Who needs foreign tourists?

[Leaver]

On 10/14/2021 at 10:27 AM, mran66 said:

 

...interesting comparison...spent almost 20yrs in the N company riding the wave up and down...thinking about it, there indeed are some comparable internal components behind the fall of N and Thailand, though a bit hard to apply them directly to Thai case to predict how things will go here...

 

What positives do you see for Thailand's tourism industry in the future, post covid?  

 

What major infrastructure projects are planned to benefit tourists, and the tourism industry here?  There's a train line that might be built by 2050.  

 

What major infrastructure projects have been built that benefited tourists and the tourism industry here in the last 10 years?

 

Here's what their competition next door are doing, which is the equivalent of say, Samsung, in the mobile phone industry.

 

Record breaking cable car.  Note, later in the video FREE hammocks and beach chairs, and 20,000VND local beer.  That's 30 baht beers on the beach, after taking a world record breaking cable car ride to the island.  

 

How can Thailand compete?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kinyara]

^ The competition next door have by far the lowest % of their population vaccinated in the region, even Laos is ahead of them. Current figures of % fully vaccinated - Vietnam 17.3% vs Thailand 34.8%, so yeah how can Thailand compete :))

[Leaver]

4 hours ago, kinyara said:

^ The competition next door have by far the lowest % of their population vaccinated in the region, even Laos is ahead of them. Current figures of % fully vaccinated - Vietnam 17.3% vs Thailand 34.8%, so yeah how can Thailand compete :))

 

It's not about covid recovery.

 

Vietnam has been building it bigger, better, and faster than Thailand for many years.  Actually, what has Thailand built for tourists lately anyway?

 

The cable car in the video clip was built in 2018, well before covid.  

 

Seriously, how long do you give it before tourist discover they can get bigger, better, nicer, and for cheaper, in Vietnam?  

 

Another example, casinos.  I don't care much for the argument on right or wrong.  It's a leisure activity Vietnam is offering, and Thailand isn't.  Basically, Vietnam Nationals are not allowed into the gaming rooms.  

 

https://thegrandhotram.com

 

Once again, how can Thailand compete?  

 

 

[kinyara]

1 hour ago, Leaver said:

 

It's not about covid recovery.

 

Vietnam has been building it bigger, better, and faster than Thailand for many years.  Actually, what has Thailand built for tourists lately anyway?

 

The cable car in the video clip was built in 2018, well before covid.  

 

Seriously, how long do you give it before tourist discover they can get bigger, better, nicer, and for cheaper, in Vietnam?  

 

Another example, casinos.  I don't care much for the argument on right or wrong.  It's a leisure activity Vietnam is offering, and Thailand isn't.  Basically, Vietnam Nationals are not allowed into the gaming rooms.  

 

https://thegrandhotram.com

 

Once again, how can Thailand compete?  

 

 

It's about Covid recovery to start with if you want tourists back and Vietnam is clearly lagging Thailand in that respect. 

 

Once again Thailand in 2019 was earning double the revenue of Vietnam with double the number of tourists, Over the last few years the year on year growth in revenue was similar at about $4 bn each, so even though Vietnam may be considered a higher % growth market coming from a low base, Thailand was actually continuing to attract the same real revenue growth as Vietnam.  You might find that odd given you think Western tourists are declining and the Chinese according to you don't contribute. Talking of the Chinese that is the one figure that Vietnam beats Thailand on, the % of Chinese that make up their total visitors, 32% in Vietnam compared to 27% in Thailand, however given how much you've banged on about zero revenue Chinese tourists I guess that's not a good thing for Vietnam right ?

 

It needn't be an either or, neither country is mutually exclusive and as the figures show both can grow their tourist revenue to the same degree.

 

 

 

 

 

[Leaver]

27 minutes ago, kinyara said:

It's about Covid recovery to start with if you want tourists back and Vietnam is clearly lagging Thailand in that respect. 

 

Once again Thailand in 2019 was earning double the revenue of Vietnam with double the number of tourists, Over the last few years the year on year growth in revenue was similar at about $4 bn each, so even though Vietnam may be considered a higher % growth market coming from a low base, Thailand was actually continuing to attract the same real revenue growth as Vietnam.  You might find that odd given you think Western tourists are declining and the Chinese according to you don't contribute. Talking of the Chinese that is the one figure that Vietnam beats Thailand on, the % of Chinese that make up their total visitors, 32% in Vietnam compared to 27% in Thailand, however given how much you've banged on about zero revenue Chinese tourists I guess that's not a good thing for Vietnam right ?

 

It needn't be an either or, neither country is mutually exclusive and as the figures show both can grow their tourist revenue to the same degree.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good reply, and fair play, but you are dwelling on the past, where I am focusing on the future.

 

How do you explain the large infrastructure projects for the tourism industry in Vietnam, versus "same same" as the last 20 years in Thailand, which is basically zero?  

 

What has Thailand built or done to benefit tourists, and the tourism industry, in the last 10 years?  I have given a couple of examples of what Vietnam has done.  

 

I really am talking about 5 to 10 years from now, not just post covid. Vietnam was building it bigger and better, post covid.  I only see that trend continuing.  

 

What is Thailand doing to compete, or do you share the same view as those in power here that Thailand will always be number one, and therefore no need to do anything, other than sit back and rake in the money?

