Thailand’s Policy On Quality Tourism

[highdiver]

Personally, i can't see anything wrong with TAT declaring a strategy centred around attracting quality tourists. Isnt that what every country wants. It doesnt automatically imply that backpackers will no longer will be welcome; it means a shifting of Thailand's tourism brand away from solely focusing on backpackers and sex tourists and towards spas, luxury resorts and the like.

Seems like a good strategic goal to me.

Of course Thailand is a fair way from that position now, but declaring it as a strategy is the right start and provides some directional sense for future policy developments.

spot on

but why ruin a perfect chance for all our "false superiority" friends who need somwhere to express themselves as konw better then Thais.

[steveromagnino]

I agree with the government's policy.I hope the country is flooded with tourists, of the same high quality,as the average Thai.

Sounds great! It would certainly be a major step above where we are at now wouldn't it

I just hope that we don't get too many. The sustainable number is probably 10m. That is enough for now.

[soundman]

What exactly is a "high quality tourist" anyway? Somebody that spends a lot per day? Somebody that doesn't annoy the locals or rock the boat? Celebrity status - so the TAT can boast in international circles?

I spend a good proportion of my time sourcing materials, sub-contractors & components. All are sold as high quality or Grade A. I have never seen so many different levels of grade A ranging from stuff that meets the grade to stuff that is downright useless sinand couldn't even be classified as grade E.

I would like to see what the TAT consideres a Grade A tourist.

Soundman.

[steveromagnino]

What exactly is a "high quality tourist" anyway? Somebody that spends a lot per day? Somebody that doesn't annoy the locals or rock the boat? Celebrity status - so the TAT can boast in international circles?

I spend a good proportion of my time sourcing materials, sub-contractors & components. All are sold as high quality or Grade A. I have never seen so many different levels of grade A ranging from stuff that meets the grade to stuff that is downright useless sinand couldn't even be classified as grade E.

I would like to see what the TAT consideres a Grade A tourist.

Soundman.

'quality tourists should have purchasing power and not exploit the country and the people. They must not create problems that lead to natural and environmental destruction. '

Partly their demands, partly their ability to spend, partly their choice on what they choose to spend money on.

Sounds like:

whoremongers

drug takers/sellers

illegal workers

gangsters

scam artists

are good examples of what are considered to be 'not quality tourists'.

Not exactly a difficult benchmark; sadly one can see the human refuse at Nana Plaza on any given sunday and realise that even this low bar is not being reached.

I can understand your confusion as the press release really is a load of drivel; however looking deeper at it, you don't agree that the key to Thailand's success in tourism is a focus on getting the right type of visitor rather than sheer numbers and we'll take who we can get?

[yaketyak]

I have said it many times before on similar threads .

Thailand is , and maybe they are right to do so, only interested in money . This being a given i cannot understand why they care who comes intro the country or for how long they stay. The back packers still spend money , the sex tourist still spends money , the high ender spends loads of money ... what do they all have in common ? they all spend money. So why does the government care who they are ... let everyone in and let them spend their money.

Now whats wrong with that logic?

[uptou]

i think ko chang is the way that thailand is heading.rows of over priced cramped together,package holiday,rather boring,sterile resorts,with no character,where the staff arn't encouraged to have a laugh with you.our favourite bar on the beach on ko chang was run by these thai hippies (we only went on the beer).i like the rough around the edges thailand,open to all,even though i have money to spend.

[soundman]

'quality tourists should have purchasing power and not exploit the country and the people. They must not create problems that lead to natural and environmental destruction. '

Partly their demands, partly their ability to spend, partly their choice on what they choose to spend money on.

Sounds like:

whoremongers

drug takers/sellers

illegal workers

gangsters

scam artists

are good examples of what are considered to be 'not quality tourists'.

Not exactly a difficult benchmark; sadly one can see the human refuse at Nana Plaza on any given sunday and realise that even this low bar is not being reached.

