The Thai Economy Is In Crisis

[Mid]

err 'diver ,

# 1859 , agree / disagree ??

[Prakanong]

ECONOMY / THAILAND FOCUS CONFERENCE

Foreigners bullish on blue chips

http://www.bangkokpost.com/Business/14Sep2007_biz02.php

those forigners must know something that our dooms day brigade dont know...

I know what it is ..... there is no crisis....

It was a beauty paegent - no different from the meet the anaylsts different companies have daily in most countries.

Here they got them together at once - the reason probably being the unceertan political and economic situation as expressed by many of them

Most analysts do agree there is still "value" in certain stocks in the thai market - its not secret and anyone reading the serious business press (Not the Bangkok Post) would know that.

This sounbdbite could be said of almost any index and of course he is going to give a nice one - why would he not as its not in his interest

"Mr Wihlborn said that while foreign investors were mostly bullish on the Thai market, interest was mostly focused on large-cap stocks.

Companies that could draw the greatest interest included those with low price-to-earnings ratios, strong dividend performance and a market capitalisation that exceeds $1 billion, Mr Wihlborn added."

Yes the economy is not in crisis but it is in could do better mode and while it is like that others are not standing still.

that could be said on just about any country... everyone wants to get better.

As you said it is not in crisis..

As this thread was dealing with the fact that some members thought it was...

I am glad to see that you are aware that it is not.

the steps to improve the economy even better need to be adreesed by the new goverment are in my view.. education, education and more education.

Well I for one will not be holding my breath till the day i see any Thai government uttering the mantra, Education, Education, Education", undertaking a serious review of what is requited and implementing the reforms required.

The middle class may be growing slowly but the elites still prefer the quas-feudal economy as it is. Thailand has a "watershed" to get over in the not so distant future and how it comes through that will have a great bearing on the future direction.

Ecucation reforms would take well over a decade to make a difference and in the mantime other countries in the region who are direct competitors are all growing at a higher rate than Thailand and with good reason.

Its not that Thailand does not have potential - If I take an industry I know best and a certain department in that industry Thailand has the best in the region if not the best. Yes others are better on certain small area's ie australia but Thailand is better than all the others. We have a great team there and they have own plenty of our corporate awards. Then is it due to education - yes some of them went to the best Uni's and Schools in Thailand but all have oversea's degree's too!

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand’s location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

Edited September 14, 2007 by Prakanong

[Old Man River]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand’s location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

[Prakanong]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

[Old Man River]

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

I do blame the TRT more than the rest as they were the people's party and the people entrusted them with the gift of continuity. Prior to that, Thailand's democracy had been plagued by constant changes in government, with each succeeding government stopping what had been done before so it could be reviewed. The TRT did not have this obstacle. They could plan and implement programs to benefit the population. Still, during their time in power, farm income did not rise nor was there heavy investment in education.

One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!

[Prakanong]

"One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!"

That was a back of the envelope calculation using the 5000 PHd's they say they have and the 4 million people here.

If its Singaporeans only then the ratio will be lower than 800:1!!!!

When I am in the office I sit close to a handful of PHd's - only one of which is Singaporean!

[samran]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

Without this turning into a Thaksin bash (worthy topic, but elsewhere please ) I do get the feeling that the last government were the best positioned to do something, but decided not to. It was almost like they had gotten some of the cream of Thailand - businessmen, thinkers, sound policy makers, academics, grass roots people - and once they figured out what Thailand needed - as long as it didn't conflict with their own particular agendas (or they'd make money out of it), they'd go ahead and do it.

A classic was the proper deregulatoin of airports and airlines. The former government was all for it until they decided that it will only happen so long as Dear Leader got a bit of the cherry through his involvement in Thai Air Asia. Nothing happened until that was guarnateed.

Regardless of this, the porter paper is useful, as it does shift quite subtly the public debate. Thailand needs more 'papers' like this. Not cause it is somehow efficient that 20 papers are written on the same thing, but it keeps the topic on the agenda...and then eventually something happens.

