Koh Samui: Build a second airport for budget airlines, much better than a bridge, says MP

[Catoni]

5 hours ago, Gulfsailor said:

I prefer quality over quantity. Thailand has plenty low cost destinations already, and are struggling more than Samui. The reason affluent travelers visit Samui is because it’s not like Pattaya or Phuket. The hotels that are struggling on Samui are the low and mid tier ones. The luxury accommodations are doing fine. Let’s not ruin that with plane loads of budget travelers please. 

Wait a second please. What’s wrong with budget travellers? Not all of us are fat cat wealthy people. Some of us worked hard all our lives and live on a small pension. We Find the cheapest flights with Skyscanner and KAYAK and fly in the back of the plane in the economy seats. 
    In Thailand, India, Cambodia and Vietnam and Laos we stay in the cheap accommodation places. Maybe rent a cheap apartment for $100.00 or $150.00 a month. We eat like the locals... and lots of street food and little tiny locals restaurants. We avoid four and five star hotels and the tourist bars and bar girls.

    Does that mean we are some sort of undesirable third class people?

Hey..... apologies for not being rich. Do you really have to look down your nose at us like we are living in the gutter?  As if we haven’t showered in six months?

[digger70]

28 minutes ago, ThomasThBKK said:

He's thinking out loud that this low quality mass tourism isn't sustainable, is that so damn hard to understand?

 

47 minutes ago, digger70 said:

Let’s not ruin that with plane loads of budget travelers please. 

It's the way he said it , It came across to me that he said that one is better than the other. 

[GreasyFingers]

2 hours ago, Sydebolle said:

Dr. Prasert Prasarttong-Osoth, Chairman of Bangkok Airways, is the visionary behind Bangkok Airways as well as the airport on Samui island. He bought the land and built the airport to make Samui - aviationwise - "online". 

Bangkok Airways is a true boutique airline and not comparable to a low cost carrier. I happened to be on a 6-passenger-flight in a 100-passenger aircraft and, despite being possibly the loss leader of that particular day, the flight was operated - which was very, very important to me. This is something which cannot be said by most other airlines in Thailand. 

Dr. Prasert and his team of leading professionals put Samui and their airline where they are today. The "expensive" part comes from all those half-empty hotels overcharging tremendously (a bottle of local soda at Baht 90++) and blocking entire sections of the beach for private hotel guests (restaurant guests spending more than B 1000/head did not count).  

So you do not mind going to the dungeon of BKK to take a THB5000 flight with a bus to a plane on the tarmac.

[Swimfan]

1 hour ago, crazykopite said:

Bangkok airways which is privately owned generates the majority of its annual income directly from the Koh Samui flights this information was released last year without Samui airport and the extortionate prices they charge they would go bust within months.

Absolutely spot on. And their numbers are already starting to dwindle. It could be the beginning of the end for BA. 

[brain150]

1. Garbage problem

2. Traffic problem

3. Water problem

4. electricity problem

 

The Island cannot even take the tourists that are here right now [for a "high season" not that many ...] !

But it is way more popular to talk nonsense than actually addressing the real issues.

 

BKK Airways is not the problem. 10 years ago flight prices were also high but the Island did very well.

Infrastructure and "class" are the problems. I have no idea why anybody would want to make holidays here right now.

The Island is overbuilt and lacks infrastructure on all fronts, environmental problems are huge, but all they talk about is air plane tickets.

 

Samui is more expensive than Europe and lacks in terms of service and standard... that might be some of the issues at hand !

[brain150]

.... and don't get me started about taxis on Samui

[androokery]

So I have 70,000 baht to spend and I have seven days in Thailand. Just as an example. 

I can fly to Surat Thani or Nakhon Si Thammarat with AirAsia and get the combined bus/ferry ticket for a few thousand baht. The problem is that it will cost me time. You need to allocate most of a day to get there and another whole day to get back to Bangkok.  The cost is around 2,000 baht. That leaves me with 68,000 baht to spend over the remaining five days. 

Or I can fly Bangkok Airways direct from Bangkok. It will just take me 1-2 hours each way. But it will cost me upwards of 9,000 baht. Now I have 61,000 baht to spend over seven days. 