 

As mentioned, the Nokia phone company thought everyone would just keep buying Nokia, because they were Nokia, until they went broke.

 

What is Thailand relying on in able to compete with Vietnam in the future, because they sure aren't building anything or fixing up their rubbish infrastructure for tourism.  

 

Happy to hear your thoughts, because all I see is Thailand plodding along in its same old corrupt and collusive ways.  Eg.  a tourist still can't even get a proper metered taxi in a tourist area.

 

 

[kinyara]

I'd naturally expect a country lagging a more developed one to have to catch up and build more when it doesn't already have the tourism infrastructure in place. That might actually put me off Vietnam, you visit only to find you've got a new hotel going up next to yours and there is disruptive building work everywhere. Seen that scenario in Cambodia in the last decade.

 

20 years ago I was flying into Don Muang airport the other side of Bangkok and taking 5 hours to reach Pattaya because there wasn't a decent motorway network to the Eastern Seaboard. New airport and motorway and I get down here in a quarter of the time these days and they are still developing the network with plans to link up with the expansion of U-Tapao for future development of this region.  

 

Just an example but head north east and look at the new motorway into Buriram to support the huge numbers they now draw in with the building and development of the Moto GP circuit. How many hotels have been built there to accomodate the motorsport enthusiasts, that's a whole new market at the higher end of the spend. 

 

Of course many come to Thailand to visit Phuket and Samui which rely on their beaches and natural habitat, why would you need to ruin that environment with further building, haven't there been enough 5 star hotels and resorts built already ?

 

Not sure what draws attracts Vietnam's majority Chinese tourist market, but if it's the kind of tacky tourist " attractions " they go to here, perhaps Vietnam should have a re-think at what they are building.

 

[kinyara]

In Bangkok the new main rail station Bang Sue Central Station is due to open next month serving all long distance services from Bangkok. I've used the old station at Hua Lamphung a fair bit over the years. Within Bangkok I prefer the old Chinatown area and in the last 2 years they've expanded the MRT line with 3 new stations in the heart of that area as part of improving it and drawing in more tourists. 

[Leaver]

8 minutes ago, kinyara said:

I'd naturally expect a country lagging a more developed one to have to catch up and build more when it doesn't already have the tourism infrastructure in place.

 

Errr.  They are building world record breaking infrastructure for tourism.  

 

Has Thailand built anything to claim a world record, ever, except for the sex trade?  ????  

 

10 minutes ago, kinyara said:

That might actually put me off Vietnam, you visit only to find you've got a new hotel going up next to yours and there is disruptive building work everywhere.

 

Yeah.  Right. What about all the shoe box condo's going up in tourist destinations in Thailand?

 

11 minutes ago, kinyara said:

20 years ago I was flying into Don Muang airport the other side of Bangkok and taking 5 hours to reach Pattaya because there wasn't a decent motorway network to the Eastern Seaboard. New airport and motorway and I get down here in a quarter of the time these days and they are still developing the network with plans to link up with the expansion of U-Tapao for future development of this region.  

Yet, the crappy Bell bus is the only public transport down here. 

 

Everyone needs to have their own taxi or private driver arranged.  Once again, all corruption and collusion designed to scam tourists.

 

18 minutes ago, kinyara said:

Just an example but head north east and look at the new motorway into Buriram to support the huge numbers they now draw in with the building and development of the Moto GP circuit. How many hotels have been built there to accomodate the motorsport enthusiasts, that's a whole new market at the higher end of the spend. 

 

Vietnam was on the Formula 1 calendar prior to covid.  Brand new street circuit in the capital, Hanoi, not in some rural city with no infrastructure and accommodation for the event.  

 

22 minutes ago, kinyara said:

Of course many come to Thailand to visit Phuket and Samui which rely on their beaches and natural habitat, why would you need to ruin that environment with further building, haven't there been enough 5 star hotels and resorts built already ?

I'm quite sure they have already ruined the environment there.

 

When's the last time you have been to both?

 

24 minutes ago, kinyara said:

Not sure what draws attracts Vietnam's majority Chinese tourist market, but if it's the kind of tacky tourist " attractions " they go to here, perhaps Vietnam should have a re-think at what they are building.

Jeez, I wonder where Thailand's lost western tourism market started going to.  

 

Are articles like this one no cause for concern for Thailand?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Leaver]

16 minutes ago, kinyara said:

In Bangkok the new main rail station Bang Sue Central Station is due to open next month serving all long distance services from Bangkok. I've used the old station at Hua Lamphung a fair bit over the years. Within Bangkok I prefer the old Chinatown area and in the last 2 years they've expanded the MRT line with 3 new stations in the heart of that area as part of improving it and drawing in more tourists. 

 

Such things service more locals than tourists, same as some roads you mentioned.  Yes, a road to Buriam really benefits tourists seeking a holiday with sun, sea, and sand.  

 

Come on, kinyara.  Post some links to some infrastructure projects that have been built to benefit tourists, and therefore the tourism industry, in the last 5 years, even 10 years.  

 

Surely it can't be too hard, after after all, Thailand is to tourism in South East Asia as Nokia was to mobile phones.   ???? 