[somtaamgaiyang]

"One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!"

That was a back of the envelope calculation using the 5000 PHd's they say they have and the 4 million people here.

If its Singaporeans only then the ratio will be lower than 800:1!!!!

When I am in the office I sit close to a handful of PHd's - only one of which is Singaporean!

Proves one wonderful thing that Singapore is interested in having very well qualified people in their country and making it very easy for people to work and invest there as opposed to Thailands rather convoluted investment and visa rules.

[highdiver]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

[Mid]

#1859 if you would 'diver

[Prakanong]

"One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!"

That was a back of the envelope calculation using the 5000 PHd's they say they have and the 4 million people here.

If its Singaporeans only then the ratio will be lower than 800:1!!!!

When I am in the office I sit close to a handful of PHd's - only one of which is Singaporean!

Proves one wonderful thing that Singapore is interested in having very well qualified people in their country and making it very easy for people to work and invest there as opposed to Thailands rather convoluted investment and visa rules.

Comparing Singapore and Thailand is like apples and pears like I have said but even so!

In my office we have the following nationalities

British

German

Burmese

Canadian

Philippine

Malay

Ghana'an

Chinese

Indian

All highly skilled with the majority having higher degree's

The Singaporeans are no slouches either!

Singapore realises it need both foreign and home grown talent - many countries do not an even the EU is now realising this and proposing "Blue Cards" for skilled workers like the American Green Card.

The majority of legal immigrants currently to the USA are now highly skilled qualified people ie about 95% and 5% non-skilled

Its around the exact opposite in the EU and this needs to change!

PS forgot the Indonesian in the office!

Edited September 14, 2007 by Prakanong

[midas]

"One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!"

That was a back of the envelope calculation using the 5000 PHd's they say they have and the 4 million people here.

If its Singaporeans only then the ratio will be lower than 800:1!!!!

When I am in the office I sit close to a handful of PHd's - only one of which is Singaporean!

Proves one wonderful thing that Singapore is interested in having very well qualified people in their country and making it very easy for people to work and invest there as opposed to Thailands rather convoluted investment and visa rules.

I often perceive many in Thailand has having a " half hearted " desire to learn or communicate

in English - I dont know if anyone else agrees ? Look at how many Thai webpages dont

provide an English option. I have also tried hard to learn Thai but the Thai's

themselves dont encourage you - they either talk back in English or even worse

once recently its better for farangs not to try if sounds bad because Thai people

dont like hearing Thai spoken poorly by farangs !!!! We have to start somewhere

for Christ's sake

But I think part of Singapores success

is down to Lee Kuan Yu having such a strong commitment early after Independance

that everyone should learn English. Today go to Cambodia and Vietnam and

you will see this same determination by young people to learn English and they

are good at it as well ! Obviously Thai is their first language and its nice

that they love it BUT if you want to do business in a global world.....................

[Prakanong]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

Not Cambodia or Laos - Malaysia and Vietnam are probably closer in economic make up or competing for investment funds.

I might also bring Singapore into it if you are talking about true "Higher" industry and specially if you are talking bio-tech. Singapore is the hub in SE Asia for life sciences and bio-tech - no close runner to compete - further afields Shanghai then other parts of China plus India

If Thailand is trying to create a "cluster" in life sciences or bio-tech the boat has left the docks a long time ago - look at the investment and building of facilities in Singapore - both primary R&D plus actual production facilities - look at who is ther.

From the old big Pharma to the leading Bio Tech company in the world Genentech which is going to produce 40% of its outstanding oncology product here!

Edited September 14, 2007 by Prakanong

[LaoPo]

"One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!"

That was a back of the envelope calculation using the 5000 PHd's they say they have and the 4 million people here.

If its Singaporeans only then the ratio will be lower than 800:1!!!!

When I am in the office I sit close to a handful of PHd's - only one of which is Singaporean!