Or, if they let low cost carriers fly direct to the island, I would have 68,000 baht to spend over seven days. 

For a short trip of seven days I would probably not spend two whole days just on transportation. So I would go somewhere else. And I would either spend 68,000 baht in a local economy (maybe Krabi?) or 61,000 baht (BA and five days on Koh Samui). It seems to me that if the tourist has any kind of budget (which most people do), more money would be spent on hotels, food, adventure and entertainment if the transportation is cheaper. So even if you argue that keeping Koh Samui expensive helps keep out budget travellers it also keeps out people with limited vacation time. 

[CNXexpat]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

that would cater to budget minded tourists

What?! I heard they want the rich high quality tourists only.

[CNXexpat]

2 hours ago, Catoni said:

Wait a second please. What’s wrong with budget travellers? Not all of us are fat cat wealthy people. Some of us worked hard all our lives and live on a small pension. We Find the cheapest flights with Skyscanner and KAYAK and fly in the back of the plane in the economy seats. 
    In Thailand, India, Cambodia and Vietnam and Laos we stay in the cheap accommodation places. Maybe rent a cheap apartment for $100.00 or $150.00 a month. We eat like the locals... and lots of street food and little tiny locals restaurants. We avoid four and five star hotels and the tourist bars and bar girls.

    Does that mean we are some sort of undesirable third class people?

Hey..... apologies for not being rich. Do you really have to look down your nose at us like we are living in the gutter?  As if we haven’t showered in six months?

There is something between hi-so and lo-so. And why should a country fight for tourists they leave only a few hundred Baht per month in the country? The tourists they live in hotels and eat in restaurants bring more money (also for the government because the restaurants and hotels pay taxes) and bring more jobs for Thais they are working there as the one who rents a cheap room.

[yogavnture]

you cant be serious building a bridge from the mainland??????omg u know how far that is............silly talk..............ive been coming to these islands for over 15 years.  and ive had enuf. im finished.  too many backpackers as it is..........do we want more ??   the islands are only so big and only if they pull a chinese idea of building up a shoal into a usable island can more come as it is.................im finished.  kind of like lipe years ago. so many people the place got ruined.  instead of new airport how about quotas.  less people not more

[yogavnture]

2 hours ago, Catoni said:

Wait a second please. What’s wrong with budget travellers? Not all of us are fat cat wealthy people. Some of us worked hard all our lives and live on a small pension. We Find the cheapest flights with Skyscanner and KAYAK and fly in the back of the plane in the economy seats. 
    In Thailand, India, Cambodia and Vietnam and Laos we stay in the cheap accommodation places. Maybe rent a cheap apartment for $100.00 or $150.00 a month. We eat like the locals... and lots of street food and little tiny locals restaurants. We avoid four and five star hotels and the tourist bars and bar girls.

    Does that mean we are some sort of undesirable third class people?

Hey..... apologies for not being rich. Do you really have to look down your nose at us like we are living in the gutter?  As if we haven’t showered in six months?

the reality is that thais want tourists with money not poor folk its just reality. but cambodia will welcome you 

[yogavnture]

1 hour ago, androokery said:

So I have 70,000 baht to spend and I have seven days in Thailand. Just as an example. 

I can fly to Surat Thani or Nakhon Si Thammarat with AirAsia and get the combined bus/ferry ticket for a few thousand baht. The problem is that it will cost me time. You need to allocate most of a day to get there and another whole day to get back to Bangkok.  The cost is around 2,000 baht. That leaves me with 68,000 baht to spend over the remaining five days. 

Or I can fly Bangkok Airways direct from Bangkok. It will just take me 1-2 hours each way. But it will cost me upwards of 9,000 baht. Now I have 61,000 baht to spend over seven days. 

Or, if they let low cost carriers fly direct to the island, I would have 68,000 baht to spend over seven days. 

