Anything new or interesting in Phuket?

[LivinginKata]

1 hour ago, NamKangMan said:

<snip>

"Foreigners owning a foreign freehold condo own their proportionate share(up to 49% of the units)" - since when is 49% "freehold?"

 

 

NKM - you are muddying the water. Those 49% allocations are indeed 100% freehold. I am with you on condo management issues. Anyone buying a 'freehold' condo in Thailand needs to buy with extreme long term caution. 

[NamKangMan]

1 hour ago, LivinginKata said:

 

NKM - you are muddying the water. Those 49% allocations are indeed 100% freehold. I am with you on condo management issues. Anyone buying a 'freehold' condo in Thailand needs to buy with extreme long term caution. 

 

LIK, I don't think I am "muddying the water."  I think sales agents here "muddy the water" by using the term "freehold" to mislead unsuspecting western buyers.

 

I have posted the Wiki meaning of the word "freehold." 

 

Here's the Webster dictionary meaning.

 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freehold

 

Here's the Cambridge meaning.

 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/freehold

 

Here's the Collins dictionary meaning.

 

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/freehold

 

Here's the Oxford dictionary meaning.

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/freehold

 

NOTE: "Permanent and absolute tenure of land or property"  A maximum 49% share of land, with a 30 year usage land certificate IS NOT "permanent and absolute" - is it????

 

You will see all links state there is no time limit on ownership.  As I said, condos don't float in mid are.  They are built on a plot of land.  That land ownership, in any form, IS NOT freehold for foreigners.

 

In the west, for example, if there is a block with 10 condos, with 10 different owners, all 10 owners have an equal share of the land their condo sits on.  They all have an equal vote in any decisions made for the benefit of the property / owners.

 

In Thailand, foreigners can only own 49% of the land their condo's are built on.  If the developer and / or his family and / or his Thai company owns the other 51%, the foreigners DO NOT have an equal vote on any decisions made about the property.  It's that simple.

 

Now, add to that the 30 years usage of that land, using proxies, or the name of the Thai developer, given that the x 30 x 30 is not legally recognized here, and it DOES NOT meet the definition of "freehold" as per the dictionary, and therefore at law as there is a limit of time on the use of the land.

 

The only thing "freehold" about it is you can do what you want within the four walls of your condo. 

 

"Anyone buying a 'freehold' condo in Thailand needs to buy with extreme long term caution." - ok.  Why????

 

[Mysterion]

4 hours ago, NamKangMan said:

 

Oh dear.  You have obviously exposed yourself and refuse to accept the facts.

 

"Who said thailand houses can be bought as foreign freehold? Of course they cannot." - "Condos can be bought foreign freehold in thailand." - these are your words, not mine.

 

The condo sits on land that can not be owned by a foreigner in the same way a house does.  Now, is that correct?  It's a yes or no answer.

 

"Foreigners owning a foreign freehold condo own their proportionate share(up to 49% of the units)" - since when is 49% "freehold?"

 

"It is essentially the same as the western world." - rubbish.  A Thai can go to my home country and buy a house 100% in their name.  A foreigner can not come to Thailand and do the same.  "Get it?" 

 

Below is the wiki definition of "freehold." 

 

See this line:  "ownership of it must be of an indeterminate duration."  What is the maximum a foreigner can use land in Thailand????  Remember, the x 30 x 30 does not exist in law here.  At least Vietnam is offering 50 years.  I have provided links to show this.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freehold_(law)

 

"Actually, there are relatively very few thais living overseas compared to other asian nationalities" - so, you go from comparing the number of Vietnamese living abroad to the number of Thai's living abroad, to now it's the amount of "Asians" living abroad.  In any case, link please.

 

I love this line: "condo own their proportionate share(up to 49% of the units) of the condos underlying land and have voting rights." - and the developer, or his Thai company, owns the other 51% of land the condo sit on.  That's a majority share.  Good luck out voting them.  ????

 

"Google it and see for yourself." - no. YOU Google it and see for yourself.