Proves one wonderful thing that Singapore is interested in having very well qualified people in their country and making it very easy for people to work and invest there as opposed to Thailands rather convoluted investment and visa rules.

I often perceive many in Thailand has having a " half hearted " desire to learn or communicate

in English - I dont know if anyone else agrees ? Look at how many Thai webpages dont

provide an English option. I have also tried hard to learn Thai but the Thai's

themselves dont encourage you - they either talk back in English or even worse

once recently its better for farangs not to try if sounds bad because Thai people

dont like hearing Thai spoken poorly by farangs !!!! We have to start somewhere

for Christ's sake

But I think part of Singapores success

is down to Lee Kuan Yu having such a strong commitment early after Independance

that everyone should learn English. Today go to Cambodia and Vietnam and

you will see this same determination by young people to learn English and they

are good at it as well ! Obviously Thai is their first language and its nice

that they love it BUT if you want to do business in a global world.....................

I agree 100% !

Learning English is a must for any country in the Far East/South E Asia.

It is shameful that ALL previous Thai governments didn't (want to?) see the importance of English for young students. The earlier they start the easier for them.

When I was young we learned three different foreign languages at the same time in school. I never regretted it.

LaoPo

[Mid]

PM urges state agencies to focus on human resources development

Friday 14 September 2007 03:12:21 PM (GMT+7:00)

BANGKOK, Sept 14 (TNA) – Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on Friday called on Thailand's state agencies to adjust their perspective toward national development by focusing more on human resources development than on targeting economic growth.

Delivering a keynote speech at an annual seminar of the National Economic and Social Advisory Council (NESAC) on "The New Strategy of Thailand," Gen. Surayud said he wanted state agencies with key roles in national development such as NESAC other agencies concerned to change their perspective toward the development of the country.

They should turn to place more emphasis on human resource development and the quality of life rather than setting a target for economic growth so that Thai personnel have a competitive edge in the face of globalisation and the dynamic international trade sector.

Although his government had limited time to work, the prime minister said, he believed it had laid a foundation for the next government to pursue administering the country in a right manner.

This could be witnessed by the government's allocation of 40 per cent of the budget for fiscal 2007-2008 for education development, Gen. Surayud said.

In addition, he said, it had proposed the idea to change the name of NESAC to the National Economic and Social Development Council to indicate that it should give a top priority to the social and human resources development.

(TNA)-E005

MCOT Public Company Limited

Edited September 14, 2007 by Mid

[Prakanong]

"One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!"

That was a back of the envelope calculation using the 5000 PHd's they say they have and the 4 million people here.

If its Singaporeans only then the ratio will be lower than 800:1!!!!

When I am in the office I sit close to a handful of PHd's - only one of which is Singaporean!

Proves one wonderful thing that Singapore is interested in having very well qualified people in their country and making it very easy for people to work and invest there as opposed to Thailands rather convoluted investment and visa rules.

I often perceive many in Thailand has having a " half hearted " desire to learn or communicate

in English - I dont know if anyone else agrees ? Look at how many Thai webpages dont

provide an English option. I have also tried hard to learn Thai but the Thai's

themselves dont encourage you - they either talk back in English or even worse

once recently its better for farangs not to try if sounds bad because Thai people

dont like hearing Thai spoken poorly by farangs !!!! We have to start somewhere

for Christ's sake

But I think part of Singapores success

is down to Lee Kuan Yu having such a strong commitment early after Independance

that everyone should learn English. Today go to Cambodia and Vietnam and

you will see this same determination by young people to learn English and they

are good at it as well ! Obviously Thai is their first language and its nice

that they love it BUT if you want to do business in a global world.....................

And now English is a standard they are now emphasising Mandarin too in Singapore.

While I do not agree with a lot of what Harry lee ay's he did have the vision about English and education to drive the country forward.

I was both surprised and amazed to see an article concerning public transport fare increases in the free newspaper two days ago.

The bus and train company's asked for a fare rise according to their profits. The Singapore giovt decided upon it according to ROTA (Return of total assets) which they explained as abetter method in a industry with high capital employed and published this opinion along with graphs showing why.