 

 

[mran66]

1 hour ago, Leaver said:

 

Good reply, and fair play, but you are dwelling on the past, where I am focusing on the future.

 

How do you explain the large infrastructure projects for the tourism industry in Vietnam, versus "same same" as the last 20 years in Thailand, which is basically zero?  

 

What has Thailand built or done to benefit tourists, and the tourism industry, in the last 10 years?  I have given a couple of examples of what Vietnam has done.  

 

I really am talking about 5 to 10 years from now, not just post covid. Vietnam was building it bigger and better, post covid.  I only see that trend continuing.  

 

What is Thailand doing to compete, or do you share the same view as those in power here that Thailand will always be number one, and therefore no need to do anything, other than sit back and rake in the money?

 

As mentioned, the Nokia phone company thought everyone would just keep buying Nokia, because they were Nokia, until they went broke.

 

What is Thailand relying on in able to compete with Vietnam in the future, because they sure aren't building anything or fixing up their rubbish infrastructure for tourism.  

 

Happy to hear your thoughts, because all I see is Thailand plodding along in its same old corrupt and collusive ways.  Eg.  a tourist still can't even get a proper metered taxi in a tourist area.

 

 

 

10 years down the road many things can change, I dont have crystal ball to forecast how Thailand vs Vietnam will be perceived, esp as I am not really into Vietnam personally. But likely there will be good space for both as long as neither do any major screw-ups - which is a concern for thailand, having the government and thai thinking in decision making. 

 

Re investment, I think fair to say thailand has just built rooms to get a place for the chinese to sleep, add few chinese focused attractions. Thats it, in the past no need to do anything more as the main challenge to capture the opportunity has been simply capacity, If the pandemic will be over some day (i.e travel as free as in 2019), the same will continue several years as only small percentage of Chinese has come here till now - and India is just starting. White tourist become smaller and smaller percentage, and the crowds of Chinese and Indian just make the country less attractive to farang. Actually I think the single biggest challenge to develop the farang market is the huge crowds of chinese and indians as there is tendency to be mutually exclusive. Hard to see thailand being able to develop much new for farang, even to keep the level of current attractiveness is hard due to above.

 

Then re TH vs other SE asian countries, Thailand is still very easy destination for many people, and also has a bit different feel vs Vietnam, Phils, Indo or Malaysia.  For me personally, for some reason the vibe of Vietnam never resonated with me, first time there about 20yrs ago and since been twice (last in 2019) just to check if my perception would have changed. Have not, but thats just me. Phils is nice for island hopping, but travel and food sucks vs  Thailand - the country is a dump other than the islands. Muslim countries have their limitations for many people incl me, thus I tend to think that Thailand has its space simply being as it is (or has been) - which is actually part of the challenge. 

 

When coming here only as a tourists 10-30yrs ago I did not bother too much of the 'thainess' issues as I either did not know about them or did not care as no substantial practical impact (e.g sick politics, dual pricing, xenofobia etc), or knew to be able to avoid them (e.g have really never been scammed). Now, after having lived here more than 8 yrs, the issues I did not know or did not care before, irritate/bother me more as I know more, even if they do not practically cause many issues for me directly, rather just irritate as have learnt more about the country and its sick culture/politics/xeno/societal structure etc. But the average tourist that come is like me 20-30yrs ago, they dont know and they dont see much of the sickness so many are not bothered too much because of those, they just focus on their holiday. Ease of travel, beaches, food, bars/clubs/restaurnt, good vibe to look around hand hang out.

 

Thus, putting aside the pandemic and how thai govt manage that for tourists (and the chinese/indians for farang) the main concerns I see is 1) the price competiveness (or lack of it) driven by the thai approach to milk tourist as much as they can, that can even cause bad rep for average tourist if it gets too bad.; 2) various stupid modernsation/ develpment projects (like khaosan, potentially 'neo pattaya' etc) that kills the vibe that farang tourists like.

 

But yes, sure there are and will be many farang tourists who do not like their experience here on their first/2nd/3rd/etc trip, and they will not come again. This is not the place for them as they have different expectation for holiday experience.

 

Still in near term (next 12 mo), the main challenge is the pandemic, if that is truly over some day, then just the pent up demand will make airport busy for few years. Still hundreds of millions of chinese waiting for their first trip here - not to speak about indians...farang be prepared!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mran66]

34 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

Surely it can't be too hard, after after all, Thailand is to tourism in South East Asia as Nokia was to mobile phones.   ???? 

 

 

regardless of some similar internal management components between N and TH, they are actually quite different cases in terms of likely future success. Nokia death was seen several years before it actually happened, Thailand I really can not see the death, though some rocky ride for sure.

 

Have the full inside re N, but too long to type, and maybe not a good idea in the first place. The industry was just so different.

[Leaver]

9 minutes ago, mran66 said:

 

10 years down the road many things can change, I dont have crystal ball to forecast how Thailand vs Vietnam will be perceived, esp as I am not really into Vietnam personally. But likely there will be good space for both as long as neither do any major screw-ups - which is a concern for thailand, having the government and thai thinking in decision making. 

