josephbloggs

4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

All the above may be true but it's no secret:

 

According to the analysis of a plastic surgeon, Jisoo is the member with completely natural beauty in BLACKPINK, while Lisa is the member who had the most work done on her face. 

 

https://www.kbizoom.com/a-plastic-surgeons-controversial-analysis-on-blackpinks-beauty-only-one-member-is-natural-lisa-had-the-most-surgery/

Yeah, sounds like a real expert:

"It looks like she has some mini marbles in some parts of her lips if you know what I mean."

Spoken like a true surgeon, thanks for sharing.

5 minutes ago, thecyclist said:

Taylor, at least  has a smidgen of musical talent. The K- pop clowns have none.I get the sense that their "music " is AI generated.

Yeah, because you become a global superstar by not having any talent.

Just a typical AN bitter / jealous old man comment. Get back in your rocking chair grandpa.

13 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

It was the OP who asked the question initially then later, you posted a list of companies you believe are foreign owned. I continue to think that list comprises foreign company names but in Thailand they are Thai companies that are 51% owned by Thai's, albeit the shareholding may favor the parent overseas. At this point it's just curiosity.

Ah yes, sorry, I mixed you up with the OP. Was asking his reason as we may be able to tailor advice for him based on why or what he wants to know.

I don't know for sure of course, but I am fairly certain they are all 100% foreign owned. I just can't see that any of those huge multinationals would have a majority Thai partner - it is asking for trouble. And with the kind of investments they are making the BOI would welcome them with open arms, absolutely.

I've randomly searched a few from my list on the BOI database and they are all there. That database used to tell you the ownership and registered capital but now it doesn't.

1 minute ago, Jonathan Swift said:

Funny, I've lived in Thailand 10 years and have managed to avoid being robbed or beaten. Wonder why? And why even drive in Thailand anyway?

Eh? Plenty of good reasons to drive in Thailand, what an odd thing to say.

Driving to Soi Buakhau to a bar is utter stupidity though. 

22 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

There is one exception to the above which is shown in the link below but it is very limited and very restrictive.

 

https://thailand.acclime.com/formation/foreign-business-license/

That is talking about Foreign Business Licenses (FBL) for non BOI companies which is very difficult. If you get BOI privileges you can be 100% foreign owned. We applied for BOI with 100% foreign ownership, no Thai shareholders at all, and we got it. Since then we have also received a FBL for non BOI activities. Granted it can't be for protected industries.

Is there a reason for your question or are you just curious?

18 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Can you list some?

There are bajillions, including:

Toyota Motor Company

Nestle
Unilever
Honda
Siemens
P&G
Mitsubishi
Shell
DHL
IBM
Mitsubishi
Samsung
Coca Cola
3M
Ford
Bayer
Nokia
LG
PepsiCo
Microsoft
General Electric
Airbus
Nissan
Bosch
HP
Cisco

There my research ended as I got bored. I would say any multinational with a presence in Thailand (including the one I work for) will be 100% foreign owned through BOI. No way will they risk having a controlling local partner.

3 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

And remember Heathrow is closed between 11pm and 6am

Also remember the person you are replying to can't read. BKK will have a higher flight density capacity than Heathrow.

5 hours ago, brianthainess said:

Flights are only between 112 a day 06.00 till 24.00 that's only 10 flights an hour, when you compare that to Heathrow's 650 landings a day it makes a mockery of BKK airport.

Oh dear, too quick to make a mockery and in fact you ended up making a mockery of yourself. Slow down before you bash next time and use a bit of common sense and read carefully. I assume you have actually been to Suvarnabhumi? Yet you believe it handles ten flights per hour? One landing and one take off every 12 minutes??

The article clearly states the new runway will increase capacity to 94 flights per hour. Heathrow handles around 72 per hour (combined take offs and landings): 1,300 flight movements per day / 18 hours per day it operates = 72 flights per hour. So BKK makes a mockery of Heathrow - and it does, in many ways.

The newly opened SAT-1 concourse will handle 112 flights per day - that is not the entire airport, just a small addition to the main terminal.

22 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I was so concerned by the lack of liferafts that worked on the ferries ( perhaps that has changed ) that I always took my own flotation device.

I can confirm that Seatran has excellent live saving equipment. Live vests under all the seats, floatation devises on the decks and lots of lifeboats/liferafts. They were all stamped with their last inspection date and the date of their next due inspection (which was July 2024 on the ferry I was on).

Raja on the other hand......

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Lomprayah do an all included from Bkk. They don't go all the way to Surat, so it's not that long a bus ride.

 

What's wrong with a sleeper train to Surat? I did it many times and never a serious problem. You can take a first class cabin if don't like bunking with the commoners.

Well my post was from five months ago so a bit irrelevant now, but the reason I didn't want a bus or train is because it was only a four day trip, so wasting two days on the journey there and back made no sense. For a longer visit, no problem. Nothing to do with mixing with the commoners (maybe a bit), a train would be fine, but I'll never get on a long distance bus in Thailand.

I actually just spent 8 days on Samui and got back a couple of days ago. This time I drove and it was much easier than I expected. Left home in Bangkok at 6am and was at the Seatran pier at Donsak at 2pm. Unfortunately I had booked a 7pm ferry and all earlier ferries were full, so I had a few hours to kiil which was not ideal but also not the end of the world.

