chang1

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

A Pattaya that does not change, will there be anyone willing to fly very far to see it in the future? It is stuck in the past, but I wonder if that will appeal to the next generation.... like it did to me!

The point is it has its niche which can attract people and not just sex tourists as a lot of other attractions like street food can flourish. 

Then ask what will attract the next generation to a modern sanitised Pattaya that is no different to half the beach resorts in the world? 

How many people do you hear saying Thailand has become a great place to visit compared to 20-30 years ago (ignoring the exchange rate). Of those that say it has, ask them why is it better than Spain or Miami. 

Many tourists like to see things stuck in the past such as preserved villages. Even more so if they are actually still functioning as they used to.

It all comes down to supply and demand. If the girls have better options the supply will dry up. If the bar scene experience becomes unpleasant or places like Amsterdam and Eastern Europe offer something better/cheaper then demand will fall. 

The mayor thinks he is preparing Pattaya for the future and will say he was right as the last bar closes. In reality he could go either way. His way will finish off the bars but he could have kept them as the main attraction. Unfortunately he sees much more financial rewards from big business than small business. The risk is, like KSR, just because it looks nice and modern, doesn't mean people will want to travel thousands of miles to visit. Being so close to BKK means pattaya should be popular no matter what the mayor does. Will killing off its only stand out attraction be a good idea, who knows? I certainly don't. 

6 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Wow, you've really missed the point.   The HSR will connect Don Muang with Bang Sue (main train station), Suvarnabhumi, then go on to U-Tapao with some stops along the way - Pattaya being one of them where it will link with the monorail if it ever gets built.

Did you really think it's just going to airports?  If you're going to be so critical of something it's better if you actually know a little about it.

I stand corrected I didn't know there was other stops along the way. So it will hardly run at high speed for more than a few miles. 

8 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

"From what I've read" - you forgot to add "on TVF".

 

So repaving the road and pavements and adding bollards to stop encroachment by cars has destroyed KSR has it?  You do realise that that work was done during Covid when there are no tourists and we are still under Covid and there are still no tourists.  Would love the see the article you read that said the repaving has destroyed it.

Problem with TVF naysayers is they listen to all the other TVF naysayers, and most of the TVF naysayers have no first hand experience of what they are naysaying.  Perfect case in point.

KSR was my first stop after arriving at Don Mueang. It was packed and full of energy a great way to start a 3 month trip. Gradually it has been modernised and the life sucked out. Last time I was there, about 3 years ago, it was just plain unpleasant. Now I avoid Bangkok completely when possible. 

10 minutes ago, Salerno said:

 

To speed up international/domestic/international flights for tourism/business. 

 

 

How many international tourists/businessmen travel by train? Pretty sure the idea is to expand U-Tapao including more domestic and international flights.

Swampy and Don Mueang are close enough to be connected by a normal sky train linked in with existing transport options. A high speed train will barely have got going before it has to stop. 

If businessmen and tourists won't use the train, then who will? 

If I landed at Swampy and wanted to go to Pattaya a direct high speed train would be perfect. Flying or taking a high speed train to U-Tapao and then looking for a bus or taxi is not better. It may work for businessmen going elsewhere or Chinese tour groups. 

International flights to U-Tapao will always be more expensive than flying to BKK and taking a taxi to Pattaya. Also no chance of direct flights from most countries. 

I would have thought businessmen would be a very small amount compared to the number of tourists going to Pattaya so why drop tourists miles away at an airport they could have flown to.

14 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Pattaya is a place and does not discern in the slightest.... for the people of Thailand I doubt the slums of Soi VC hold much meaning unless they live there. Arrogant of Westerners to hold this country and it's people back over foreign nostalgia due their sense of fun over their old tatty crumbling buildings....

Thailand needs to modernize.

Yes and no. Would you modernise Stonehenge or the Tower of London? Modernisation is killing Pattaya. Large malls and hotels filled with Chinese along an uninviting beach is driving Farang away. Now the decline is in full flow the mayor thinks making everything shiny and new is going to bring them back. Then there is the problem of who will benefit in the end. Those with money will make money far more than those with small businesses that get pushed out. 