This in a free local mag and applying rational econometric/financial principles to a pronblem then exlaining them

[Old Man River]

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

Highdiver, there are sporadic attempts to raise Thailand's industrial capabilities, but achievements are constantly being sidetracked. Plans are always to make it a hub of something. In your example, the goal is to make it a regional biotechnology development hub. So far, the only hub the country has been successful in achieving is the hub of low skilled assembly operations.

Take the IT industry for example. There are a lot of very intelligent, highly motivated people at NECTEC. If you talk to them you will know what I mean. They wish to develop Thailand's IT capabilities to be on par with the more developed surrounding countries, but where is the infrastructure? How can it developed when ministers don't even see the benefits? There is always something that steps in the way of Thailand's attempts to compete at the levels you say they are.

The good news is that there are some people who do want to see Thailand raise its productivity and standard of living and can get into a position to do something about it. However, they first have to get elected.

[highdiver]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

Not Cambodia or Laos - Malaysia and Vietnam are probably closer in economic make up or competing for investment funds.

I might also bring Singapore into it if you are talking about true "Higher" industry and specially if you are talking bio-tech. Singapore is the hub in SE Asia for life sciences and bio-tech - no close runner to compete - further afields Shanghai then other parts of China plus India

If Thailand is trying to create a "cluster" in life sciences or bio-tech the boat has left the docks a long time ago - look at the investment and building of facilities in Singapore - both primary R&D plus actual production facilities - look at who is ther.

From the old big Pharma to the leading Bio Tech company in the world Genentech which is going to produce 40% of its outstanding oncology product here!

there is no doubt singapore is leading in education but it is because they have no alternetives.

Singapore only has education as it does not have land water or natural resaurces. as such and very wisely they have invested in education as the only resource.

thailand is competeing in the area and globaly on many levels.

it is one of the largest food producer in the world and the largest rice producer.

it has a growing industry that is moving away from low labour to higher.

it is closing the gap with education.. even if it is a slow step.

and while Malasia and vietnam are catching up they do so in the low cost labour while thailand is moving into higher industries.

I still say that education is the main driver for the future but they are catching up quickly.

thailand has all the dundementals of a good economy and the forigen intrest in setting up shop is bigger this year then any other. the demand for skilled labour for higer pay will drive many thais to get a higher education.

[Prakanong]

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

Highdiver, there are sporadic attempts to raise Thailand's industrial capabilities, but achievements are constantly being sidetracked. Plans are always to make it a hub of something. In your example, the goal is to make it a regional biotechnology development hub. So far, the only hub the country has been successful in achieving is the hub of low skilled assembly operations.

Take the IT industry for example. There are a lot of very intelligent, highly motivated people at NECTEC. If you talk to them you will know what I mean. They wish to develop Thailand's IT capabilities to be on par with the more developed surrounding countries, but where is the infrastructure? How can it developed when ministers don't even see the benefits? There is always something that steps in the way of Thailand's attempts to compete at the levels you say they are.

The good news is that there are some people who do want to see Thailand raise its productivity and standard of living and can get into a position to do something about it. However, they first have to get elected.

So so true - just how many initiatives and "Hub's" have we seen mentioned, a conference or meeting then it all fizzes out.

Sometimes the vison but no excution - without execution it's absolutely meaningless and worthless.

Thialand might even get a small bio-tech industry but it will be a very pale shadow of Singapore by large factors - google biopolis and see.

Have a look at the top researchers from Europe and the USA coming to Singapore to work. Look at where pharma and biotech are building research and production facilities.

If its not Singapore its India and then China but China has its difficulties.

[Prakanong]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

Not Cambodia or Laos - Malaysia and Vietnam are probably closer in economic make up or competing for investment funds.