 

Re investment, I think fair to say thailand has just built rooms to get a place for the chinese to sleep, add few chinese focused attractions. Thats it, in the past no need to do anything more as the main challenge to capture the opportunity has been simply capacity, If the pandemic will be over some day (i.e travel as free as in 2019), the same will continue several years as only small percentage of Chinese has come here till now - and India is just starting. White tourist become smaller and smaller percentage, and the crowds of Chinese and Indian just make the country less attractive to farang. Actually I think the single biggest challenge to develop the farang market is the huge crowds of chinese and indians as there is tendency to be mutually exclusive. Hard to see thailand being able to develop much new for farang, even to keep the level of current attractiveness is hard due to above.

 

Then re TH vs other SE asian countries, Thailand is still very easy destination for many people, and also has a bit different feel vs Vietnam, Phils, Indo or Malaysia.  For me personally, for some reason the vibe of Vietnam never resonated with me, first time there about 20yrs ago and since been twice (last in 2019) just to check if my perception would have changed. Have not, but thats just me. Phils is nice for island hopping, but travel and food sucks vs  Thailand - the country is a dump other than the islands. Muslim countries have their limitations for many people incl me, thus I tend to think that Thailand has its space simply being as it is (or has been) - which is actually part of the challenge. 

 

When coming here only as a tourists 10-30yrs ago I did not bother too much of the 'thainess' issues as I either did not know about them or did not care as no substantial practical impact (e.g sick politics, dual pricing, xenofobia etc), or knew to be able to avoid them (e.g have really never been scammed). Now, after having lived here more than 8 yrs, the issues I did not know or did not care before, irritate/bother me more as I know more, even if they do not practically cause many issues for me directly, rather just irritate as have learnt more about the country and its sick culture/politics/xeno/societal structure etc. But the average tourist that come is like me 20-30yrs ago, they dont know and they dont see much of the sickness so many are not bothered too much because of those, they just focus on their holiday. Ease of travel, beaches, food, bars/clubs/restaurnt, good vibe to look around hand hang out.

 

Thus, putting aside the pandemic and how thai govt manage that for tourists (and the chinese/indians for farang) the main concerns I see is 1) the price competiveness (or lack of it) driven by the thai approach to milk tourist as much as they can, that can even cause bad rep for average tourist if it gets too bad.; 2) various stupid modernsation/ develpment projects (like khaosan, potentially 'neo pattaya' etc) that kills the vibe that farang tourists like.

 

But yes, sure there are and will be many farang tourists who do not like their experience here on their first/2nd/3rd/etc trip, and they will not come again. This is not the place for them as they have different expectation for holiday experience.

 

Still in near term (next 12 mo), the main challenge is the pandemic, if that is truly over some day, then just the pent up demand will make airport busy for few years. Still hundreds of millions of chinese waiting for their first trip here - not to speak about indians...farang be prepared!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good post.

 

However, once again, dwelling somewhat in the past, just as the Thai's do.

 

Put simply, if the Thai tourism industry and Vietnam tourism industry were on the stock market, and you HAD TO invest money in one of them, which one would you chose?   

[Leaver]

12 minutes ago, mran66 said:

Nokia death was seen several years before it actually happened, Thailand I really can not see the death, though some rocky ride for sure.

 

Really?

 

Same question to you.  Can you name any infrastructure projects in recent years here that benefit tourists and the tourism industry here?   

 

Why should this be so hard to answer?  

 

I've given some examples of what the competition have built.  Apparently they are a poorer country.  ????  

[morrobay]

6 hours ago, Leaver said:

 

Really?

 

Same question to you.  Can you name any infrastructure projects in recent years here that benefit tourists and the tourism industry here?   

 

Why should this be so hard to answer?  

 

 

Yes take Pattaya beach road and second road. The city takes all this money for these bs kickback promenade projects that have ruined a previously nice environment into a glorified road for lowlife local males on motorbikes . And besides this hazard the city can't even build some pedestrian overpasses for the safety of tourists ?

 

[mran66]

14 hours ago, Leaver said:

 

Good post.

 

However, once again, dwelling somewhat in the past, just as the Thai's do.

 

Put simply, if the Thai tourism industry and Vietnam tourism industry were on the stock market, and you HAD TO invest money in one of them, which one would you chose?   

 

well, thats a tricky one as I normally do not invest to things I don't have decent understanding about (i.e I dont bet). As said, vietnam is not (or at least has not been) my piece of cake (I prefer Thailand), and not familiar at all about the latest tourism industry developmtns. Just know that my last short trip to HCM and Vung Tau did not make me consider moving to Vietnam.

 

But,  if I need to make the bet, just trying to look at things at a distance, I propably would place my token on Vietnam, simply due to the fact that it is behind the curve vs Thailand, and there SHOULD be substantial upside on macro level to grow the industry from current levels. Having said that, I do not foresee Vietnam bypassing Thailand in terms of tourism-driven GDP contribution anytime soon. Higher growth rates yes.

[rott]

15 hours ago, mran66 said:

 

regardless of some similar internal management components between N and TH, they are actually quite different cases in terms of likely future success. Nokia death was seen several years before it actually happened, Thailand I really can not see the death, though some rocky ride for sure.

 

Have the full inside re N, but too long to type, and maybe not a good idea in the first place. The industry was just so different.

I would be interested in the inside story of N, abbreviated would be perfectly acceptable. 

[mran66]

15 hours ago, Leaver said:

 

Really?