 

"Unlike myself, you seem to be an expert on the wants and needs of bar girls." - your personal attack is wasted on me.  The Vietnam War saw many South Vietnamese refugees to America and Australia, because they worked with these two countries during the war.  Also as a result of the war, Thailand's tourism industry really kicked off, particularly its sex tourism, through American soldiers.  However, Vietnamese have stopped seeking refugee status, whilst Thai sex workers still seek a foreign "sponsor."

As many others on TV  have warned, its not worth the time to try to educate you and clear-up the misinformation you spread.

 

In the future, can you please focus on your bar girl expertise/theories rather than straying into other adult conversations?

 

thank in advance.

[Mysterion]

2 hours ago, LivinginKata said:

 

NKM - you are muddying the water. Those 49% allocations are indeed 100% freehold. I am with you on condo management issues. Anyone buying a 'freehold' condo in Thailand needs to buy with extreme long term caution.

Goodluck, but you will never change his delusional views on condo freehold.

 

I agree the quality of condo mgt is very important in thaialnd and all other parts of the world as well.

 

 

[Mysterion]

8 hours ago, Tofer said:

Attractions maybe, but "attractive" is pushing the image a bit too far IMHO. You can hardly see the island for the overdevelopment there, and there's nothing attractive about high rise condos and wall to wall hotels.

 

Every time I cross the bridge between Lanta Yai and Noi I marvel at the unspoilt views of Lanta Noi, not a single man made impression on the vista whatsoever.

 

Check out the type of tourists, I wouldn't say it's a "top beach holiday destination", just busy.... 

 

I would be very interested to know what you perceive as being "things of value" in your opinion? Kindly enlighten us.

Phuket attracts all types of tourists, hence the mixture of 1-5 star hotels and continued construction. 

 

Attractions and attractiveness  are subjective. All we know is that phuket is the top beach destination in Asia, and maybe even the world.

 

There is even talk of building another Phuket airport teeminal to handle the expected growth going forward.

 

Whatever the reason/reasons for the attraction, phuket is attractive in many ways to more and more people.

 

[NamKangMan]

2 hours ago, Mysterion said:

As many others on TV  have warned, its not worth the time to try to educate you and clear-up the misinformation you spread.

 

In the future, can you please focus on your bar girl expertise/theories rather than straying into other adult conversations?

 

thank in advance.

 

A foreigner can own 100% of the "strata" - the air space.  Like I said, they can do what they want in their four walls.  However, it sits on land that is 51% owned by a Thai, or Thai's, and you think that is "freehold" as in western property ownership "freehold."  Give me break. 

 

Doesn't matter which way you spin it, a foreigner can only own 49% of the land, and that is not "freehold."  It's that simple. 

 

[NamKangMan]

2 hours ago, Mysterion said:

Phuket attracts all types of tourists, hence the mixture of 1-5 star hotels and continued construction. 

 

Attractions and attractiveness  are subjective. All we know is that phuket is the top beach destination in Asia, and maybe even the world.

 

There is even talk of building another Phuket airport teeminal to handle the expected growth going forward.

 

Whatever the reason/reasons for the attraction, phuket is attractive in many ways to more and more people.

 

 

"phuket is attractive in many ways to more and more people." - and look at the type of those "more and more people." 

 

The vast majority of the tourists here now are "zero baht tourists." 

[NamKangMan]

2 hours ago, Mysterion said:

Goodluck, but you will never change his delusional views on condo freehold.

 

I agree the quality of condo mgt is very important in thaialnd and all other parts of the world as well.

 

 

 

You keep banging on about condo's. 

 

How about you comment on the land the condo block sits on.

 

Post a link that shows a foreign condo owner owns the land their condo sits on, freehold.  That is, a freehold land certificate from the Lands Office. 

 

"Goodluck" with that.  ????

 

 

[xylophone]

18 hours ago, LivinginKata said:

 

NKM - you are muddying the water. Those 49% allocations are indeed 100% freehold. I am with you on condo management issues. Anyone buying a 'freehold' condo in Thailand needs to buy with extreme long term caution. 

LiK, I don't think I have ever disagreed with anything that you have posted, and indeed I do like your posts, however I think I have an idea as to what NKM is trying to put across.

