androokery

2 minutes ago, Falcon said:

How the hell is this going to generate 1.2 billion baht? They say they are limiting it to 300 people per week so 1,200 per month, so that’s 1 million baht each they expect to get from each person arriving here?? Idiots one and all!

But they're expecting the tourists to stay for at least 90 days each, so there's no need to be so gloomy:) The average per month for the first six-month period would be 3,000 people. So they only have to generate THB 400,000 per month and visitor. Or 13,333 per day and visitor. That's doable. Not likely. But doable. 

38 minutes ago, TommyL727 said:

I will tell you something that the media do not. There is a very specific reason for that. I have family in Sweden (as all Norwegians do lol), and they have first hand knowledge about this. Sweden has had a massive influx of immigrants the last 20 years or so, and especially since 2015. What happened was, that a lot of these got a job in the health care sector, and mostly in old peoples home care facilities. Now, the majority of these people were never met with any demands of any sort, so they did not bother learning the countrys language. They worked, could only understand their home language, or in best case some very basic English. So when corona hit, they had no idea what was happening, and they infected thousands of those old people, before the Swedish Government understood what was happening. They later issued corona material and advice in their native languages, but it was too late.

 

This is the true story of the massive deaths per capita in Sweden, and you will never hear it in main stream media. And im not trying to place blame, just stating facts. It could easily have been us, if we did not have had a stricter immigrant policy, with language demands.

That is not "the true story". It is one theory that has been popularised, but people who actually represent the groups you mention have debunked it. They put more blame on the fact that they live in crowded conditions and found it very difficult to separate young from old, infected from uninfected. And of course there are more issues. 

2 hours ago, HiSoLowSoNoSo said:

I think I stay here in Sweden, they can stick their silly rules and quarantine up where the sun don't shine. Can always find another warm country to spend the winter in if it gets too cold here.

"if" it gets too cold there? ????

6 hours ago, Ireland32 said:

I live Korat bye bye , so many deals on Air b & b in Thailand Im going on Tour 1 to 2 months each place , So many deals on ABB 

If you have to book the accommodation through the designated Thai travel agencies, I have a feeling AirBnb will not be an option. And there are some really good offers on there right now.

4 hours ago, OumarhindaOunsingha said:

Folks, Thailand just don't want to open up to tourists, yet. Trust me, if they wanted to open to tourists while securing the non-spreading of the corona, they could easily do that. Maybe not the same number of tourists as before the whole covid thing, but maybe 20 or even 50 percent of it. It could be made a highly effective, productive, streamlined system - requiring a negative test before entering the plane, make agreements with tons of cheap places in and around Bangkok to have the tourists in quarantine for 10 days (enough!), then yet another negative test, and then a minimum 3 or 6 months' visa stamp. This could be engineered, it could be coordinated, on a big scale, if Thailand really wanted. And if this easy, lots would come, sure. But they don't do this. And of course it is because they just don't want it. It is not that difficult to get lots of tourists into Thailand and still secure a non-spreading of the virus. Not if they really want. So, maybe they are just happy to get a break from the many tourists...

The quarantine part, even if shortened to 10 days, requires an awful lot of manpower. As does the testing. I don’t see how you can ramp that up to 8 million visitors per year, much less to almost 20 million as you suggest. 

On 9/18/2020 at 3:47 AM, ubonjoe said:

It was only been approved in principle by the cabinet which means it is not official yet. 

I doubt Brazil will be on the list of 10 countries allowed to use the scheme unless their corvid 19 infection rate drops to a zero.

 

10 countries? Have they limited the number of countries already?

4 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

So in reading the paper we can not link to this morning I found this quite interesting as it is also needed for the STV, and then again nothing makes me laugh harder then the ridiculousness of there resolve to not have tourists really arrive.

 

The article has a qoute by Dr Chakrarat Pittayawonganon, director of the Bureau of Mental Health Strategy under the Department of Disease Control, (DDC).  In his interview he stated that Tourists wanting to visit Thailand on the new Tourist Visa, must also have quarantined in their country of origin.  Additionally they must also have health insurance for international travel, and a specified minimum amount of money in their bank account, while also having a record of not visiting crowded places prior to their departure.  During the domestic quarantine, those prospective tourists must also have been tested twice for Covid-19 at the beginning and end of the domestic quarantine process in there home country, and If both tests are negative for the virus, they will be allowed to travel to Thailand.

 

I am flabbergasted that they want this as well as the local ASQ quarantine upon arrival.  You just can not make this garbage up.  Who in there right mind will travel with those types of requirements.  