 

Same question to you.  Can you name any infrastructure projects in recent years here that benefit tourists and the tourism industry here?   

 

Why should this be so hard to answer?  

 

I've given some examples of what the competition have built.  Apparently they are a poorer country.  ????  

Yes.

 

well, it's hard to name as there aren't many...just thinking quickly only recent Suvannabhumi terminal extension comes to mind - and Khaosan modernisation!. Just like majority investment in past years/decades have been, even that one is simply to add capacity to be able to cope with the demand, just like building hotels and some roads

 

Personally I am somewhat sceptical how much tourism-focused investments (other than capacity/access building and keeping-places-tidy-and-neat) will actually drive the market, esp places like Thailand. People tend to go see the country/city as it is by heart, by history or by nature - not because of a theme park (yes there are exceptions like Disney places). Think about Italy or France, how much they have invested to tourism other than capacity and access in last 100 years, people go there to see what they have from past (investments done 100-2000 years ago)

 

The challenge/concern with Thailand, as said before, is that some stupid people might invest to things that kills what they have in their modernisation drive, due to whatever reason. Or be stupid enough to make the capacity/access investments in a way that wont always help too much - other than the people who get the kickbacks (like the Pattaya beach road investment). What they definitely should invest more is maintenance of places, let it be sidewalks, beaches, or other things. Invest on something and then let it unmaintained tends to be the way to go here, and places get drab.

 

Then there are those double-faced decisionmakers that try to intentionally kill what they have (pattaya party & sex tourism that is substantial economic driver), and institute  something else on top of the same place (family destination). Im not sure if this is serious, or just face talk as it might be, but its stupid. This country have many places that are good to develop into family destination without damaging the existing cash cow...if you had established business that provides steady cash flow, would you try to kill it and develop something new in its place that might not actually get traction too much - especially if you could try to develop the new biz aside the old one to some other location? I would just develop Pattaya, Nana/Patpong and Bangla on their strenghts, and then in parallel try to develop family holiday places to other locations.

 

Once china opens its borders (and no major shift of politics towards outbound package tours there), and India outbound tourism grows, main issue with Thailand is capacity of airports, roads, parking lots, streets, destinations - and garbage handling. For a farang tourist, issue is that those hoards, and investments/developments made driven by their demands, easily reduces attractiveness towards farang travelers, thus I see Thailand having risk of becoming totally dominated by those. Then, how the thai govt balances the volume/value game in that remains to be seen, I would guess in real life they go for the volume as it is easy in short term

 

If there were no Chinese travelers, like it was just 10 yrs ago, the whole situation would be totally different. Many things in Thailand would be very different, forex reserves to name one!

 

 

[Leaver]

9 hours ago, morrobay said:

And besides this hazard the city can't even build some pedestrian overpasses for the safety of tourists ?

 

The pedestrian traffic lights rarely work properly as well. Dangerous for a newbie tourists.  

[morrobay]

37 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

The pedestrian traffic lights rarely work properly as well. Dangerous for a newbie tourists.  

The lights are not the problem: Brakes stop cars not lights. 

[Leaver]

2 hours ago, mran66 said:

 

well, thats a tricky one as I normally do not invest to things I don't have decent understanding about (i.e I dont bet). As said, vietnam is not (or at least has not been) my piece of cake (I prefer Thailand), and not familiar at all about the latest tourism industry developmtns. Just know that my last short trip to HCM and Vung Tau did not make me consider moving to Vietnam.

 

But,  if I need to make the bet, just trying to look at things at a distance, I propably would place my token on Vietnam, simply due to the fact that it is behind the curve vs Thailand, and there SHOULD be substantial upside on macro level to grow the industry from current levels. Having said that, I do not foresee Vietnam bypassing Thailand in terms of tourism-driven GDP contribution anytime soon. Higher growth rates yes.

 

Fair play.

 

I was talking more about tourism, not expats moving to Vietnam.  Example, a ride on a world record cable car is great for tourists, but means nothing to expats after their first ride.  

 

Given Thailand has been plodding along for decades, which no change in sight, how long do you give "the curve" before Vietnam overtakes Thailand?  

[Leaver]

2 hours ago, mran66 said:

well, it's hard to name as there aren't many..

 

Correct. 

 

Yet, Thailand's tourism industry brings in billions of dollars a year.  Why aren't they reinvesting and upgrading?  How long do they think tourists will put up with the same tired infrastructure and rubbish?

 

To date, their only answer to replacing lost markets have been to target markets from emerging economies, which is great for a body count, not so great for revenue.  

 

2 hours ago, mran66 said:

Once china opens its borders (and no major shift of politics towards outbound package tours there), and India outbound tourism grows, main issue with Thailand is capacity of airports, roads, parking lots, streets, destinations - and garbage handling. For a farang tourist, issue is that those hoards, and investments/developments made driven by their demands, easily reduces attractiveness towards farang travelers, thus I see Thailand having risk of becoming totally dominated by those. Then, how the thai govt balances the volume/value game in that remains to be seen, I would guess in real life they go for the volume as it is easy in short term

 

Is it possible this is the only market Thailand can attract now?  Western tourism was in rapid decline, pre covid.  

 

As I have said before, like Sihanoukville in Cambodia, Pattaya doesn't need casinos to become a China Town for Chinese tourists.  