 

He does later on talk about the land that the condo sits on, so taking an alternative view on this, let's say that the condos sit on 100 m² of land and that condo block was demolished.

 

In theory, if the 51%/49% allocation has been adhered to, then strictly speaking the foreigners holding their condo freeholds should actually own 49% of that land................but  It is clearly stated that foreigners cannot own land in Thailand, so I very much doubt that if those foreigners clubbed together to try and obtain 49% of that land as legally theirs, they would fail miserably.

 

However they may be able to claim their 49% portion of the land through the fact that the original Thai owner has to allow 49% of that land to be used for a foreign held condominium, so in effect they have to lease it again.

 

It really isn't freehold in the true sense of the word, however is freehold in the manner that they are allowed to do what they want within their condominium, as has been stated here.

 

I believe that's what NKM  Is trying to put across and his point about the use of the word "freehold" is therefore valid.

[LivinginKata]

Oh dear xyl ... I did clearly state "Anyone buying a 'freehold' condo in Thailand needs to buy with extreme long term caution"

 

I do not disagree with what you say.  Anyone I talk with about buying or interested in buying a 'free hold' condo, I make it very clear that your 'investment' can just disappear at the whim of the real land owner. That's why we (either wife or company) own our land with Chanotes locked in a safe. Even then ... come some sort of revolution all bets are off and we will fly to Singapore.   

[Mysterion]

11 hours ago, xylophone said:

LiK, I don't think I have ever disagreed with anything that you have posted, and indeed I do like your posts, however I think I have an idea as to what NKM is trying to put across.

 

He does later on talk about the land that the condo sits on, so taking an alternative view on this, let's say that the condos sit on 100 m² of land and that condo block was demolished.

 

In theory, if the 51%/49% allocation has been adhered to, then strictly speaking the foreigners holding their condo freeholds should actually own 49% of that land................but  It is clearly stated that foreigners cannot own land in Thailand, so I very much doubt that if those foreigners clubbed together to try and obtain 49% of that land as legally theirs, they would fail miserably.

 

However they may be able to claim their 49% portion of the land through the fact that the original Thai owner has to allow 49% of that land to be used for a foreign held condominium, so in effect they have to lease it again.

 

It really isn't freehold in the true sense of the word, however is freehold in the manner that they are allowed to do what they want within their condominium, as has been stated here.

 

I believe that's what NKM  Is trying to put across and his point about the use of the word "freehold" is therefore valid.

It is foolhardy to try to defend the misleading/false information of others.

 

These are the facts about foreign freehold condo ownership-

 

“The Thailand Condominium Act allows foreigners to have outright ownership of an apartment unit in a condominium. Foreign ownership is governed by condominium laws and ownership includes co-ownership in the common areas such as the land, exterior of building, hallways and stairs, roof, swimming pools.”

 

https://www.thaicontracts.com/q-and-a-condominium.html

[Mysterion]

8 hours ago, LivinginKata said:

Oh dear xyl ... I did clearly state "Anyone buying a 'freehold' condo in Thailand needs to buy with extreme long term caution"

 

I do not disagree with what you say.  Anyone I talk with about buying or interested in buying a 'free hold' condo, I make it very clear that your 'investment' can just disappear at the whim of the real land owner. That's why we (either wife or company) own our land with Chanotes locked in a safe. Even then ... come some sort of revolution all bets are off and we will fly to Singapore.   

LOL!!

 

Assuming you(a foreigner) are the most significant/only funding source for the thai land owned by your wife, or the shady illegal corporate structure you used to buy it,  you are actually the one who needs to have the most “extreme long term caution”.

 

How can you sleep at night knowing that your investments can “disappear at a whim” of your wife or via legal confiscation??

 

Foreign freehold condo owners are the only ones who legally own their share of the building and underlying land. It is the only legal property structure for foreigners wanting to own property in Thailand. Period.

 

https://www.thaicontracts.com/q-and-a-condominium.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

[xylophone]

19 hours ago, Mysterion said:

It is foolhardy to try to defend the misleading/false information of others.

It is also foolhardy to jump into a post in which you do not fully understand the subtleties being discussed, or indeed the possible hypothetical situation which I posted.