I might also bring Singapore into it if you are talking about true "Higher" industry and specially if you are talking bio-tech. Singapore is the hub in SE Asia for life sciences and bio-tech - no close runner to compete - further afields Shanghai then other parts of China plus India

If Thailand is trying to create a "cluster" in life sciences or bio-tech the boat has left the docks a long time ago - look at the investment and building of facilities in Singapore - both primary R&D plus actual production facilities - look at who is ther.

From the old big Pharma to the leading Bio Tech company in the world Genentech which is going to produce 40% of its outstanding oncology product here!

there is no doubt singapore is leading in education but it is because they have no alternetives.

Singapore only has education as it does not have land water or natural resaurces. as such and very wisely they have invested in education as the only resource.

thailand is competeing in the area and globaly on many levels.

it is one of the largest food producer in the world and the largest rice producer.

it has a growing industry that is moving away from low labour to higher.

it is closing the gap with education.. even if it is a slow step.

and while Malasia and vietnam are catching up they do so in the low cost labour while thailand is moving into higher industries.

I still say that education is the main driver for the future but they are catching up quickly.

thailand has all the dundementals of a good economy and the forigen intrest in setting up shop is bigger this year then any other. the demand for skilled labour for higer pay will drive many thais to get a higher education.

I really can not agree with you on two points

1) Thaland is not catching up with anyone on education - who with? - you seem to be the only person saying this. The education system is a mess and its not producing enough people with the skills required to compete in high tech industries to make it a major player.

2) Malasia and vietnam are not just about low cost low skill jobs - why are companies like mocrosoft and Intel opening up in Vietnam? - Malaysia is no slouch when it comes to high tech either - certainly ahead of Thailand

[midas]

there is no doubt singapore is leading in education but it is because they have no alternetives.

Singapore only has education as it does not have land water or natural resaurces. as such and very wisely they have invested in education as the only resource.

thailand is competeing in the area and globaly on many levels.

it is one of the largest food producer in the world and the largest rice producer.

it has a growing industry that is moving away from low labour to higher.

it is closing the gap with education.. even if it is a slow step.

and while Malasia and vietnam are catching up they do so in the low cost labour while thailand is moving into higher industries.

I still say that education is the main driver for the future but they are catching up quickly.

thailand has all the dundementals of a good economy and the forigen intrest in setting up shop is bigger this year then any other. the demand for skilled labour for higer pay will drive many thais to get a higher education.

Can you give some specific examples ? For example a group of Singaporean

investors came to Thailand last year to see if there was an opportunity

to create a large Science Park in Bangkok like they have in Singapore - the

problem was very few people here even knew the first thing about what exactly

a Science Park is for There always seems to be this gaping disconect ?

Another thing highdiver ! How on earth do you reconcile the " methodology " of teaching and

even examination methodology in Thailand compared to neighbouring countries ??

In Thailand 's universities I understood the exams were based on " multiple choice " wheras i am

sure in Singapore even the entry system to Uni's is still based on the UK " A " Level

system of exams ? Chalk and Cheese

[somtaamgaiyang]

"One in every 800 in Singapore is a PHD? Now that is an investment in education!"

That was a back of the envelope calculation using the 5000 PHd's they say they have and the 4 million people here.

If its Singaporeans only then the ratio will be lower than 800:1!!!!

When I am in the office I sit close to a handful of PHd's - only one of which is Singaporean!

Proves one wonderful thing that Singapore is interested in having very well qualified people in their country and making it very easy for people to work and invest there as opposed to Thailands rather convoluted investment and visa rules.

I often perceive many in Thailand has having a " half hearted " desire to learn or communicate

in English - I dont know if anyone else agrees ? Look at how many Thai webpages dont

provide an English option. I have also tried hard to learn Thai but the Thai's

themselves dont encourage you - they either talk back in English or even worse

once recently its better for farangs not to try if sounds bad because Thai people

dont like hearing Thai spoken poorly by farangs !!!! We have to start somewhere

for Christ's sake

But I think part of Singapores success

is down to Lee Kuan Yu having such a strong commitment early after Independance

that everyone should learn English. Today go to Cambodia and Vietnam and

you will see this same determination by young people to learn English and they

are good at it as well ! Obviously Thai is their first language and its nice

that they love it BUT if you want to do business in a global world.....................

