept my sincere apologies.

1 minute ago, ukrules said:

I'd just boot them out, never mind the reviews.

That is more or less what happened in the end and she just had to suck up the reviews,

but these people tell all sorts of lies in their reviews and she has little recourse other than

myself replying to their nastiness. Thankfully she works hard and the good reviews far

outweigh the lousy parasites ones. 

15 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

He runs a coffee shop or something which is struggling so he is taking it out on customers (logical?), really he needs to generate more money elsewhere or stop his mrs spending it. By restricting wifi access at least his bp might reduce

Just for the record I do not run a coffee shop but my wife has a small restaurant/coffee shop, doing alright as it happens

at the moment, and she had a spell last year when it seemed to be the digital parasites stop off every day. She went out

of her way ask them politely to either spend or vacate and she has the reviews to prove their vindictiveness. Since then 

through a little bit of help from me and prominent notice in the right place this appears to have done the trick, so far.

We will see how it goes in the upcoming high season?? Hence my feeling on digital parasites.

At one stage last year I came back from shopping to find no less than 6 computers complete with at least one phone for

each computer and of course all her 4 seat tables taken by one or 2 people, leaving little room for real customers.

1 minute ago, scubascuba3 said:

He runs a coffee shop or something which is struggling so he is taking it out on customers (logical?), really he needs to generate more money elsewhere or stop his mrs spending it. By restricting wifi access at least his bp might reduce

LOL I can't believe where you have ended up with this are you in a bar right now???

I am truly amazed how you have conjoured up what you seem to have from previous posts

truly amazing.

8 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Surely they could just skip buying a coffee/drink and go to a internet shop it would work out cheaper

It is cheaper to buy a coffee, and much more comfortable, to sit for hours in a cafe'/restaurant

than pay for 5 hours in an internet shop.

9 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

No that's nobby, how about the other customers who are using it

I am well versed on how and when to do it, don't worry.

17 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Do you know one who doesn't live better lives than those working day-jobs they hate for decades?  I have met ones who are millionaires.  And many who aren't today, will be next year.

I have met many who are most definitely not millionaires and almost all of

them were here last year and they were not millionaires then either, maybe 

next year then.

14 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Yes.  I wasted decades in jobs I hated.  But I am happy for those who were born later, and could get out of that routine when younger.  Others seem to see wasted-decades as a "right of passage" of some sort - like a hazing ritual, or something.

And too many of the young today see hard work as something older people used to do 

and why should they do it when sitting in front of a computer punching keys is way

easier, unfortunately laziness is the norm in far too many young people today, sad.

7 minutes ago, jspill said:

Some young guys working online here sure does seem to provoke an emotional reaction in certain people. 

I have absolutely no problem with anyone working on line anywhere

just don't expect other people to foot the bill for your overheads, do

you actually have any idea, even roughly, how much it cost on a daily

basis to open the doors of even a small cafe;/restaurant?

I can only assume the little money that some of them may make would

not actually be sufficient to support a real business, but I can't be sure?

5 minutes ago, jspill said:

It's in Thai news media 

Must be true then.      .

5 minutes ago, jspill said:

Germany, Estonia, Chile... Thailand is considering one actually

That would be great then they can all get together and buy their own digital

cafe' and pay their own overheads, don't hold your breath though.

And heh watch out for freeloaders coming in, or sorry digital nomads.

Just now, j8k said:

You sound very bitter.

 

Maybe you should try and earn some extra money online to bolster your shrinking UK pension? 

 

You might scrape enough together for a night out at the 7eleven with your friend Leo.

Now i know i am getting the better of you when you stoop to personal insults.   

Not bitter in the least just hate parasites, I have worked all my life to get where i am now 

no freeloading involved.

3 minutes ago, j8k said:

Many nomads will use their own wifi via 4G tethering. Often faster than the sucky wifi on offer anyway!

Then why do they leech of other people in places where they don't need to be then?

8 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

An easy fix just have a system in place where max usage is an hour or so, something like Starbucks and others do

Yes by the use of below.

3 minutes ago, perthperson said:

An even easier fix is a "kill" switch which turns off the Wi Fi -- best done while the Parasites are actively up/downloading ! 

and Yes.

5 minutes ago, balo said:

I think you are being a bit judgemental here.

 

Not all of them are nomads , you can see students and backpackers do the same thing  , order a coffee and sit for hours.   And most digital nomads actually work from inside their own homes or hotels.

 

 

 

Believe me I am being extremely judgemental, I have seen them with my own eyes 

and what really pisses me off is the indignant pose they adopt when questioned about

sitting for hours on one coffee or water, as if it is their god given right to free air-con

and internet/wifi and a comfortable free office for the day and the next day and the next

day. Students and backpackers are not in the same league as professional digital

parasites, they generally understand they are occupying revenue generating seats and

will move to help the business ,when asked.

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

You're splitting rhetorical hairs.

OK Jt have it your way I just thought i was stating a fact.        

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Extensions of stay indeed are not visas.

But I would say that the extensions of stay are extensions based on the original visa, even if the original visa expired 20 years ago.

Almost correct jt an extension of stay is not actually based on any visa but

you are required to have a visa of some sort to enable you apply for that

extension, whether you apply for an extension or not the moment you enter

the country on most visas the visa has been used and is therefore expired.