 

Technically NKM was right when he said, "A foreigner can own 100% of the "strata" - the air space.  Like I said, they can do what they want in their four walls.  However, it sits on land that is 51% owned by a Thai, or Thai's, and you think that is "freehold" as in western property ownership "freehold."  Give me break".

 

And his point was that freehold, as we understand it in the Western world, does not have the same meaning here in Thailand, so for many expats what they think they are getting, they are not. In some respects it could possibly be viewed as misleading advertising especially if it is aimed at the Western/farang market.

 

In common law jurisdictions (e.g. England and Wales, United States, Australia,[1] Canada, and Ireland), a freehold is the common ownership of real property, or land,[a] and ownership of it must be of an indeterminate duration. If the time of ownership can be fixed and determined, it cannot be a freehold. 

 

Also in my post I hypothesised as to what could be viewed as another angle in the "freehold ownership" statement, when you look at it again in a different way, but I did not state that this was the case, only that it could be viewed that way – – an alternative way to look at the NKM argument, which I believe holds water.

 

And again I state that if the 49% farang shareholders wanted to claim their part of the land should the condominium block be demolished, they would have no chance as land ownership for them is forbidden in most cases.

 

In summary, freehold here in Thailand has a different meaning and a potentially different outcome to that which is understood by most farangs……..and that was the main point.
 

[Mysterion]

1 hour ago, xylophone said:

It is also foolhardy to jump into a post in which you do not fully understand the subtleties being discussed, or indeed the possible hypothetical situation which I posted.

 

Technically NKM was right when he said, "A foreigner can own 100% of the "strata" - the air space.  Like I said, they can do what they want in their four walls.  However, it sits on land that is 51% owned by a Thai, or Thai's, and you think that is "freehold" as in western property ownership "freehold."  Give me break".

 

And his point was that freehold, as we understand it in the Western world, does not have the same meaning here in Thailand, so for many expats what they think they are getting, they are not. In some respects it could possibly be viewed as misleading advertising especially if it is aimed at the Western/farang market.

 

In common law jurisdictions (e.g. England and Wales, United States, Australia,[1] Canada, and Ireland), a freehold is the common ownership of real property, or land,[a] and ownership of it must be of an indeterminate duration. If the time of ownership can be fixed and determined, it cannot be a freehold. 

 

Also in my post I hypothesised as to what could be viewed as another angle in the "freehold ownership" statement, when you look at it again in a different way, but I did not state that this was the case, only that it could be viewed that way – – an alternative way to look at the NKM argument, which I believe holds water.

 

And again I state that if the 49% farang shareholders wanted to claim their part of the land should the condominium block be demolished, they would have no chance as land ownership for them is forbidden in most cases.

 

In summary, freehold here in Thailand has a different meaning and a potentially different outcome to that which is understood by most farangs……..and that was the main point.
 

Yes, you are correct that the foreign freehold condo structure is a slightly “different” model from what’s typical in the west. 

 

However, there is no significant real-world added risks with the thai foreign freehold condo model as compared to the west. Thats all that needed to be clarified, and i hope that we have finally cleared-up the misinformation/falsehoods being spread by the other guy.

 

On a related side note, i think that its very intelligent forward-thinking that the thais dont want foreigners controlling their precious lands. Its a terrible shame that the western world hasn’t  followed the same model as thailand.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Mysterion

[xylophone]

25 minutes ago, Mysterion said:

Yes, you are correct that the foreign freehold condo structure is a slightly “different” model from what’s typical in the west. 

 

However, there is no significant real-world added risks with the thai foreign freehold condo model as compared to the west. Thats all that needed to be clarified, and i hope that we have finally cleared-up the misinformation/falsehoods being spread by the other guy.

 

On a related side note, i think that its very intelligent forward-thinking that the thais dont want foreigners controlling their precious lands. Its a terrible shame that the western world hasn’t  followed the same model as thailand.

Not sure about your understanding of what "the other guy" was trying to say, but at least we finally agree on something.

[LivinginKata]

21 hours ago, Mysterion said:

LOL!!