I agree 100% !

Learning English is a must for any country in the Far East/South E Asia.

It is shameful that ALL previous Thai governments didn't (want to?) see the importance of English for young students. The earlier they start the easier for them.

When I was young we learned three different foreign languages at the same time in school. I never regretted it.

LaoPo

Question posed to Thai Head Teacher at bilingual kindergarten come middle school my kids attend. Bearing in mind my kids are already very bilingual at a young age.

Question: "Have you ever considered having Mandarin extra classes for the kids?, I wouldn't mind paying."

Answer :"Oh they will only get confused!"

[midas]

highdiver - I have just looked it up to check - these are all countries which still use the " A " level system -

Pakistan, Cyprus, Hong Kong, Mauritius,Sri Lanka, Singapore,[1] Zimbabwe, Malawi, Malta, Zambia, South Africa and the former British West Indies. In India, the same system is followed, though the names of the exams are different.

The significance ???? These are all countries with which Thailand needs to compete regarding its

" educated workforce " The big difference in all of these countries the students are already

taught HOW TO THINK !!! Not this completely messed up education system here which

has no room for learning to apply lateral thinking

[highdiver]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

Not Cambodia or Laos - Malaysia and Vietnam are probably closer in economic make up or competing for investment funds.

I might also bring Singapore into it if you are talking about true "Higher" industry and specially if you are talking bio-tech. Singapore is the hub in SE Asia for life sciences and bio-tech - no close runner to compete - further afields Shanghai then other parts of China plus India

If Thailand is trying to create a "cluster" in life sciences or bio-tech the boat has left the docks a long time ago - look at the investment and building of facilities in Singapore - both primary R&D plus actual production facilities - look at who is ther.

From the old big Pharma to the leading Bio Tech company in the world Genentech which is going to produce 40% of its outstanding oncology product here!

there is no doubt singapore is leading in education but it is because they have no alternetives.

Singapore only has education as it does not have land water or natural resaurces. as such and very wisely they have invested in education as the only resource.

thailand is competeing in the area and globaly on many levels.

it is one of the largest food producer in the world and the largest rice producer.

it has a growing industry that is moving away from low labour to higher.

it is closing the gap with education.. even if it is a slow step.

and while Malasia and vietnam are catching up they do so in the low cost labour while thailand is moving into higher industries.

I still say that education is the main driver for the future but they are catching up quickly.

thailand has all the dundementals of a good economy and the forigen intrest in setting up shop is bigger this year then any other. the demand for skilled labour for higer pay will drive many thais to get a higher education.

I really can not agree with you on two points

1) Thaland is not catching up with anyone on education - who with? - you seem to be the only person saying this. The education system is a mess and its not producing enough people with the skills required to compete in high tech industries to make it a major player.

2) Malasia and vietnam are not just about low cost low skill jobs - why are companies like mocrosoft and Intel opening up in Vietnam? - Malaysia is no slouch when it comes to high tech either - certainly ahead of Thailand

ok so we disagree.... at leat on the other points you agree.

1. as per education in thailand. it is unfortunate that it is not given so much publicity but the education level in thailand has made a huge leap in the number of students and the graduates.

only in 1999 did the goverment intoduce 12 years education.

those changes take time but it is in the right direction.

if you are realy intrestd read the following

http://www.unesco.or.kr/kor/activity2005/e...ortThailand.doc.

2. intel in vietnam is purely a production line for chips. and they did it because the cost of labour is cheaper then setting it up in california.

[Prakanong]

highdiver - I have just looked it up to check - these are all countries which still use the " A " level system -

Pakistan, Cyprus, Hong Kong, Mauritius,Sri Lanka, Singapore,[1] Zimbabwe, Malawi, Malta, Zambia, South Africa and the former British West Indies. In India, the same system is followed, though the names of the exams are different.