Coming back I intended to stay a night in Hua Hin to break up the journey. An 8am ferry from Samui to Donsak got me to Hua Hin  before 4pm, but then I decided to keep going to Bangkok as it was still daylight and Hua Hin holds no interest for me whatsoever.

I wouldn't hesitate to drive again. The bit between Bangkok and Hua Hin is a pig: ugly scenery, horrible roads, construction, trucks (so leave early and you miss the nastiness) but the rest of journey is scenic, quiet, and excellent roads.

11 hours ago, Ralf001 said:

 

Wow ok.

 

Definitely not something I have witnessed at a 7/11.

That's because it doesn't happen.

On 2/6/2024 at 8:19 PM, rabas said:

 

 

The next morning my girlfriend, reading That Rat with a huge front page picture of a torso shaped black cinder on a white sheet, said "Lets go to the hospital and look at the dead burnt bodies!" 

 

That's when it really sank in that Thai do not think about death as we do, if at all.

 

 

No, I think it's just your girlfriend that is weird. 

23 hours ago, BenStark said:

 

Perfect description of the relationship and trust between you and your wife.

 

I assume you sleep in different bedrooms, with the armoured door of yours locked, and still pay her a monthly salary.

Couldn't have said it better.

What sad lives some people have that they live with that mentality.

13 hours ago, Rampant Rabbit said:

any "decent"  company  ( and to be honest Im not sure they even exist anymore) would give you a  Business  class  ticket complete with PR  photoshoot in the cockpit to explain to  them how they were wrong as  "amateur wannabe  p[ilots".....thats the way to do it.

Why would you do that? The man posted lies and slanderous comments saying that Thai skimp on fuel risking safety, the pilots were wrong to divert as he could see out of the windows and no other flights diverted (they did), and that the pilots' command of English was too poor to negotiate more firmly with ATC. It wasn't just a complaint that he was late home, he posted that the airline was risking safety in several ways. But you would reward that with a business class ticket and photos? 

He comments were slanderous. I disagree with Thai's approach and they should have just made him take them down and apologise, but I have no ideas why you think slanderous comments merit a free business class trip. 

12 hours ago, Banana7 said:

After reading this article, I definitely will avoid booking any and all flights with Thai Airlines. I hope Thai airlines provided free ground transportation  for all passengers and their luggage to the original destination, immediately upon landing.  It's a 9 hour road trip between the 2 cities or 1.5 hour flight! If they didn't, they should have provided financial compensation. If they don't provided any compensation, I hope Australian transportation agency fines Thai airlines or revokes their landing rights.

Another AN genius, talking about fining TG or removing their landing rights for a scenario that you just made up.

A one minute internet search will tell you they continued on to Melbourne after a short time on the ground and arrived four hours after their scheduled time.

15 hours ago, Reigntax said:

thats the exact question that should be asked and how long before they arrived in Mel.

It doesn't need to be asked. If you bother to read about it (I know that is beyond most posters here) you'll see that after a short time on the ground in Sydney they flew to Melbourne. It arrived four hours late in total, but arrived safely.

16 hours ago, JohnAllan said:

I haven't read the criticism ... but I seriously doubt any slander was involved.

 

As for Thai pursuing legal action ... not the BRIGHTEST decision it could have made!

This is Asean Now at its finest! Haven't read it yet you have drawn your conclusion and taken the side of the anti Thai posting foreigner, brilliant.

Try reading it, it was clear slander in any country.

 

Quote

As for Thai pursuing legal action ... not the BRIGHTEST decision it could have made!

This I agree with.

3 hours ago, ezzra said:

Well the ministry of Finance own more than 50% of Thai airways and any decisions made would be a government

one wouldn't It?...

No they don't, and no they wouldn't.

4 hours ago, Stocky said:

The electric bill 

You obviously didn't read the thread - he said he will have solar.

42 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

 

Break the law and have an accident, that negates your fully comp insurance, leaving you to face a very large compensation claim is not really a good idea. Good luck to G Rex, he's gonna need it. And anyone else that does similar.

Yep. Driving 7-ish hours in a day (Kanchanburi to Hua Hin and back) with Thai family in the back is just beyond stupid. One accident, even if not your fault, and you are liable for the deaths of many Thais, that would be fun. But he laughs it off, "when in Rome". One of the most idiotic things I've read on here for a while.

Like another poster said, I have a 100% seatbelt rule. Even if just driving to the local 7-Eleven in my car (which is one of the safest on the market) if the kids don't have their belts on we don't move. Family, friends, neighbours, all have to obey the same rule. Of course it is second nature to my kids now. The roads are unpredictable and dangerous and even if you do everything perfectly you can still become a cropper. One of my cars almost got squished in two right outside my condo when I was smashed into by a speeding pick up - if I had people in with no seatbelts or I was in a pickup with people sat in the back there would have been deaths.

The poster is an idiot and should be ashamed.

7 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

Being on a motorcycle is perfectly safe if one drives properly and stays alert.

And wears a helmet.

3 hours ago, G Rex said:

 Yep , I am happy - and so are they

Accidents don't happen in vans? - ( and btw - would need a bus...)

 

When in Rome...

 

You don't sit your passengers on the roof of a van though do you, they are enclosed and have seat belts.

Irresponsible and shameful.