 

 

[mran66]

47 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

Fair play.

 

I was talking more about tourism, not expats moving to Vietnam.  Example, a ride on a world record cable car is great for tourists, but means nothing to expats after their first ride.  

 

Given Thailand has been plodding along for decades, which no change in sight, how long do you give "the curve" before Vietnam overtakes Thailand?  

yes understand we talking about tourism. but still, I doubt people choose to go to vietnam because of the cable car, they go there for other reasons (I think still mostly to see the country for the first time). once they are there, they may or may not have the ride with the cable car. in my eyes the cable car is an investment to try to get money from the traffic that is there for other reasons, rather than attract the people per se. might well be good investment for whoever gets the ticket revenue (though I will not set my foot on a cable car in vietnam, nor do I in china, thailand etc), sorry my distrust!

 

honestly, even thru my thai-tinted lenses I have hard time to see vietnam to bypass thailand during my lifetime, something unexpected would need to happend to cut the flow of people to thailand for that to happen in my books. but sure will grow.

 

I dont know why, maybe because I just not into vietnam vibe myself, I feel that the repeat rate of visitors to vietnam is substantially lower than thailand. dont have statistics though, but think many people go there once, maybe twice if no time to see the whole country at one trip and thats it, whereas thailand has pretty good repeat customer base

[mran66]

53 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

Correct. 

 

Yet, Thailand's tourism industry brings in billions of dollars a year.  Why aren't they reinvesting and upgrading?  How long do they think tourists will put up with the same tired infrastructure and rubbish?

 

To date, their only answer to replacing lost markets have been to target markets from emerging economies, which is great for a body count, not so great for revenue.  

 

 

Is it possible this is the only market Thailand can attract now?  Western tourism was in rapid decline, pre covid.  

 

As I have said before, like Sihanoukville in Cambodia, Pattaya doesn't need casinos to become a China Town for Chinese tourists.  

 

 

 

 

well thats a million dollar question - I think the answer is thai culture/thinking - the part that is very difficult to understand with farang eyes. basically almost all major beach destinations are badly maintained, many places would be dramatically more beautiful and attractive if some resources would be used for basic maintenance of beahces/parks/streets/sidewalks etc. I think answer comes from same question why next to a villa of rich thai, there can be slum or garbage dump. they do not care or see it as a problem as it is part of the culture. China, cambodia, phils, indo all the same, Lack of civilisation/sophistication I think

 

I dont have statistics of non-russian farang arrivals, but one reason it may look like not growing is that suddenly there is 10+M chinese everywhere, so the share of farang is down even if absolute numbers might not be that much. Overall economic situation in europe likely impacted that, and opening of alternative (new, unexperienced) destinations with warm weather elsewhere, maybe closer to europe ,taking their share of the beach or city holiday market. dont forget that substantial part of europeans that travel in the first place outside eu, have already been in thailand, many more than once, so some go to see other places. repeat rate likely to go down for europeans, and maybe same for americans.

 

that's the concern, i rememeber my first trip to sihanouk in 2001, was a very nice place.  then, went to see it another time in 2018, likely for the last time unless go for curiosity sometime later. Sihanouk is a prime example how a place with good potential for broad based tourism goes exclusive as everything is developed for chinese. Boracay seemed to be moving same way, full of chinese when last go there, first time none. Though no casinos, just people,

 

economic growth of china will inevitably take over many SEasian places (unless specifically prevented by goverments), simply because of the population, like it or not. I dont, after living 13 years in Beijing enough of them - unfortunately can not stop them coming here 

 

if someone in 2012-13 was uncomfortable with too many russians in thailand, remember that population of china is 10x of that.

 

 

[Leaver]

25 minutes ago, mran66 said:

I doubt people choose to go to vietnam because of the cable car,

 

It's not about tourists going to Vietnam to ride on the cable car.  It's about the fact Vietnam offers a world record breaking cable car as part of their tourism infrastructure, which enhances the tourist's holiday.  

 

Word of mouth, photos on social media etc etc after experiencing such things in Vietnam is money in the bank for Vietnam's tourism industry. 

 

Meanwhile, tourists going to Koh Larn for example are STILL on an old ferry or a scam speed boat.. 

 

Do you see the difference?

 

35 minutes ago, mran66 said:

honestly, even thru my thai-tinted lenses I have hard time to see vietnam to bypass thailand during my lifetime,

 

Vietnam only opened their borders around 1990, after the war.

 

Look how fast and how much they have progressed in 30 years.  What's Thailand done for tourism in the last 10 years?

 

39 minutes ago, mran66 said:

I feel that the repeat rate of visitors to vietnam is substantially lower than thailand.

 

That would be mainly due to the massive sex trade here.

 

 

[mran66]

19 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

It's not about tourists going to Vietnam to ride on the cable car.  It's about the fact Vietnam offers a world record breaking cable car as part of their tourism infrastructure, which enhances the tourist's holiday.  

 

Word of mouth, photos on social media etc etc after experiencing such things in Vietnam is money in the bank for Vietnam's tourism industry. 

 

Meanwhile, tourists going to Koh Larn for example are STILL on an old ferry or a scam speed boat.. 

 

Do you see the difference?

 

 

Vietnam only opened their borders around 1990, after the war.