I can understand your confusion as the press release really is a load of drivel; however looking deeper at it, you don't agree that the key to Thailand's success in tourism is a focus on getting the right type of visitor rather than sheer numbers and we'll take who we can get?

This is where it becomes hard to categorise. I know a few miners & oilworkers who come to holiday in Thailand every so often on their month off.

These guys spend upwards of $500 per day (some budget closer to a $1,000), nearly 5 times the avg. tourist spend. Sure enough they drink & womanise, however they don't really offend the general population at large because they stick to their small areas of interest.

Should these type of tourists who I assume are numbered in the thousands be discouraged from visiting Thailand?

[MikeRay]

My wife is Thai and we have 3 kids, that makes as the eldest is in school about 2700-3000€ for tickets. I´m the only earner as my wife takes care of the kids, even that I earn above average we have to save about 3 years for our holiday. Holiday´ing is not everything to us! But as it is the home country of my wife that she can´t visit every year she´s always trying to stay as long as possible (4-6 weeks). I don´t want to spend too much time in her village and so when I´m there we ´re leaving for a destination at the beach. As we like to enjoy our holiday a bit we are taking some relative, mostly an elder sister with us to take care of the kids. So we need to rent a house, or 2 Bungalows, or 3 Hotelrooms. I like to be independant that´s why I rent a car and we are able to make some excursions. Even that we only eat local food and I drink little we need between 1500-2000 Baht/day for that. For accomodation we spend about 3000-4000 Baht a day, that gives you a nice accomodation for a single or a couple. But we are six. With an ongoing rate 1€ / ca. 42 Baht, I calculated all in all 380000 Baht for a holiday, that is more than 9000 € for our holiday. Expensive and I don´t alwaysget quality

[steveromagnino]

I have said it many times before on similar threads .

Thailand is , and maybe they are right to do so, only interested in money . This being a given i cannot understand why they care who comes intro the country or for how long they stay. The back packers still spend money , the sex tourist still spends money , the high ender spends loads of money ... what do they all have in common ? they all spend money. So why does the government care who they are ... let everyone in and let them spend their money.

Now whats wrong with that logic?

- certain groups are somewhat mutually exclusive e.g. you cannot have Japanese tourists and Chinese tourists in close proximity of eachother for the most part; you certainly cannot have family Christians close to a bunch of whoremongers; you probably cannot have drunk soldiers from the middle east near affluent Saudi Muslims. Simple rule of marketing

- there is only a limited amount of land and natural attractions which can only support a certain number of visitors before they start looking like kee; for instance Pattaya and Patong are running above that - the infrastructure and management is unable to keep up

- at a certain point, numbers of tourists start to remove people and resources from developing other parts of the economy, and so when something that stops this money train occurs, e.g. tsunami, coup, birdflu, SARS, the economy has become overly reliant on one product - akin to a banana republic or oil country; all the eggs are in one basket - tourism is a nice money maker, but over exploitation of it ends up resulting in an inferior product for all if the fundamental reason to come here is of a finite quantity (e.g. pretty beaches, staying at the seaside, clean water, good service, even skanky hos)

- money spent say in sex tourism encourages sectors of the economy to develop which are like a cancer; as anyone with a brain can see the money going into the sex industry in Thailand feeds a lot of cash into a money spiral including drugs, booze, gambling and other vice; much of the money does not go into economically viable projects at all - YES it is a necessary part of any country's economy, but overreliance on this is part of the reason that Isaan is now a total mess -by earning relatively easy money many people in that region have not developed any other skills, leaving them working as service providers on their backs, meea farang or similar, and not forcing the region to develop areas of core competence of greater value. Tourism and the sex industry are a nice crutch, but the longer one leans on it, the more reliant one becomes on it. And of course, the negative impact on the family tourism market is part of that mutually exclusive issue; that's merely marketing 101; basic market segmentation

- by playing with the supply/demand price point, a place can actually earn more money or higher profit without resorting to quantity; e.g. AMEX, Bhutan, most nightclubs worldwide with a restrictive door policy, etc

I am not suggesting actively blocking certain groups (well perhaps pedophiles, serial sex tourists, drug takers and the like) but rather choosing what to focus on in marketing the country abroad. Backpackers are the obvious choice that everyone always starts with single out as being the opposite of a quality tourist, but I think despite their reputation for poor personal hygiene, inability for the most part to wander more than a few steps beyond a few stereotypically The Beach type locations and choices of things to do, that they for the most part bring more than they take. Why should we block them?