For a short trip of seven days I would probably not spend two whole days just on transportation. So I would go somewhere else. And I would either spend 68,000 baht in a local economy (maybe Krabi?) or 61,000 baht (BA and five days on Koh Samui). It seems to me that if the tourist has any kind of budget (which most people do), more money would be spent on hotels, food, adventure and entertainment if the transportation is cheaper. So even if you argue that keeping Koh Samui expensive helps keep out budget travellers it also keeps out people with limited vacation time. 

im finished withthe islands too many backpackers as it is. i hope they build an airport and free up the mainland for folk like me that just want to hang with locals in peace.  you all can fight it out

[baansgr]

They talked about this and a bridge/tunnel way back in 2005 when I lived there....maybe in another 15 years it may be built...

[schvonsky1]

8 hours ago, Gulfsailor said:

I prefer quality over quantity. Thailand has plenty low cost destinations already, and are struggling more than Samui. The reason affluent travelers visit Samui is because it’s not like Pattaya or Phuket. The hotels that are struggling on Samui are the low and mid tier ones. The luxury accommodations are doing fine. Let’s not ruin that with plane loads of budget travelers please. 

So what you are saying Samui is for only wealthy folk you say the hotels are doing well are you staying in every luxury hotel ???????????????? Thailand’s future is fcked !!!

 

8 hours ago, Gulfsailor said:

I prefer quality over quantity. Thailand has plenty low cost destinations already, and are struggling more than Samui. The reason affluent travelers visit Samui is because it’s not like Pattaya or Phuket. The hotels that are struggling on Samui are the low and mid tier ones. The luxury accommodations are doing fine. Let’s not ruin that with plane loads of budget travelers please. 

 

[khunPer]

1 hour ago, androokery said:

So I have 70,000 baht to spend and I have seven days in Thailand. Just as an example. 

I can fly to Surat Thani or Nakhon Si Thammarat with AirAsia and get the combined bus/ferry ticket for a few thousand baht. The problem is that it will cost me time. You need to allocate most of a day to get there and another whole day to get back to Bangkok.  The cost is around 2,000 baht. That leaves me with 68,000 baht to spend over the remaining five days. 

Or I can fly Bangkok Airways direct from Bangkok. It will just take me 1-2 hours each way. But it will cost me upwards of 9,000 baht. Now I have 61,000 baht to spend over seven days. 

Many of the tourists coming to Samui and staying in the nations highest concentration of many-stars hotels, they don't mind the Bangkok Airways' prices – some even prefer the quality instead of a budget solution – compared to their total budget, the cost for a Bangkok Air ticket is minimal. Many rooms for two persons costs around 15,000 baht and up a night – however included breakfast – and people spending that kind of money also spend on other things, not to forget another one or two meals a day, preferably in some of the island's many gourmet restaurants. 7,000 baht more or less in the total budget is not important, some even gladly pay that to avoid flying budget – I actually know of quite a number.

 

If you wish to fly cheap directly to Samui, you can for example book early and use "early morning bird" or the late evening flights which costs around 2,900 baht for a one-way ticket. With a bit of planning you can actually have around 64,000 baht to spend over 7 days on Samui.

 

I believe that many, if not most, of those who choose Samui do it because it's their wish to visit this more expensive island; others might not care so much about which beach or destination they stay, and choose from domestic air ticket price, and they would probably also not choose Samui due to other price levels than the air ticket only.

????

[khunPer]

23 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

the reality is that thais want tourists with money not poor folk its just reality. but cambodia will welcome you 

Unfortunately, that is true – I believe it's called "quality tourists" – the same trend is beginning in Europe, where they some place tax tourists, to make sure to limit the number to those that can afford to pay.

[baansgr]

3 hours ago, Catoni said:

Wait a second please. What’s wrong with budget travellers? Not all of us are fat cat wealthy people. Some of us worked hard all our lives and live on a small pension. We Find the cheapest flights with Skyscanner and KAYAK and fly in the back of the plane in the economy seats. 
    In Thailand, India, Cambodia and Vietnam and Laos we stay in the cheap accommodation places. Maybe rent a cheap apartment for $100.00 or $150.00 a month. We eat like the locals... and lots of street food and little tiny locals restaurants. We avoid four and five star hotels and the tourist bars and bar girls.