Sure you can bulldoze Stonehenge and replace it with yet another awful metal sculpture surrounded by big hotels but would anyone want to fly halfway around the world to see it?

5 hours ago, Salerno said:

 

Thought the three airports in question are Dong Mueang, Suvarnabhumi and U-Tapao?

What is the point of joining airports with high speed trains? Much more sense to join the places that people want to travel between. 

Why not join the 2 Bangkok main train stations to the monorail in Pattaya via Swampy? U-Tapao could then be closed as it would be redundant. 

56 minutes ago, Snackbar said:

OK to pass judgement with a third party version of an event?

 

No

 
 

 

 

 

 

OK for this teacher to be free to threaten further violence if the case is not dropped when there is strong evidence against him?

No

6 minutes ago, eastlight said:

Your description is just what the Pattaya I visited in 1985 was actually like.

Same as Lamai in 2000. I knew the good times were over when McDonald's came and every way to get to the beach was built upon. I have not been to Samui for about 10 years so need to see what it is like after covid.

3 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

what if they applied the 1996 law which is about the suppression of prostitution ? not only providing as it does penalties for prostitution, but for soliciting, pimping and just about everything else to do with it. People used to get pleasure from bear baiting and the sex trade does affect other people. It's mired in criminality, exploitation, drugs, depression and ill health. 

Mongers should read it

 

Section 7. Any person who advertises or agrees to advertise, induces or introduces by means of documents or printed matters, or by any means makes known to the public in a manner apparently indicative of importunity or solicitation for the prostitution of himself ,herself or another person shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of six months to two years or to a fine of ten thousand to forty thousand Baht or to both.

Section 8. Any person who, in order to gratify his or her sexual desire or that of another person, has sexual intercourse or acts otherwise against a person over fifteen but not over eighteen years of age in a prostitution establishment, with or without his or her consent, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of one to three years and to a fine of twenty thousand to sixty thousand Baht.

If the offence under paragraph one is committed in relation to a child not over fifteen years of age, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of two to six years and to a fine of forty thousand to one hundred twenty thousand Baht.

If the act under paragraph one is committed in relation to one's own spouse, and not to gratify the sexual desire of another person, the offender is not guilty.

Section 9. Any person who procures, seduces or takes away any person for the prostitution of such person, even with her or his consent and irrespective of whether the various acts which constitute an offence are committed within or outside the Kingdom, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of one to ten years and to a fine of twenty thousand to two hundred thousand Baht.

What an uneducated, narrow minded  view. You must have had a very sheltered life. No-one can deny prostitution has some very bad sides to it including in Thailand. I have spent many hours researching bars and spoken to many bar girls so know a lot of the good and bad things that go on. 

What is the alternative - planting rice for little reward.

What are the rewards - decent money and the chance to snare a relatively or even very wealthy husband. Money for the family. 

What are the risks - very little but they can be very bad.

Is it a bad life - no worse than a normal job if they are mentally up to it.

Most girls have at least one child to support which reduces their chances of getting a decent Thai husband. 

It is not suitable for most girls but it certainly is not that bad when compared to the alternatives most of these girls have. Tourist bars are a fraction of Thai prostitution and I doubt are any worse than karaoke bars. 

Instead of just taking the moral high ground do your own research and put yourself in their position. Bars have lifted many families out of desperate poverty and helped many to be happy but there has also been many exploited and harmed as well. Remember, people are also hurt in normal jobs whether physically or mentally. I slipped on ice at work yesterday and smashed my head on the ground while doing some welding. I bet you don't want to stop people welding though. I wish I could earn a month's wages just for sleeping one night with my choice of one of the women who came to my pub. 

I doubt much has changed but I  am out of touch now as I have been married over 10 years and I don't think our 6 year old would want to sit in a bar at night  just yet - but he does love the Hooters (bar) near Nana plaza. 

Edit - I  forgot to mention, that law is not generally enforced for a reason - money, lots of it.

If it was enforced it would not help anyone as it would just drive prostitution underground meaning it would be more unsafe for everyone. 