But in terms of where we invest money for infrastructure, marketing, etc - surely we should look at the people who we want coming here, and try to provide them with what they want. e.g. closing hours, drinking laws, public transportation, hotel/travel package incentives, visitor centre services, etc etc.

Because if it is sex tourists we want, it seems like all the infrastructure for letting fat old men sleep with legal age (and below legal age) ladies of the night is already fully developed to the point of exploding.

As for the thousand or so oil workers... well to compare we look after some people who are spending $10-100k USD a day here, so it isn't like they are spending that much...however can't see why we wouldn't welcome them; just no reason to market to that group specifically with regards to the nightlife industry.

my views on this, are of course tainted somewhat, having had relatives being treated pretty embarrassingly badly by some of the 'high quality tourists' that you can find roaming around BKK these days. For some reason, I was not particularly pleased when one guy was offering my neice 10,000b to sleep with him. When she is (and obviously so) about 13. If this is the only market that Thailand can hope to get, god help us.

Edited August 9, 2007 by steveromagnino

[mellow1]

My wife is Thai and we have 3 kids, that makes as the eldest is in school about 2700-3000€ for tickets. I´m the only earner as my wife takes care of the kids, even that I earn above average we have to save about 3 years for our holiday. Holiday´ing is not everything to us! But as it is the home country of my wife that she can´t visit every year she´s always trying to stay as long as possible (4-6 weeks). I don´t want to spend too much time in her village and so when I´m there we ´re leaving for a destination at the beach. As we like to enjoy our holiday a bit we are taking some relative, mostly an elder sister with us to take care of the kids. So we need to rent a house, or 2 Bungalows, or 3 Hotelrooms. I like to be independant that´s why I rent a car and we are able to make some excursions. Even that we only eat local food and I drink little we need between 1500-2000 Baht/day for that. For accomodation we spend about 3000-4000 Baht a day, that gives you a nice accomodation for a single or a couple. But we are six. With an ongoing rate 1€ / ca. 42 Baht, I calculated all in all 380000 Baht for a holiday, that is more than 9000 € for our holiday. Expensive and I don´t alwaysget quality

Dear MikeRay,seeing how you are just another family man trying to support and make the family happy. By working,and saving your money for 3YEARS,just to be able to bring them to the land of smiles,to run around the old village,does not make you a quality tourist, from what I have read.I do that, everyday here in the land of smiles(except work),and from what I see,I'm probably not a quality Visa holder, because there is always something going on with those rules which are ever changing.Things are hard to figure out because they change so quickly,and the minute you think your OK,and everything is fine,some new thing will come around for you to try and figure out.I think that if we were" quality tourists or people" we wouldn't have to go through all this shit.I think quality types of people would not be treated this way,but then again they might.After all this is amazing Thailand.

[steves_the_1]

interesting, but what exacly would they spend 100k USD a day on for arguments sake

steve

[Ulysses G.]

Let's ditch the myths:

Plenty of high end tourists staying at high end hotels also spend money in the local

Plenty of high end tourists, particularly the ones who are investing in condos like the Heights in Phuket are coming here monthly. They are not 1 time visitors. However....to suggest that the only reason visitors come here is for dodgy sex and booze, and that Thailand is unable to attract high end tourists at all sounds a bit like some posters should look beyond their own group of mates.