The significance ???? These are all countries with which Thailand needs to compete regarding its

" educated workforce " The big difference in all of these countries the students are already

taught HOW TO THINK !!! Not this completely messed up education system here which

has no room for learning to apply lateral thinking

My freinds daughters are doing The International Baccalaureate at the Unitied Nations school and he prefers it for them to A Levels

He is an A level boy who I met at Uni and very clever - Deputy Ambassador at 40

At the end of the day though its not about the exam as you say but the methods of learning. The top Thai schools might produce a few students competing at international level but not in the numbers other countries pump them out.

I have not met anyone who thinks the Thai education is changing or improving to the degree highdiver say's it is - he need's to provide us with examples as all anecdotal and empirical evidence plus multiple reports is quite the opposite.

[Mid]

# 1859 ??........................................

[Prakanong]

The Porter document towards the end puts this point - interesting to ponder over!

"Thailand has a vision for niche industries, but no vision for the country as a whole

• What will in 5-10 years be unique about Thailand as a location to do business relative to other countries in the region / the world?

– What advantages does Thailand's location, history, and current business environment provide?

– How can Thailand move to the next stage of economic development?"

When Thaksin commissioned Porter to do the study, most in the business community in Bangkok questioned the need for the study. The issues of low productivity, an unskilled labor force and rising labor costs were already known. When completed, most of us felt that the value of this high priced report was to confirm to Thaksin what everyone already knew.

The time to do something about it was then. With rising labor costs it was known then that labor intensive, non value added industries in Thailand were going to be hurt, especially those that were not owned by MNC's with ready made channels of distributions in other countries. However, following the Porter study, the TRT did nothing. They were Thailand's first democratically elected government to complete its term of office (and were re-elected). They had time to plan and implement educational and other productivity increasing projects that were (and are) so badly needed. Instead, they focused on how to benefit themselves.

We are now experiencing the results of their inefficiencies. The weak THB/USD exchange rate that has been subsidizing labor intensive, non value added companies is no longer the case. Business failures in these industries are coming to the forefront. It is imperative that the next government urgently tackle the productivity and cost issues or more an more industries will either fail or move on to more competitive, receptive countries.

Yes TRT lined their pockets but so did all the others before - just because they served a full term and were re-elected I would not blame them more than any of the rest

I know comparing Singapore and Thailand is like comparing apples and pears but i am here and reading about the economy every day

2nd Economic story in the paper today is the record growth in R&D down here - primary R%D - with a lot of it from companies themselves and not just the govt pump priming

What I did find interesting though as we are talking about education - there were 500 more PHd graduates among Singaporeans in the year bringing a total of 5000 - that is one in 800 of the people living in this little red dot.

you keep pointing out the competition is the area. who are you referring to? cambodia, vietnam, laos??

all those countries are now moving into the low labor.low pat nich while thilan is moving to higher industry competing with those countries that are giher labour costs in those industries...

the thai goverment is spending a lot in education but as i said before its not enough on a long term scale and more attention is needed to be ready for the following decade.

the R&D in bio tech is very progressed and you may find this ineresting.

http://www.chemweb.com/submitted-news/201c...ors-worldwide-1

Not Cambodia or Laos - Malaysia and Vietnam are probably closer in economic make up or competing for investment funds.

I might also bring Singapore into it if you are talking about true "Higher" industry and specially if you are talking bio-tech. Singapore is the hub in SE Asia for life sciences and bio-tech - no close runner to compete - further afields Shanghai then other parts of China plus India

If Thailand is trying to create a "cluster" in life sciences or bio-tech the boat has left the docks a long time ago - look at the investment and building of facilities in Singapore - both primary R&D plus actual production facilities - look at who is ther.

From the old big Pharma to the leading Bio Tech company in the world Genentech which is going to produce 40% of its outstanding oncology product here!

there is no doubt singapore is leading in education but it is because they have no alternetives.