 

Assuming you(a foreigner) are the most significant/only funding source for the thai land owned by your wife, or the shady illegal corporate structure you used to buy it,  you are actually the one who needs to have the most “extreme long term caution”.

 

How can you sleep at night knowing that your investments can “disappear at a whim” of your wife or via legal confiscation??

 

Foreign freehold condo owners are the only ones who legally own their share of the building and underlying land. It is the only legal property structure for foreigners wanting to own property in Thailand. Period.

 

 

Ha Ha ... you know nothing about our company structure which is completely legal these past 18 years.

 

You are promoting freehold condos where there are a number of so called 'professionals' with a big finger in the pie.

 

My biggest concern would be the 'management' company. Plenty of news reported examples of the 'management' company not paying electric, water, and repairs. Leaving all the 'owners' without services. For example the Patong Tower. I know many others with a smaller media profile.

 

Freehold condo or Freehold land .... all have risks. The land legal system here in Thailand is corrupt beyond believe. The sales guys will tell lies to make a sale.  

 

I accept my risk with my eyes wide open. Have a nice day. 

  

[Mysterion]

30 minutes ago, LivinginKata said:

 

Ha Ha ... you know nothing about our company structure which is completely legal these past 18 years.

 

You are promoting freehold condos where there are a number of so called 'professionals' with a big finger in the pie.

 

My biggest concern would be the 'management' company. Plenty of news reported examples of the 'management' company not paying electric, water, and repairs. Leaving all the 'owners' without services. For example the Patong Tower. I know many others with a smaller media profile.

 

Freehold condo or Freehold land .... all have risks. The land legal system here in Thailand is corrupt beyond believe. The sales guys will tell lies to make a sale.  

 

I accept my risk with my eyes wide open. Have a nice day. 

  

Goodluck to you.

 

I do hope you can sleep well at night with your “legal” company structure.

[xylophone]

On ‎11‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 11:47 AM, LivinginKata said:

Anyone I talk with about buying or interested in buying a 'free hold' condo, I make it very clear that your 'investment' can just disappear at the whim of the real land owner

I hadn't considered other aspects of the buying of condos here, as you imply here and in a previous post, however you are right, because they have been failed condominium projects here where the investors have lost their money, probably never to be seen again, and even though the BIB know the owners of one particular failed condominium development here, they have never been brought to justice.

 

Because of the corruption and influence wielded by powerful people here, not to mention the lack of protection for the everyday farang buyer, true enough the buying of property here even if it's a condo, is still fraught with danger.

 

Going down the supposed "legal route" in order to recover one's investment is also fraught with danger, as a friend here has found out.

 

[LivinginKata]

2 hours ago, Mysterion said:

Goodluck to you.

 

I do hope you can sleep well at night with your “legal” company structure.

 

  I sleep well every night. Taxes paid, audited. 18 years now. Hope you sleep well too. Bye condo sales Troll.

[Mysterion]

12 minutes ago, LivinginKata said:

 

  I sleep well every night. Taxes paid, audited. 18 years now. Hope you sleep well too. Bye condo sales Troll.

Goodluck dude.

 

Keep sleeping well and hoping that the “legal” structure doesn’t collapse on you or your better half doesnt have a change of mind.

 

????

[billythehat]

14 hours ago, xylophone said:

It is also foolhardy to jump into a post in which you do not fully understand the subtleties being discussed, or indeed the possible hypothetical situation which I posted.

 

Technically NKM was right when he said, "A foreigner can own 100% of the "strata" - the air space.  Like I said, they can do what they want in their four walls.  However, it sits on land that is 51% owned by a Thai, or Thai's, and you think that is "freehold" as in western property ownership "freehold."  Give me break".

 

And his point was that freehold, as we understand it in the Western world, does not have the same meaning here in Thailand, so for many expats what they think they are getting, they are not. In some respects it could possibly be viewed as misleading advertising especially if it is aimed at the Western/farang market.

 

In common law jurisdictions (e.g. England and Wales, United States, Australia,[1] Canada, and Ireland), a freehold is the common ownership of real property, or land,[a] and ownership of it must be of an indeterminate duration. If the time of ownership can be fixed and determined, it cannot be a freehold. 