 

Look how fast and how much they have progressed in 30 years.  What's Thailand done for tourism in the last 10 years?

 

 

That would be mainly due to the massive sex trade here.

 

 

well ko lan access maybe not a good reference though sure i see the difference  - however for many tourists to go to the island with an old boat IS part of the attraction of the island lifestyle. making that too advanced I think is negative I think

 

then, yes you need to have quick lift or helicopter (or maybe even cable car!) to get to mahanakorn rooftop or sirocco, thats different experience.

 

sure vietnam has developed in compressed time, simply due to world being more into mass travel during last 20yrs. Just like china developed very quickly compared to europe or US because all the technological and scientific work done before 1980 was given to them, they did not need to invest for all the work and old things, just get straight to new.

 

During past 20yrs thailand has simply built capacity (airports, roads, hotels etc), not much else. Ease of access AND westernised tourist areas, mixed with thai style, has made all easy for tourists. Actually, the farang-style (also farang developed in many cases) services is one of benefits of thailand for farang tourists.

 

Sure sex tourism drives repeat, but it not only that. I have friends who are multiple-time repeats, and not driven by the sex trade. I personally came for short holidays tens of times with farang GF without entering anything related to sex trade, and I dont think I am the only one. Vietnam just did not have the vibe for us, only one long holiday there to see the sights south to north, and thats it. But to each of their own!

 

 

[Leaver]

9 minutes ago, mran66 said:

well ko lan access maybe not a good reference though sure i see the difference  - however for many tourists to go to the island with an old boat IS part of the attraction of the island lifestyle. making that too advanced I think is negative I think

 

then, yes you need to have quick lift or helicopter (or maybe even cable car!) to get to mahanakorn rooftop or sirocco, thats different experience.

 

As I have said before, Thailand was "cheap and nasty" but a good time could be had by all here. 

 

Now, Thailand is not so cheap, but the nasty still remains. 

 

Middle income earners from the west will not pay decent money to be surrounded by "nasty" and high end tourists are seeking the helicopter / cable car experience, to use your example.

 

This is why I have said Thailand has placed itself in an awkward position in the tourism market in South East Asia.  Too expensive for lower incomes, too cheap for higher incomes.

 

19 minutes ago, mran66 said:

sure vietnam has developed in compressed time, simply due to world being more into mass travel during last 20yrs.

 

Has Thailand developed at the same rate?  Think, Nokia phone company again.  

 

20 minutes ago, mran66 said:

During past 20yrs thailand has simply built capacity

 

So that would be quantity over quality.  How do you think that will work out for Thailand, 5 to 10 years from now?

 

What's better, 100 million tourists spending 1 billion dollars, or 50 million tourists spending 2 billion dollars, to use round figures for the example.  

 

24 minutes ago, mran66 said:

Sure sex tourism drives repeat, but it not only that. I have friends who are multiple-time repeats, and not driven by the sex trade. I personally came for short holidays tens of times with farang GF without entering anything related to sex trade, and I dont think I am the only one.

That was the good old days for Thailand.  Now, it's a worn out shadow of its former self, due to zero investment in tourist infrastructure.    

[mran66]

15 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

As I have said before, Thailand was "cheap and nasty" but a good time could be had by all here. 

 

Now, Thailand is not so cheap, but the nasty still remains. 

 

Middle income earners from the west will not pay decent money to be surrounded by "nasty" and high end tourists are seeking the helicopter / cable car experience, to use your example.

 

This is why I have said Thailand has placed itself in an awkward position in the tourism market in South East Asia.  Too expensive for lower incomes, too cheap for higher incomes.

yes the cost level is a concern, as said earlier one way to shoot themselves to the foot is pricing - however I think pricing is subject to demand and supply, and the dramatic increase in demand (read: chinese) has enabled sustenance of prices at relatively high level. when covid hit, we saw what happened - interesting to see how the price level of e.g hotels will develop over the next two years from todays starting level. But as long as demand is as it was in 2019, and the trend remains, prices likely not go down. If for whatever reason the chinese will not come back in volumes, for sure that has an impact to price levels. At the end, labor costs are low, it is the hotel and other investors that have benefited from the demand driven high prices, not the workers. Prices can be adjusted quickly if there is a reason, just see how price of 5star hotel went from 5k to 1.5k last year!

But if they come back in volumes, the indirect impact to middle class farang is that things get more/too expensive; a small slice of middle class chinese can take the space with their affordability.

 

However, even if many things are more expensive than before, people who want to have a low cost beach holiday on tropical island, they still can have that, just choose your location accordingly. Sure you need to wealthy enough to buy the flight, but after that the daily cost can be kept low if needed.

 

15 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

Has Thailand developed at the same rate?  Think, Nokia phone company again.  

 

'obviously not possible to keep same rate, just like US or Germany development in past 20yrs is a small fraction of china (due to low starting point), though absolute level still way higher. 

 

15 minutes ago, Leaver said:

So that would be quantity over quality.  How do you think that will work out for Thailand, 5 to 10 years from now?

 

What's better, 100 million tourists spending 1 billion dollars, or 50 million tourists spending 2 billion dollars, to use round figures for the example.  