38 minutes ago, Tony Calderazzo said:

Need get rid of other type of filth .. that would take care of the rubbish ..

a great opportunity to move the whole “mixed business” away from the foreshore 

That would make plenty of room for multistorey hotels. A great way to kill off anything of interest. Maybe widen the roads a little so that they can be lined with pretty Chinese tour buses. 

Pattaya could be like Miami that should have the Americans queuing up to stay - or just maybe they will just go to Miami. There is a big market for that kind of tourist and they have a lot of choices that are much more suitable. Pattaya caters to a niche tourist who has very few options so why not concentrate on that instead? 

Remove big hotels and shopping malls, create small streets filled with seedy bars and of course make a nice quiet natural looking beach. A place where men can enjoy nights out without families, snobs or Chinese to spoil the atmosphere. 

17 minutes ago, Pilotman said:

I was last there about a year later than you.  I was not uncomfortable, just bored by it all.  Just looked a sad, seedy and down market dump.

Sounds like my kind of place. 

19 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

They need to bury the sex trade as well

Why? Pattaya has been built on the sex trade. Take that away and there is nothing to go there for. Why should any European fly 5000 miles further than Spain to go to a boring shopping street? Pattaya needs to cater for the Chinese market now and prey it lasts. 

Being run down with bars and masses of "ugly" cables is not only very cheap to maintain but gave it its charm. People like me would make the effort to go and experience Pattaya but people like you have many places to go shopping and Pattaya will not stand out from most of them.

All this reconstruction will be very expensive, drive away what's left of the tourists and mean starting from zero. 

Pattaya had its uniqe place in the world and worked very well. This mayor is trying to turn it into something that can be found in many countries. 

I'm just glad I got to see Pattaya in its prime when I was in my prime even though I much preferred Lamai (around 20 years ago).

1 minute ago, wombat said:

666 on the forehead is gaining popularity so i believe

555

1 minute ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Are you one of those anti vaxers you spoke about earlier?

Sorry, should have labelled it as sarcasm. 

4 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

It looks as if one of the worst hit countries in the World will emerge as one of the most organised and effective in vaccination and eradication of the virus.

 

You cannot beat a bit of British spirit to show the World how things are done during the darkest hours. 

 

It seems things have flipped on their head with the Thais now struggling to procure vaccines and deal with a worsening outbreak.

It is a great relief knowing my elderly father has had the Pfizer jab 3 weeks ago. 

But things can still go bad here. 

First - most people have only had the first jab which is far better than vaccinating half as many people but at a  cost of reduced immunity and unclear affects when delaying the second jab. 

Second  - new strains are popping up all over the world which may not be stopped by the current vaccines. It is in everyone's interest that the whole world is getting vaccinated or borders will stay restricted for years to come.

Another problem that needs sorting is how do you prove you have been vaccinated to countries that require it before letting you in? There is no standard and already fake certificates are around in Europe. 

14 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

To me it looks like a gigantic city railway station.

A bit like where trains would come to from all over the country just to drop off and pick up people and their luggage. 

22 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

The only time it was a great place was when it really was a fishing village. Sex tourist mega attractions with the associated crime, drugs, disease and exploitation are never 'great'.

Personally I preferred Samui but I still totally disagree with you. If I wanted to see a dreary fishing port I can do that here and there is certainly nothing great about them. I first went to Pattaya in 2000 and it most definitely was great and well worth flying 6000 miles to EXPERIENCE in all its glory - good and bad. Went back about 8 years ago with my wife and her friends - all had a good  time. 

If they actually rebuild it as a super modern city (in my lifetime) with lots of high tech. I may want to see it but it is never going to happen. 

4 minutes ago, jingjai9 said:

It is interesting here in Thailand how things reinvent themselves.

I don't see much in the way of invention just copying what everywhere else is doing. Thailand was outstanding at what it was. Now it is just another Spain living on its past reputation while quickly becoming a Chinese only getaway destination. 

The new sewers and improving transport are good news and the sooner the better before tourists return. If they want to change from a sex town and drive out farangs, they need to see what the Chinese are attracted to. Then find something that other cities are not doing. Pattaya already had its niche, why risk losing it by becoming yet another boring resort? Years of building at huge cost, I can't see any gains for years to come. Then it would only take a little disagreement, between Thailand and the ccp, for it all to go tits up.