 

Also in my post I hypothesised as to what could be viewed as another angle in the "freehold ownership" statement, when you look at it again in a different way, but I did not state that this was the case, only that it could be viewed that way – – an alternative way to look at the NKM argument, which I believe holds water.

 

And again I state that if the 49% farang shareholders wanted to claim their part of the land should the condominium block be demolished, they would have no chance as land ownership for them is forbidden in most cases.

 

In summary, freehold here in Thailand has a different meaning and a potentially different outcome to that which is understood by most farangs……..and that was the main point.
 

Good post young man. ????

[billythehat]

On 11/1/2018 at 12:28 PM, NamKangMan said:

 

A foreigner can own 100% of the "strata" - the air space.  Like I said, they can do what they want in their four walls.  However, it sits on land that is 51% owned by a Thai, or Thai's, and you think that is "freehold" as in western property ownership "freehold."  Give me break. 

 

Doesn't matter which way you spin it, a foreigner can only own 49% of the land, and that is not "freehold."  It's that simple. 

 

Indeed, but it may be prudent to say that reference to ‘Strata’ (this is the plural of Stratum,) referring to geological formation, may not be entirely suitable for the debate here. Strata Title would seem to be appropriate for the point made. Outside of Lalaland, the term Freehold is completely understood in meaning and I thought you had a reasonable attempt to try and put this forward, but unfortunately the rule of law does not apply there if you are farang; I would guess the average Somchai fares no better should property issues go pot-over-teacup either. In the UK, owners of the leases of flats can (for some time now) buy the freehold to the land from the freehold management and get rid of the thieving scum once and for all.

[billythehat]

8 hours ago, LivinginKata said:

 

  I sleep well every night. Taxes paid, audited. 18 years now. Hope you sleep well too. Bye condo sales Troll.

Dunno why Mysto had to drag your dear old Trouble & Strife into this debate but I for one would say with absolute certainty that as a gentleman in his autumn years, you have no trouble nodding off for a quick nap. ????

[NamKangMan]

On 11/4/2018 at 9:45 AM, billythehat said:

Indeed, but it may be prudent to say that reference to ‘Strata’ (this is the plural of Stratum,) referring to geological formation, may not be entirely suitable for the debate here. Strata Title would seem to be appropriate for the point made. Outside of Lalaland, the term Freehold is completely understood in meaning and I thought you had a reasonable attempt to try and put this forward, but unfortunately the rule of law does not apply there if you are farang; I would guess the average Somchai fares no better should property issues go pot-over-teacup either. In the UK, owners of the leases of flats can (for some time now) buy the freehold to the land from the freehold management and get rid of the thieving scum once and for all.

 

Yes, but the OP said it's "FREEHOLD" because it doesn't matter what land the condo is built on because it's "FREEHOLD" air space.  Like I said, Thai condo's must float in mid air. ????????

[Patriot1066]

On 27 October 2018 at 5:45 PM, Old Croc said:

Good luck with that.

 

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/05/henderson-island-pitcairn-trash-plastic-pollution/

Not anywhere left unpolluted?

[Patriot1066]

On 03 November 2018 at 10:43 PM, billythehat said:

Good post young man. ????

Yes very good and accurate.

[Argus Tuft]

On 10/31/2018 at 2:06 PM, simon43 said:

But having thought about the various pros and cons of living in south Thailand or living in Myanmar, (and there are plenty of arguments in favour of/against both countries), I have decided to remain in Myanmar and continue/expand the educational charity work that I started in my spare time.  Next week I hope to move to live in Kawthaung (the visa-run town opposite Ranong). 

 

Few foreigners give Kawthaung more than 10 minutes of their time.  I've visited K. many times and that is actually where my volunteer work began many years ago.

 

I may be one of the rare ones with considerable time and many years of experience with Kawthoung Simon (gateway and my main access point to where I worked and lived for many years in the nearby islands) since my first arrival there nearly 20 years ago.

Have to say I think your timing is good. I've often thought recently that Kawthoung is on the cusp of its next 'reincarnation' so to speak.  A lot of my local info and contacts lead me to believe this.