Singapore only has education as it does not have land water or natural resaurces. as such and very wisely they have invested in education as the only resource.

thailand is competeing in the area and globaly on many levels.

it is one of the largest food producer in the world and the largest rice producer.

it has a growing industry that is moving away from low labour to higher.

it is closing the gap with education.. even if it is a slow step.

and while Malasia and vietnam are catching up they do so in the low cost labour while thailand is moving into higher industries.

I still say that education is the main driver for the future but they are catching up quickly.

thailand has all the dundementals of a good economy and the forigen intrest in setting up shop is bigger this year then any other. the demand for skilled labour for higer pay will drive many thais to get a higher education.

I really can not agree with you on two points

1) Thaland is not catching up with anyone on education - who with? - you seem to be the only person saying this. The education system is a mess and its not producing enough people with the skills required to compete in high tech industries to make it a major player.

2) Malasia and vietnam are not just about low cost low skill jobs - why are companies like mocrosoft and Intel opening up in Vietnam? - Malaysia is no slouch when it comes to high tech either - certainly ahead of Thailand

ok so we disagree.... at leat on the other points you agree.

1. as per education in thailand. it is unfortunate that it is not given so much publicity but the education level in thailand has made a huge leap in the number of students and the graduates.

only in 1999 did the goverment intoduce 12 years education.

those changes take time but it is in the right direction.

if you are realy intrestd read the following

http://www.unesco.or.kr/kor/activity2005/e...ortThailand.doc.

2. intel in vietnam is purely a production line for chips. and they did it because the cost of labour is cheaper then setting it up in california.

OK I will read that when I get time

Even if it is a production line they still need highly skilled people on the lines - it is raising the human capital and I bet Vietnamese go to the USA for training and i bet USA based Viets transfer over thus raising the bar again.

Look at the other countries where chip fabrication goes on and the industries that build up around them to supply them.

It is these type of jobs Thailand needs - not importing parts, putting them together and exporting again like hard drives or whatever - the level is all wrong.

[highdiver]

there is no doubt singapore is leading in education but it is because they have no alternetives.

Singapore only has education as it does not have land water or natural resaurces. as such and very wisely they have invested in education as the only resource.

thailand is competeing in the area and globaly on many levels.

it is one of the largest food producer in the world and the largest rice producer.

it has a growing industry that is moving away from low labour to higher.

it is closing the gap with education.. even if it is a slow step.

and while Malasia and vietnam are catching up they do so in the low cost labour while thailand is moving into higher industries.

I still say that education is the main driver for the future but they are catching up quickly.

thailand has all the dundementals of a good economy and the forigen intrest in setting up shop is bigger this year then any other. the demand for skilled labour for higer pay will drive many thais to get a higher education.

Can you give some specific examples ? For example a group of Singaporean

investors came to Thailand last year to see if there was an opportunity

to create a large Science Park in Bangkok like they have in Singapore - the

problem was very few people here even knew the first thing about what exactly

a Science Park is for There always seems to be this gaping disconect ?

Another thing highdiver ! How on earth do you reconcile the " methodology " of teaching and

even examination methodology in Thailand compared to neighbouring countries ??

In Thailand 's universities I understood the exams were based on " multiple choice " wheras i am

sure in Singapore even the entry system to Uni's is still based on the UK " A " Level

system of exams ? Chalk and Cheese

as i said in another reply... unfortuaty there is not enough publication about the development in thailand

but just to give some idea

please read the following

THAILAND’S BIO INDUSTRY DEMONSTRATES IT IS GAINING CRITICAL MASS

http://www.business-in-asia.com/bio2007_thailand.html

as for what companies are there

http://www.business-in-asia.net/biotech_thai_companies.html

as for education developing.

http://www.unesco.or.kr/kor/activity2005/e...ortThailand.doc.

the same situation as 10,20,30 years ago?? not.

improvement needed yes.... moving forward yes...

[highdiver]

# 1859 ??........................................

have you looked up Phuket???

[Mid]

oh a dodge and subject change ..............................

#1859 ??