    Does that mean we are some sort of undesirable third class people?

Hey..... apologies for not being rich. Do you really have to look down your nose at us like we are living in the gutter?  As if we haven’t showered in six months?

Its the budget travelers that made Samui so popular...and back packing at any age is an experience, rather than being chauffered around to 5 star hotels. I can get luxury anywhere but give me value for money and meeting interesting people any day.

[tlandtday]

5 hours ago, Sydebolle said:

Dr. Prasert Prasarttong-Osoth, Chairman of Bangkok Airways, is the visionary behind Bangkok Airways as well as the airport on Samui island. He bought the land and built the airport to make Samui - aviationwise - "online". 

Bangkok Airways is a true boutique airline and not comparable to a low cost carrier. I happened to be on a 6-passenger-flight in a 100-passenger aircraft and, despite being possibly the loss leader of that particular day, the flight was operated - which was very, very important to me. This is something which cannot be said by most other airlines in Thailand. 

Dr. Prasert and his team of leading professionals put Samui and their airline where they are today. The "expensive" part comes from all those half-empty hotels overcharging tremendously (a bottle of local soda at Baht 90++) and blocking entire sections of the beach for private hotel guests (restaurant guests spending more than B 1000/head did not count).  

The flights are ridiculously expensive let airasia in and see the results.

[mickey rat]

I have some land for sale and my brother-in-law can handle the logistics.????????????

[ronaldo0]

Highly unlikely to happen and thankfully so as I like sitting in my pool in the south with no noise and driving around the roads that are well maintained and quiet compared to north ????

[milys]

This is what should have been done 30 years ago. Bangkok Airways has made a fortune on having monopoly on tourists who don't want to take the bus/ferry ride which will take you on a 20h busride, thrown out to a travel agent in Suratani 04 in the morning charging for transportation and ferry. They don't let you out on a place where you have any choice of transportation. Do I have to tell you that everything is extremely overprized. When you come to Koh Samui and leaving the ferry it's time to choose a taxi to hotel. Meter...? Not working..500B 5km..Don't bother go checking with another driver, only people from the island get a taxi license. That has resulted in a taxi mafia all with broken meters and special prices. When I was there the last time I saw an olderly german couple who took a taxi from the middle of Lamai to their hotel at the end of the street (200m). 300B !

 

I would advise first time travelers to check where your hotel is or where you want to stay and take a 100 m stroll up to the big road.

There you look out for a songteo, a pickup with roof and two benches (in thai it means two benches). Don't be afraid to ask people frequently because the thai mostly don't want to loose face by not  knowing, so they can point you in any direction. I experienced the same thing in the south of Europe so it's not a thai thing

 

Well I slipped away from the subject a bit but maybe first time tourist there can get something out of it.

I am hoping the corrupt situation on Koh Samui will change (Ha-ha-ha) and let other airlines fight about

those more than 4000B tickets.

It was close to that 30 years ago so I doubt they will be cheaper today. 
.

[impulse]

6 hours ago, Catoni said:

Wait a second please. What’s wrong with budget travellers? Not all of us are fat cat wealthy people. Some of us worked hard all our lives and live on a small pension. We Find the cheapest flights with Skyscanner and KAYAK and fly in the back of the plane in the economy seats. 
    In Thailand, India, Cambodia and Vietnam and Laos we stay in the cheap accommodation places. Maybe rent a cheap apartment for $100.00 or $150.00 a month. We eat like the locals... and lots of street food and little tiny locals restaurants. We avoid four and five star hotels and the tourist bars and bar girls.

    Does that mean we are some sort of undesirable third class people?

Hey..... apologies for not being rich. Do you really have to look down your nose at us like we are living in the gutter?  As if we haven’t showered in six months?

 

Nothing wrong with budget travelers, and there are plenty of places in Thailand that still look like they did back in the '80s.  

 

Samui isn't one of them. 

 

You can't have convenient access, unspoiled surroundings and cheap digs.  If you want cheap and unspoiled, it means traveling like they did in the '80s before cheap airfare and an airport on every tiny speck of land.  Not just hopping off the plane and into the taxi to your hotel.  Or you can settle for a cattle-car experience- which is the direction most of Thailand's destinations chose.