MOST "high-end" tourists that are repeat visitors to Thailand come for the nightlife and companionship no matter what YOU have decided. There is not a lot else here to attract them that they can't get a million other places with better restaurants, service and shopping and a lot less rip-offs.

[steveromagnino]

Let's ditch the myths:

Plenty of high end tourists staying at high end hotels also spend money in the local

Plenty of high end tourists, particularly the ones who are investing in condos like the Heights in Phuket are coming here monthly. They are not 1 time visitors. However....to suggest that the only reason visitors come here is for dodgy sex and booze, and that Thailand is unable to attract high end tourists at all sounds a bit like some posters should look beyond their own group of mates.

MOST "high-end" tourists that are repeat visitors to Thailand come for the nightlife and companionship no matter what YOU have decided. There is not a lot else here to attract them that they can't get a million other places with better restaurants, service and shopping and a lot less rip-offs.

Hmmm. Let me advise the some of houses from Saudi about that one for you. I am sure one Princess in particular would be inclined to disagree with you. Let's see... she spent $100k USD in a day, then went to the bank to get some more. 3rd trip....THIS YEAR.

So..... where are all the men for the women and families that are coming here and spending serious cash then? I always wondered what 10 year old children and their mothers and fathers do for companionship and nightlife.

And I wonder why places like Hua Hin, Phi Phi, Koh Racha, Kata Noi and so on do for customers....it must be really really tough setting up these massive resorts and having no customers at all, since all the 'high end tourists' are at Ratchada, Patpong, Walking Street and Patong.

I guess all those Singaporeans and Hong Kong Chinese who fly in here by the bus load and by the family load to eat cheap seafood must really be doing that to cover up their nightlife activities.

I would imagine all those golfing Koreans and Japanese, in particular the Japanese ladies, they really are only pretending to come here for the cheap golf.

Hmmmm. I guess despite miles of beach, great food, cheap fashion, sight seeing, spas, great prices, cheap 5 star hotels...at the end of the day you feel that THailand has nothing to offer, and I don't see it the same way.

Clearly our viewpoints are very different. I love living here, and manage to do so without doing much in the way of companionship, as do (I would take a total guess here) more than 90% of the foreign customers spending cash that my main client handles, as one of Bangkok's larger tourist 'pulls'. In terms of foot traffic however, less than 90%; we are a walking area that has its share of dodgy daytime 'harsh light of reality' couples on display too.

But then again, it is only my own personal livelihood and an area of knowledge I am somewhat familiar with, I may be completely wrong about this ;-0 As must be some of my very wealthy clients.

My belief is that actively engaging in the prostitution industry repeatedly automatically rules a person out as a quality tourist - it is money spent, and a cancer as a result. I would LOVE to see that entire industry significantly reduced in size. Some people need to believe that it is a good thing for Thailand, the only thing Thailand has going for it. I am not one of them. But then again, I did not move half way across the world to take some dead end job just so I could hang out at NEP every night. I was never desperate for a date where I grew up, where I lived since and living here. So that's at least one reason why I might be totally underestimating what white men want when they come here...who knows?

To each their own!

Edited August 9, 2007 by steveromagnino

[samran]

i dare say that most of the outside world think of thailand as a cheap whore house they should be gratful they get tourists never mind quality tourist.

Quality tourist go to quality destinations thailands got a long way to go

Thailand would be seen as a quality desitination if it could get rid of that image.

Killing off the sex-tourism industry would be a great day for Thailand and the first but most important step in re-building its image. Thats not going to make most of the punters on this site happy, but it is the honest truth.

[JetsetBkk]

Quality tourism goes something like this.....

Mr X, a foriegn Multi Millionaire, who is self employed, decides to Visit Thailand with his wife for a short Vacation.

He travels to Thailand in his private Jet. etc etc etc etc etc etc etc..........

Don't forget the day trip to Patong:

"On returning to Phuket airport to board his private jet, he notices a line of minibuses parked outside the airport car park, clearly avoiding an extra few baht of the parking fee.

