Jump to content

TAT proposes paying part of quarantine bill for tourists


webfact

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ezzra said:

Spoke to the F&B manager at the 4 star hotel where i stay this morning noticing a marked drop in the number of people coming to the breakfast buffet, yes he said,  this is happening all over Phuket island  and next week going to be even less and the drop in incoming tourists or staying tourists is getting smaller now that other destinations have opened up, so much so that the Phuket Holiday in will shut its doors from next week... so go figure...

 

2 hours ago, ezzra said:

Spoke to the F&B manager at the 4 star hotel where i stay this morning noticing a marked drop in the number of people coming to the breakfast buffet, yes he said,  this is happening all over Phuket island  and next week going to be even less and the drop in incoming tourists or staying tourists is getting smaller now that other destinations have opened up, so much so that the Phuket Holiday in will shut its doors from next week... so go figure...

Ask LongTimeLurker he says the litterbox sceme is working very well and he is living on the island so he should know ????

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ozzydon said:

i guess they have to try anything another scheme from tat ????

"Say" anything would be more accurate, as they are experts at spouting off and scheming, but actually "doing"...not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Mike KIWI said:

So I am moving back to Thailand from New Zealand and i have to quarantine. 3000USD for me and my son. complete waste of time and money.

Aotearoa must be really horrible if you're willing to pay that much to rush back into Covid central.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Nanaplaza666 said:

Ask LongTimeLurker he says the litterbox sceme is working very well and he is living on the island so he should know

Is this a translation issue? Is it Sandbox or Litterbox Scheme?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, steven100 said:

Paying for the 7 days or 14 days quarantine is only 50% of the problem .....

The most part is being stuck in a ASQ hotel for most part of the vacation/holiday.

No one is going to do that.

 

No quarantine is the only way tourists will come.  And that can't happen until the vaccine has been given to everyone in Thailand. 

so stop dreaming Thanes Petchsuwan

The most sensible post you have ever made on TV - keep it up Steven! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did this moron just figure out that some other countries quarantine any returnees?

 

Did he just wake up after a year-long siesta?

 

I doubt this scheme would lead to any increase in "tourists". It's not so much about the money quarantine-ing upon a return, it's the extra time required after you return home. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would make far more sense for Thailand to pay for the 3 PCR tests and the "Thai covid insurance", if they genuinely want to attract more tourists. That would only cost them £200 or so.

 

UK quarantine currently costs £2,285 per person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, steven100 said:

Paying for the 7 days or 14 days quarantine is only 50% of the problem .....

The most part is being stuck in a ASQ hotel for most part of the vacation/holiday.

No one is going to do that.

 

No quarantine is the only way tourists will come.  And that can't happen until the vaccine has been given to everyone in Thailand. 

so stop dreaming Thanes Petchsuwan

 

haha, i know, the TAT do miss the point, everything is about money. if they sat down and thought if they themselves went on holiday and had to sit in a hotel for 14 days would they go?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, internationalism said:

I don't think any tourist would want to waste 2 weeks in quarantine on returning back home, even if cost was only 50%.

Different matter, if travel is for business or work. That might have sense.

 

The real problem for tourists starts, when tested positive on arrival or during stay in SHA+ in phuket sandbox. Or even if they were close by to an infected.

They would be transferred to hospitel, which are expensive in comparison to SHA+, in the range of 40k for a 2 weeks stay. Hospitels are not covered by covid insurance. And after completion they would be, most likely, turned back home.

 

 

Hi , are you sure about COVID insurance not paying if you end up in hospital ? I thought that was the goal of COVID covered insurance ? I read the conditions of AXA Thailand and am sure it is covered.

info please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, geisha said:

Hi , are you sure about COVID insurance not paying if you end up in hospital ? I thought that was the goal of COVID covered insurance ? I read the conditions of AXA Thailand and am sure it is covered.

info please. 

hospitEl (which is quarantine at hotel, rather than in a common hall with hundreds of others).

If you don't have any serious symptoms, insurance doesn't cover.

If you end up in hospitAl, it means, you have symptoms and constant treatment, that is covered by insurance.

There are covid specific insurances (from around 500b per year) that they do cover also hospitEl. I am not sure if they still do offer and for around that price, as during the 3rd wave they are losing money

Edited by internationalism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, steven100 said:

Paying for the 7 days or 14 days quarantine is only 50% of the problem .....

The most part is being stuck in a ASQ hotel for most part of the vacation/holiday.

No one is going to do that.

 

No quarantine is the only way tourists will come.  And that can't happen until the vaccine has been given to everyone in Thailand. 

so stop dreaming Thanes Petchsuwan

I agree… I also think that IF the goal is truly to get *tourists* to come, then IF they want to go with this 50% subsidy idea, they will need to know who is and who is not a true and legitimate tourist and not a long stay “expatriate” type person.

 

If I think about it, I’d say that those who are essentially long-stay “expatriate” types- there’s not a lot of NEED to offer any incentive to them as they will most likely return at some point in time on their volition…. many have homes, assets, formal/informal family/social networks here …. so i see little need to offer a subsidy to attract them to come…. For many in this group, i suspect it’s more a matter of “when” to come and not “if” to come. 

 

Now, for a legitimate short-stay tourist, that’s different… i could see offering what would be a 50% discount of your lodging bill, as incentive … but i agree that in the end, so long as there is ANY kind of hard “movement restriction” - be that at remaining in one hotel or even a strictly defined geographic area, a traditional tourists might look at other destinations that offer fewer/no movement restrictions, easier administrative formalities, lower entry costs, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nsp64 said:

That is how they see it in their narrow minds. 

Thais of all social and education levels really think foreigners are just sitting at home desperate to visit here.

This is why they see no wrong in their ridiculous entry rules.

There is no narrow minds, here we are talking out of their minds!

Education + Level of that???? You do know we are talking about Thailand?

Why so specific on entry rules? They see no wrong in anything they are doing. Best in the world syndrome!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...