 

[huberthammer]

12 hours ago, brain150 said:

1. Garbage problem

2. Traffic problem

3. Water problem

4. electricity problem

 

The Island cannot even take the tourists that are here right now [for a "high season" not that many ...] !

But it is way more popular to talk nonsense than actually addressing the real issues.

 

BKK Airways is not the problem. 10 years ago flight prices were also high but the Island did very well.

Infrastructure and "class" are the problems. I have no idea why anybody would want to make holidays here right now.

The Island is overbuilt and lacks infrastructure on all fronts, environmental problems are huge, but all they talk about is air plane tickets.

 

Samui is more expensive than Europe and lacks in terms of service and standard... that might be some of the issues at hand !

It also has to be mentioned that building more and more hotels will not help the room occupancy of the island. It is beyond me that they build two big Holiday Inn next to FV when the entire island has problems filling rooms. Same goes for Farangs and Thais who think buying a plot of land and building a few small bungalows must be a money printing machine. Supply completely outrun demand for rooms and similar can be said for restaurants.

 

 

[Airbagwill]

I"m told that under international airline regulations you are not allowed to have airports within 50km of each other ...So building another airport on Samui is a non-starter.

 

It also seems nonsensical to cram more people on the island just to meet the demands of those who have taken part in the untramelled overdevelopment of this blighted iisland.

[Airbagwill]

Apparently the Samui connection is the only part of BKK air that makes money. Doesn't say a lot for their abilities as an airline.

[No1Farang]

10 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

I"m told that under international airline regulations you are not allowed to have airports within 50km of each other ...So building another airport on Samui is a non-starter.

 

No such international regulation.  Suvarnabhumi and Don Mueang are 30 kms apart and that is just one local example. And another example, this time in the UK, you'll find London Heathrow only 9 km from Northolt airport.

[ronaldo0]

1 hour ago, Airbagwill said:

I"m told that under international airline regulations you are not allowed to have airports within 50km of each other ...So building another airport on Samui is a non-starter.

 

It also seems nonsensical to cram more people on the island just to meet the demands of those who have taken part in the untramelled overdevelopment of this blighted iisland.

Last I heard was it was 30km distance and if you draw a line from the one that’s there to anywhere 30km I think the island isn’t big enough as it’s only 68km or something all the way round the ring road.

[Sydebolle]

10 hours ago, tlandtday said:

The flights are ridiculously expensive let airasia in and see the results.

Well, book a flight from Bangkok (Swampy) to Udon Thani and compare pricing between Thai Airways International and Thai Smile.

Surprise, surprise, Thai Airways is considerably more expensive and the clue is, that this code share flight is operated by Thai Smile. Go figure ........... 

One is government (TG, WE with 70% owned by the ministry of finance), PG (Bangkok Airways) is privately owned! And no private businessman runs a business with the intention to lose money. 

[gearbox]

14 hours ago, brain150 said:

1. Garbage problem

2. Traffic problem

3. Water problem

4. electricity problem

 

 

This is not what I've read in the brochures of mainly farang businesses spruiking real estate here.

[Airbagwill]

1 hour ago, ronaldo0 said:

Last I heard was it was 30km distance and if you draw a line from the one that’s there to anywhere 30km I think the island isn’t big enough as it’s only 68km or something all the way round the ring road.

Sorry, yes 30 km....whatever, the point being there is nowhere on the island far enough away to build an airport. ... 

 

BKK Air....... whatever anyone says, relies totally on the Samui connection to stay afloat - their other services hardly ever make money. Take away Samui and the company will go.

 

The government has tried several times to curtail the airline's monopoly and the company has come out on top every time....... the only way is for government intervention on a major scale to break the monopoly of landing on the airport the BKK Air own.....so not an easy thing to do without seeming dictatorial.

 

At the end of the day though, do we subscribe to the concept of ever increasing tourist numbers? Or do we just draw a line and say enough is enough and stop <deleted>ting in our own nest?