Jump to content

Latest foreign tourist assessment: Kasikorn downgrades to just 150,000 visitors before year's end


Recommended Posts

Posted
13 minutes ago, andersonat said:

I understand that there's only a limited amount of space in a news-article/media-announcement, but I'd *really* like to learn/know how (for example) TAT forms/comes up with their predictions for tourist-numbers.  --  Does it come from polling potential Tourists in foreign-countries, does it come from questioning Tourists who are actually in Thailand, does it come from analysing flight/travel-trends from Airlines/Hotel-Booking-Companies ?

 ----   Do the Thai Government or the Research-Organisations ever actually publish the details upon which their calculations/predictions are based ? 

 

There is nothing to learn here and to be polite they pull the numbers out of their hat. (or you could replace hat with another word).

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

One things for sure, with far less tourists than last year - when they still had 3 months of tourism - and more harsh lockdowns and closures, any rise in GDP is this will be purely fictitious and should result in negative figures.

 

Sadly if they opened up to all peoples of the world fully jabbed , they still have time to put it in positive territory 

Yea those first 3 months kept people from knowing the true bad numbers...

Edited by redwood1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Zack61 said:

This is 150,000 more than Australia is aiming for so I can't be too critical.

My friends in the UK can't wait to come here

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Sharp said:

Finally a realistic number and let's call them arrivals as the demographic would be a split between returnees and tourists

I think even 150k with word tourist next to it is optomistic

  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, newnative said:

   If the SVT (or is it STV???) and the Sandbox schemes had actually been 'well received' Thailand would be seeing far more than just 150,000 visitors.  In reality, with both schemes the numerous and complex hoops to jump through were way too much for most.  

Just to give some data published here for Samui +

 

In July TAT announced:

Exactly 1 month later TAT announced 

 

The range of numbers was therefore exactly 50% wrong, aka too high, by TAT. And that only within a month. You can imagine what the annual values will look like.

 

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...