 

Maybe I am reading to much into the article and this good doctor is confused as well.

I love the bit about having a record of not visiting crowded places prior to departure. Is the gps log of my phone OK? Or should I ask the government to write me a certificate? Are they asking me to board a flight from a secluded desolate area?

4 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

So in reading the paper we can not link to this morning I found this quite interesting as it is also needed for the STV, and then again nothing makes me laugh harder then the ridiculousness of there resolve to not have tourists really arrive.

 

The article has a qoute by Dr Chakrarat Pittayawonganon, director of the Bureau of Mental Health Strategy under the Department of Disease Control, (DDC).  In his interview he stated that Tourists wanting to visit Thailand on the new Tourist Visa, must also have quarantined in their country of origin.  Additionally they must also have health insurance for international travel, and a specified minimum amount of money in their bank account, while also having a record of not visiting crowded places prior to their departure.  During the domestic quarantine, those prospective tourists must also have been tested twice for Covid-19 at the beginning and end of the domestic quarantine process in there home country, and If both tests are negative for the virus, they will be allowed to travel to Thailand.

 

I am flabbergasted that they want this as well as the local ASQ quarantine upon arrival.  You just can not make this garbage up.  Who in there right mind will travel with those types of requirements.  

 

Maybe I am reading to much into the article and this good doctor is confused as well.

I read it as a suggestion for an alternate way to get tourists back into Thailand, not as a new list of requirements for STV. As a new proposition it’s hilarious, as an added list of requirements it’s horrifying. 

32 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Afraid you're mistaken... There's no direct correlation between someone with CV being asymptomatic (or pre-symptomatic) and them not being able to spread the virus. People with no apparent symptoms are capable of spreading it, just as are people with severe symptoms.

 

What matters more in terms of a person's ability to spread the virus is where they are in their own individual infection cycle.... After first exposed and then later on the down side, less likely to infect others. More in the middle and/or just before any symptoms present and then in the days after that, more likely to infect.

 

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/09/health/who-coronavirus-asymptomatic-spread-bn/index.html

 

 

Is there a correlation between being infected by an asymptomatic carrier and then becoming an asymptomatic carrier oneself? So, while the infection spreads, the recipients get such a small load that they often do not develop any symptoms? 

7 hours ago, ourmanflint said:

You have to ask yourself if 1 death in 100 days is worth the current economic chaos Thailand has put itself through?

I think I know what you're trying to say here, but you've got the argument back asswards. 

If the huns - or the mameluks or whatever warrior gang - are bearing down on your cute medieval town you can put up no defenses and suffer 2,000 dead, all the citizens in the town. Or ------ you could strengthen all the defenses and put a man on every wall and dig trenches and raise bulwarks and drag out cauldrons of boiling oil etc (I'm not familiar with medieval warfare). The aggressors beat themselves bloody on your strong defenses and only 1 of your own people dies before the huns move on.

Was all that work worth the single death?

No, all the work was to protect the 2,000 citizens. The single death was the cost.  

The problem with your argument is that you don't know what would have happened without the shutdowns etc. But I agree with your sentiment. It's gone on long enough. They are overreacting, throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater, they've painted themselves into a corner, the cost of the defense of their cute little town is getting to be too big. Probably. I don't know.  

23 hours ago, paahlman said:

You guys are missing something... If you have a rental its sufficient.. Or have a lease contract somewhere.... A hotel is not enough, but a rental seems to be. Which is good for villa renters I would guess. At least they say" asq hotels OR lease, rental contract, condo ownership or house papers like the housebook or/and title deed."

 

So seems to be not impossible not to stay in a hotel designated by the gov.

That's after quarantine. You have to show proof that you have booked and paid for your entire stay, minus the 15 nights in ASQ. So at least 75 nights.

On 9/17/2020 at 8:42 AM, crazykopite said:

I refuse to place my wife in Quarantine for 14 days in some fleapit in Bangkok also I was quoted 87,000 baht for the $100,000 Covid insurance as she is over 65 so I have no option but to leave her holed up in the U.K. I suppose the only saving is that as she is not in Thailand the food bills and other shopping has vastly been reduced as I tend to now go to my local 50 baht local eating place to keep the owner in business . If it wasn’t for owning a property I would have packed up and moved on  ☹️☹️☹️

Was that THB 87,000 per year?

On 9/17/2020 at 9:30 AM, herfiehandbag said:

It is due to run for a year. Those who have invested a considerable sum of "influence" in setting up this scheme are hardly likely to have done so if there was to be any "easing" before that time has elapsed.