Not one for this topic though which seems to have got dragged well away from the OP's question about Phuket ????

[billythehat]

On 10/31/2018 at 7:06 AM, simon43 said:

I left Phuket around August 2016 to work again in Myanmar (I was there in 2012/13) - this time in the new city of Naypyitaw.

 

I've enjoyed my time there, primarily because the lack of any sort of 'entertainment' encouraged me to go on a healthy food and fitness regime.  

 

Well, I'm fit and healthy now, and recently resigned from my job with an initial idea to return to live in Thailand, - if not Phuket, then nearby in Phang-Nga.

 

But having thought about the various pros and cons of living in south Thailand or living in Myanmar, (and there are plenty of arguments in favour of/against both countries), I have decided to remain in Myanmar and continue/expand the educational charity work that I started in my spare time.  Next week I hope to move to live in Kawthaung (the visa-run town opposite Ranong). 

 

Few foreigners give Kawthaung more than 10 minutes of their time.  I've visited K. many times and that is actually where my volunteer work began many years ago.

 

How on earth can I compare living in Kawthaung to Phuket?

 

Plus points:

- There are pristine islands and beaches in that region

- There is a small jogging track down at the sea-front (got to keep fit!)

- Myanmar soi dogs run away from foreigners!

- Myanmar people are much friendlier than many Thais (I attribute this to the low number of foreigners in the country - I'm still a curiosity!)

- Living costs can be extremely cheap

 

Negatives:

- Most Myanmar food is full of oil and fatty meat, (no problem for me 'cos I generally eat healthy fresh food nowadays)

- The infrastructure sucks, with frequent power cuts etc (but I also experienced many power cuts when living 5 minutes from Phuket Airport) Mobile internet in Myanmar is fast!

- Lack of a decent medical service.  This is one issue that concerns me.  I already have Medivac insurance to Bangkok etc.  But if one has a serious accident or sudden illness in Kawthaung, then the only route out is in a small boat across to Ranong.  I guess my Medivac will not be used because I'll be dead before any feasible help arrives.

 

I can't say that I miss Phuket.  It was great fun 15 years ago for me (well, not so much marriage fun..).  But living and travelling in Myanmar, with all its hardships etc has been an enjoyable challenge for me, and I'm not ready to stop just yet and put my feet up ????

-

you missed the plus point of Kawthaung having a domestic airport. ????

[schlog]

3 hours ago, billythehat said:

you missed the plus point of Kawthaung having a domestic airport. ????

Interesting. A small domestic airport beats HKT. I prefer HKT in every aspect.

[NamKangMan]

On 11/4/2018 at 9:45 AM, billythehat said:

Indeed, but it may be prudent to say that reference to ‘Strata’ (this is the plural of Stratum,) referring to geological formation, may not be entirely suitable for the debate here. Strata Title would seem to be appropriate for the point made. Outside of Lalaland, the term Freehold is completely understood in meaning and I thought you had a reasonable attempt to try and put this forward, but unfortunately the rule of law does not apply there if you are faranI would guess the average Somchai faresg; no better should property issues go pot-over-teacup either. In the UK, owners of the leases of flats can (for some time now) buy the freehold to the land from the freehold management and get rid of the thieving scum once and for all.

 

"Outside of Lalaland, the term Freehold is completely understood in meaning" - I agree, however, the use of the word "freehold" in Thailand, by anyone, or any company, is misleading.  Freehold DOES NOT exist for a foreigner in Thailand.  It's as simple as that.  Like I have said, condo's DO NOT float in mid air. 

 

"I would guess the average Somchai fares no better should property issues go pot-over-teacup either." - yes and no.  If Somchai owns a condo in a block that has foreign "owners" in it then he is, or could be, in the 51% which gives him more voting power.  If Somchai is in a condo block completely owned by Thai's, and the said Thai's own the land the block sits on, not a developer, then he shares equal voting power, and whilst he can also be out voted, at least it was a fairer system of majority rules, whereas, a foreigner will ALWAYS be in the minority, thus, even collectively, never having equal voting rights.