On closer inspection he sees a line of minibus drivers emptying their bladders against the airport wall in preparation of their passenger pick-up and subsequent long trip to Patong."

Quality minibus drivers would be a start.

[bendix]

Killing off the sex-tourism industry would be a great day for Thailand and the first but most important step in re-building its image. Thats not going to make most of the punters on this site happy, but it is the honest truth.

Amen to that.

To read posters here saying there is very little else to attract people to Thailand tells me more about those posters than it does about Thailand as a destination.

World class and affordable hotels. World class spas. World class and affordable golf courses. Beaches. Superb food. World class shopping. Natural attractions. Cultural attractions.

Oh - but no - those aren't attractive. It's Nana Plaza which is most important.

Good on TAT for stating what is pretty obvious (even if the guy stated it verbosely). The sooner Thailand sheds its image as a magnet for loser farangs coming for their annual shagfest, the better.

[paulsmithson]

London-Paris-Rome -Prague-Bangkok. get real there is no comparison

[Ulysses G.]

i dare say that most of the outside world think of thailand as a cheap whore house they should be gratful they get tourists never mind quality tourist.

Quality tourist go to quality destinations thailands got a long way to go

Thailand would be seen as a quality desitination if it could get rid of that image.

Killing off the sex-tourism industry would be a great day for Thailand and the first but most important step in re-building its image. Thats not going to make most of the punters on this site happy, but it is the honest truth.

You mean like Korea really took off as a tourist destination after it closed down its sex-industry about 15 years ago?

[samran]

i dare say that most of the outside world think of thailand as a cheap whore house they should be gratful they get tourists never mind quality tourist.

Quality tourist go to quality destinations thailands got a long way to go

Thailand would be seen as a quality desitination if it could get rid of that image.

Killing off the sex-tourism industry would be a great day for Thailand and the first but most important step in re-building its image. Thats not going to make most of the punters on this site happy, but it is the honest truth.

You mean like Korea really took off as a tourist destination after it closed down its sex-industry about 15 years ago?

and has replaced a tawdry image with that of a modern economy, high tech industry and manufacturing where investors are happy to plonk their money, with first world living standards and one of the highest uptakes of new technology....

yeah, something like that.

[soundman]

i dare say that most of the outside world think of thailand as a cheap whore house they should be gratful they get tourists never mind quality tourist.

Quality tourist go to quality destinations thailands got a long way to go

Thailand would be seen as a quality desitination if it could get rid of that image.

Killing off the sex-tourism industry would be a great day for Thailand and the first but most important step in re-building its image. Thats not going to make most of the punters on this site happy, but it is the honest truth.

You mean like Korea really took off as a tourist destination after it closed down its sex-industry about 15 years ago?

and has replaced a tawdry image with that of a modern economy, high tech industry and manufacturing where investors are happy to plonk their money, with first world living standards and one of the highest uptakes of new technology....

yeah, something like that.

Irrespective of the sex industry or high tech industry...

I don't hear of too many people wanting to take a vacation in South Korea. In fact I mainly hear of South Koreans wanting to escape the boredom of their country for a holiday elsewhere, like Thailand for example.

Given the general work ethic in Thailand, I'm wouldn't feel confident that it could emulate South Korea's transition to an industrialised economy even if that was the wish of the Thai people.

Nope, Thailand has to come to terms with what it is good at & stop looking over the fence to see if the grass is greener on the other side.

Soundman.

[Ulysses G.]

samran Today, 2007-08-09 21:15:27 Post #50

and has replaced a tawdry image with that of a modern economy, high tech industry and manufacturing where investors are happy to plonk their money, with first world living standards and one of the highest uptakes of new technology....

yeah, something like that.

Huh? All that happened BEFORE Korea's sex industry was dismantled, so they don't need tourism any more.

Thailand needs tourism to survive.

Edited August 9, 2007 by Ulysses G.

[bendix]

Huh? All that happened BEFORE Korea's sex industry was dismantled, so they don't need tourism any more.