That's a scary conclusion

7 hours ago, ChakaKhan said:

Why so serious??? Why no sleep??????? ????

I may only be envious of the sleeping. 
 

And to be fair, I do see a lot of Thais exercising in the parks at night. 

15 hours ago, JusticeGB said:

Man all the desks 3 planes a week about to arrive from abroad 1,200 people a week. About 60,000 a year. Was it just last year that 40,000,000 came to Thailand? What a catastrophic storm is about to hit Immigration they will have to work again at Swampy to process dirty farangs. 

No, it’s capped at 1,200 people a month, 14,400 per year. Basically droves of people.

14 hours ago, 86Tiger said:

Let's face it, Thailand is not a jewel on the mountain every soul across the world aspires to visit.  As matter of fact, there is nothing really unique offered, nothing not available at dozens if not hundreds of other locations all over the world.  And Bangkok is a dirty, loud, crowded, stinking city.

 

The draw has always been and always will be easy to get to and relatively cheap.  Impose up front costs, bureaucratic nonsense to acquire visas/permission to travel, a forced quarantine and Thailand as a tourist destination is finished.  The entire world will get the message pretty darn qwik and another easy to get to, cheap destination will be bursting at the seams with new tourists that used to go to Thailand.

Sure, but it’s MY dirty, loud, crowded, stinking city. 

2 hours ago, Kaopad999 said:

So, just open the borders like a flood gate and let the virus flood in? 

What a great Idea.. 

 

You do realise he is actually arguing the opposite? That the “flood” occurred BEFORE the shutdown?

42 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Dr. Thanarak is misinformed and misguided. 

 

A safe approach is to allow ANY person from ANY nation starting tomorrow, in unlimited quantities, if they are willing to subject themselves to a 14 day quarantine and pay excessive fees for that two week sentence. There is no downside or risk, and only upside for the nation. No groveling from a local consulate should be required. That is utter nonsense. And no special health insurance either. Just another hurdle tourists will NOT jump over! A covid free letter and a booking at an approved hotel. 2 requirements. That is all that will be tolerated by tourists. 

 

In reality if they were serious about reinvigorating long term tourism, they would subsidize the quarantine, pay for at least half of it, and then maybe some people would come. At this point, they may be sabotaging tourism long term, beyond repair. Expect a million tourists in 2021, two to three million in 2022, and beyond that?

 

Thailand will never, ever again see over 30 million tourists. That is in the past. Trillions of baht invested in tourism down the drain. The sooner these companies write off their Thai investments, the better. 

It would still be quite limited since there aren’t that many places offering the 14 day quarantine (which is actually 16 days/15 nights). 

8 hours ago, spiekerjozef said:

The only safe way is keep the borders closed.

No. The best way to protect the country from widespread COVID-19 may be to keep the borders closed. But that same decision may lead to quite horrible consequences that are far from “safe”. 

1 hour ago, Donga said:

Wealthy tourists with high spending power are very unlikely to stay three months in Thailand. But I suppose it is a timid start. However, to have an impact on the millions unemployed, Thailand needs to ramp up seriously and soon. 

What better way than going back to safe countries, bubble approach? There are already many countries in the region, including big markets like Japan, Australia and South Korea where the chances of someone boarding a plane with Covid would be 1 in 10,000.. even before you apply tests 3 days out and upon arrival.

With existing distancing and face masks, the chances would be around one in a million. So bring them in tested from "safe" countries, have them wear masks, isolate for a week perhaps. If one or two beat those odds and slip the net, the chances of an outbreak are minuscule, e.g. the Egyptians earlier and recent DJ.

Sooner or later other countries in the region will see this and let's hope Thailand is an early adopter.

I'm regularly trying to "game this out", trying to see what a realistic compromise between the needed volumes of visitors and the safety measures could be. And I always get stuck on the isolation part, the quarantine. If you want to maintain control you will never get the volume of tourists you need. There are bottlenecks both at the embassies and at the ASQ hotels.

You need a system where visitors are incentivised to self-quarantine for a period, a system where you get checked in and out with appropriate testing, a system where you are penalised for breaking the rules. It doesn't sound like fun and it does sound like the perfect opportunity for police and other locals to capitalise on your vulnerability as a visitor. And people will of course slip through the cracks. Some of them.  

19 hours ago, ronaldo0 said:

And it’s not a cheap fee which is why Thai airways stopped their flights there .

Sea planes - there should be sea plane flights to Koh Samui from Bangkok/Samut Prakan. Not entirely relevant to this thread, but a fun way to bypass the airport issue. Also: "Samui, the Maldives of the Bay of Siam"????