 

thats the big question, my guess is the volume driven by chinese and indians - and the growth coming from markets where political or economic changes of these two countries could have dramatic impact of demand (southwards) at a snap of a finger. Thats why they SHOULD not go the easy way, but I think they will. Too easy money, too easy to forget the risks - and the fact that chinese occupation drives away the farang, sihanouk being an extreme case. But so many chinese and indians that they probably not care, even bar girls need to get used to small d**k or learn to close their nose for an hour!

 

And I do not foresee thailand becoming a real high-end travel destination, though sure there are places here and there that can attract high paying guests. But on general level, this is a developing country, and cannot be regarded as high class by any standard. So volume is the name of the game, just how big is the question. Sure closer to 50 than 1.

 

If you want to have a beach/sightseeing vacation in SE Asia, not sure if can you actually can have it substantially cheaper in any other place esp with same ease of travel for the unexperienced. 

 

15 minutes ago, Leaver said:

 

That was the good old days for Thailand.  Now, it's a worn out shadow of its former self, due to zero investment in tourist infrastructure.    

I agree that the relative attractiveness of Thailand for farang is down, and that improving the basic infrastructure would make it better. That just does not seem to be within capability of local govermental decisionmakers, as said maybe they do not see the problem at all with their eyes.

 

Does not mean that it is too bad compared to competing opportunities in the region, but down.

[Leaver]

6 minutes ago, mran66 said:

At the end, labor costs are low, it is the hotel and other investors that have benefited from the demand driven high prices, not the workers. Prices can be adjusted quickly if there is a reason,

I think you will find it's the Thai landlords driving the prices here, and they are not keen on "adjustments."  

 

8 minutes ago, mran66 said:

However, even if many things are more expensive than before, people who want to have a low cost beach holiday on tropical island, they still can have that, just choose your location accordingly.

Thailand was outpricing itself in the South East Asia tourism market long before covid. 

 

Where do you think tourists will decide to go in the future when they learn Vietnam is not only cheaper, but is offering quality tourism infrastructure, which generally makes it a better value for money holiday.  

 

14 minutes ago, mran66 said:

'obviously not possible to keep same rate, just like US or Germany development in past 20yrs is a small fraction of china (due to low starting point), though absolute level still way higher. 

 

So, a "low starting point" country builds world record breaking infrastructure whilst an established country sits back and does nothing and you think that's just the low starting point country catching up.

 

Did you see it's "world record breaking?"  That means, the best in the world, not just against Thailand.  

 

17 minutes ago, mran66 said:

Thats why they SHOULD not go the easy way, but I think they will.

 

They already have, pre covid, and it wasn't working out too well.  

 

19 minutes ago, mran66 said:

But on general level, this is a developing country

 

It seems Thailand's neighbour, Vietnam, is developing their tourism industry a lot faster.   How many years do you give it before Vietnam's tourism industry  overtakes Thailand's tourism industry, sex tourism aside?

 

22 minutes ago, mran66 said:

I agree that the relative attractiveness of Thailand for farang is down, and that improving the basic infrastructure would make it better.

 

What improvements?  Can you name some?

 

23 minutes ago, mran66 said:

That just does not seem to be within capability of local govermental decisionmakers, as said maybe they do not see the problem at all with their eyes.

 

Does not mean that it is too bad compared to competing opportunities in the region, but down.

So, you say there is a problem. What is it?

 

By Thailand staying still, and their competition moving forward so fast, Thailand is basically going backwards, and not an infrastructure project in sight to compete. 

 

I would short sell Thailand's tourism industry in a heart beat.   

[lmxcredt]

Not too sure what all the waffling on about tourist infrastructure is about. People don't come to Thailand for brand new shiny tack. They come for what it has always had: beaches, temples, night markets and bars. These don't require overhauls in infrastructure. They require maintaining things as they are, so people can experience them when they are full of authentic life. Overdevelop and you destroy the very thing people came to your country to see, which is an idea of paradise.

 

I am 25 and live in Bangkok, and I will say now the reason people my age will stop bothering with Thailand is because everywhere is overbuilt, the old school charm is being bulldozed, the beaches are <deleted> and it is no longer as cheap as it used to be. Many people my age would rather go to Laos or pre-coup Myanmar for kicks in Asia nowadays. This is not because Thailand isn't investing enough. Actually, if Thailand just stopped investing in crappy redevlopment projects, destroying the natural habitat that clings to life on the edge of beach towns, and stopped sanitising everywhere to turn places into overdeveloped malls, people might actually be interested again.

 

Ask the average Brit my age where Pattaya is and they probably couldn't even tell you. Or might remember hearing about it once when someone made a joke, and liken it to a dead British seaside town full of an ageing retiree population akin to Benidorm (no offence, but everyone here knows it is true). People have a similar impression of Phuket. I think only the North retains its charm to the average young tourist.

 

But that said, young western tourists only make up a fraction of Thailands visitors, so my comments are limited. My info probably is irellevant and not relatable to most the posters here, but just wait 10-15 years and those who remember Thailand for what it was will be replaced by people my age who don't care for Pattaya and Phuket. By all means the Thai government can pump money into "tourist infrastructure", but more often than not this means concrete being poured on sand and paradise being turned into Alton Towers.

[jacko45k]

14 hours ago, morrobay said:

The lights are not the problem: Brakes stop cars not lights. 

Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't....