Thailand needs tourism to thrive.

Precisely. The right sort of tourism though. Which is the whole point of this thread and the TAT's strategy, isnt it? Supplementing the 1500 baht a day backpacker and 3000 baht a day sex tourists with high quality, higher spending visitors.

[Ulysses G.]

Who have little interest in visiting 3rd world countries.

[Ulysses G.]

Hmmm. Let me advise the some of houses from Saudi about that one for you. I am sure one Princess in particular would be inclined to disagree with you. Let's see... she spent $100k USD in a day, then went to the bank to get some more. 3rd trip....THIS YEAR.

So..... where are all the men for the women and families that are coming here and spending serious cash then? I always wondered what 10 year old children and their mothers and fathers do for companionship and nightlife.

And I wonder why places like Hua Hin, Phi Phi, Koh Racha, Kata Noi and so on do for customers....it must be really really tough setting up these massive resorts and having no customers at all, since all the 'high end tourists' are at Ratchada, Patpong, Walking Street and Patong.

I guess all those Singaporeans and Hong Kong Chinese who fly in here by the bus load and by the family load to eat cheap seafood must really be doing that to cover up their nightlife activities.

I would imagine all those golfing Koreans and Japanese, in particular the Japanese ladies, they really are only pretending to come here for the cheap golf.

Hmmmm. I guess despite miles of beach, great food, cheap fashion, sight seeing, spas, great prices, cheap 5 star hotels...at the end of the day you feel that THailand has nothing to offer, and I don't see it the same way.

You are wrong. I think that Thailand has a lot to offer someone who doesn't have tons of money, but the super-rich might visit once, and be off to Tahiti the next 10 times. They are not going to help the tourist industry in Thailand very much.

As far as your list above, the Philipines is very simular to Thailand and has lots of things for rich people, but do you seriously think that enough of them will go there to support the whole tourist-industry?

[soundman]

Precisely. The right sort of tourism though. Which is the whole point of this thread and the TAT's strategy, isnt it? Supplementing the 1500 baht a day backpacker and 3000 baht a day sex tourists with high quality, higher spending visitors.

5 milllion (for arguments sake) normal tourists versus 2,000 "quality - elite card type - tousists". More revenue to be made out of the normal tourists even if the quality ones are spending 100 times more per day (300,000 baht).

This argument put forward by the TAT is all a front. I suspect the real reason is all about pride & face in the eyes of the international community, the ministers peers and the voting public (or lining the pockets of the inside clique) - even if the overall revenue is significantly reduced.

The mind boggles.

Soundman.

[Ulysses G.]

TAT's strategy

Sorry, but I couldn't help myself.

[Boon Mee]

the Philipines is very simular to Thailand and has lots of things for rich people,

Apples/Oranges.

Food in the PI sucks.

Most significantly though, the culture there is nothing to compare to Thailand's.

[Aussietraveller]

My fear is that "Quality Tourists" will not care enough about Thailand and its people to support all of the sick Buffalo in Issan.

Has anyone considered the buffalo in all of this?

[Jingthing]

This may be a cyclical thing. Thailand will never be the Seychelles or a luxury island in the Caribbean. Who do they think will be fooled by this?

[cubes2]

Killing off the sex-tourism industry would be a great day for Thailand and the first but most important step in re-building its image. Thats not going to make most of the punters on this site happy, but it is the honest truth.

Amen to that.

To read posters here saying there is very little else to attract people to Thailand tells me more about those posters than it does about Thailand as a destination.

World class and affordable hotels. World class spas. World class and affordable golf courses. Beaches. Superb food. World class shopping. Natural attractions. Cultural attractions.

Oh - but no - those aren't attractive. It's Nana Plaza which is most important.

Good on TAT for stating what is pretty obvious (even if the guy stated it verbosely). The sooner Thailand sheds its image as a magnet for loser farangs coming for their annual shagfest, the better.

Dream on, like TAT.