Entrance to Grand Palace in Bangkok is free for Thais, while foreigners pay. In a way fair enough, it's the Thais' culture, while foreigners are tourists – and most of us foreigners can afford to pay for the ticket. Generally I'm okay with dual pricing.

1 hour ago, Chongalulu said:

The essential point that goes over your head is Thai dual pricing is based on RACE, nothing else. If you look Thai you’ll get the reduced price. I’m a long term resident near a national park and get no discount, but a Thai visitor from the other end of the country does. Look again at your examples- "Residents" not white Americans. Got it now…? 

   Nothing is going over my head, and certainly not your incorrect, lame argument.   Thai is not a 'race'.  Thai is a nationality.  A Thai citizen, whether they are local or 'from the other end of the country', gets a break on the price of admission at the national park near you.  Non-Thai citizens, of whatever race, whether local or 'from the other end of the country', are charged a higher price, not because of their race but because they are not Thai citizens.  Not racist.  Not a big deal.  Got it now?

    

7 minutes ago, newnative said:

   Nothing is going over my head, and certainly not your incorrect, lame argument.   Thai is not a 'race'.  Thai is a nationality.  A Thai citizen, whether they are local or 'from the other end of the country', gets a break on the price of admission at the national park near you.  Non-Thai citizens, of whatever race, whether local or 'from the other end of the country', are charged a higher price, not because of their race but because they are not Thai citizens.  Not racist.  Not a big deal.  Got it now?

    

Absolute rubbish

Racist is characterized by or showing prejudice, discrimination, that what duel pricing is discrimination, Thailand IS A RACIST country

Years ago I remember a farang and his Thai wife opening a restaurant here in Rawai, the place was nothing fancy, sure enough they had 2 menu's a farang one and a Thai one, I don't know why but I noticed it right away, I think I was pointing to something to my wife when I clocked the price difference, ok it was only 20 Baht, When I said to the woman serving us, what's this? this the farang menu? I was making a joke about it, but she got the real hump I guess because she got found out, 

I didn't actually say anything to anyone, but it seem like others  did as the place didn't last long, I mean a few months, 

It's not really about the money.    Seems like it's bigotry.  Feels like it.  That feels bad.  Most of us like being here and there's that false hope of being part of the family.   Becoming Thai.   Embraced like a local.  Loved like a son from the mountains of Chiang Mai.  Then reality slaps us in the face and we say, "But I've been here 30 years and helped 39 billion Thais!!!!"  Farang!!! 300.  Thai.  20.   You pay.  

 

dreams shattered.    

12 minutes ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Omg, look at all the negative reactions. 

I'm out numbered here.

 I'm not a Brit.

 I'm not a boomer. 

I'm not on the aged pension. 

Because I am different, I get the most thumbs down in my comments. 

I have a good idea, let's change Thailand, let's make it the same sh?thole we all left behind. 

 

 

You don't get the most thumbs down because your comments are different....   Different but intellectually astute comments on here are often yield a positive response... 

 

No... its not because your comments are different...  you get the most 'thumbs down' because your comments are unhinged... and you are still blind to this.

 

 

2 hours ago, JustinTyme said:

They just need to change the wording, to more easily explain the rationale behind this.  These are PUBLIC areas funded by taxes! 
The Thai have "already paid."

Tax Payer - 30 Baht
Non Tax Payer - 150 Baht

(and to the very small minority of tax paying foreigners, yes, they should provide you with a card to avoid the higher charge)

If I committed a crime I'm sure I could justify it too. 

8 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Dual pricing only effects cheap backpacker type tourists and sensitive souls. Thailand in no way should appease cheap backpackers who offer nothing to the economy, but take up valuable space. Not only should they put the prices up for foreigners but ban anyone with a back pack from coming into a national park. Furthermore ban hostels. 

 

The prices for these places are still cheap compared to western standards. 

 

Thailand simply needs to adjust the wording and image of the dual pricing. For example, if you see a price on the wall, but then offers Thais a reduction it may look better than showing two prices on board and you get the dreaded sensitive police brigrade crying dual pricing. 

 

In London you have attractions and places that offer discounts for locals, and those not from the area pay more. I see no moral outrage there. Imagine being a local Thai and seeing lovely national parks destroyed by mass cheap tourists, throwing rubbish everywhere, crowds, and the enviromental damage it does to your locality. Letting them in cheaply offers some compensation. 

 

Aren't the also planning this for the BTS - where by locals in Bangkok may get a set fare of 20 Baht per person, but others will pay full fares. Wording makes it okay. 

Well, for the reasons they state just doesn't stand up...a foreigner working in Chiang Mai has to pay the "tourist price" even though he pays tax and SS, and also local to Chiang Mai..whereas an unemployed Thai from Songla not paying tax or SS and not local to Chiang Mai pays the Thai price..sorry, it's just not right.  I made a decision 20 years ago to boycott them...no loss

8 hours ago, Gsxrnz said:

Bit of a gouge. 40 baht and 20 baht.

 

Try this - Rock up with your Thai license, and a stern DFWM look on your face, hand over the Thai price exactly, change your DFWM look to a toothy widemouth smile, and tell them in Thai you're a Thai person. Works more often than not and usually elicits a laugh from the ticket issuer,   

I've done exactly that, and it usually works! The humor part is key -- if you get them to chuckle, you're in.

I stopped visiting places that have dual pricing long ago, nothing to do with the cost which is small in the grand scheme of things but due to the policy which i disagree with.

Most of us spend a small fortune when we come to Thailand and i personally don't like being taken advantage of to visit somewhere.

Lets be honest, one temple is the same as the next and the national parks are full of viewpoints brimming with people livestreaming or taking selfies for their oh so important social media accounts.

 

I have lived in Thailand for over 15 years. During that time, I have owned 2 condos but I am a renter now.

Personally, Thailand is too unstable and regulations are constantly changing. The risk of ownership to too great for me.

 It has been my experience that you will lose 40-60% of your deposit when renting. So, if you rent for one year you can figure your true cost of renting by taking 50% of your deposit, which the owner will keep, and dividing by 12 months. Add that sum to your monthly rent and that is your TRUE effective monthly rent. If you plan for that and get your full deposit back then you will be pleasantly surprised. The better deal is to rent for 24 months, then  50% of your deposit will be divided by 24 months and not 12 lowering your true monthly rent. You don't have to sign a lease for 24 month. Most yearly leases have renewal clauses.

 

I have been charged for things that were broken before I moved in and things that were worn-out through time and usage (normal wear and tear).  It is almost impossible to document 100%  the condition of your condo when you move in. The owner will find something to charge you for. Remember, your deposit is not held in escrow. It is given to the owner. Further, if there is such a thing in Thailand as a "Small Claims Court" , a farang has no chance against a Thai. 

 

So, just plan well and consider the loss of part of your deposit as a cost of living here. Don't get angry. That doesn't work in this culture. I love living in Thailand even considering all of the little annoyances.

 

BTW, I have been refunded my full deposit when renting from Thai owners on occasion. All people are not the same. I have been screwed by owners in my home country too.

 

I have rented from Thai owners and farang owners. I have ALWAYS had 100% of my deposit returned by farang owners.

 

Just my experiences. Always rent through an agency and interview that agency carefully. 

 

BTW, yes, I owned a real estate brokerage in my home country but in all cases remember, "You are in Kansas any more Dorthey". Thailand is a sovereign country with its own customs and culture and they don't care how you do it back in your country....nor should they. 

 

Tom 

   

2 minutes ago, WHansen said:

I stopped visiting places that have dual pricing long ago, nothing to do with the cost which is small in the grand scheme of things but due to the policy which i disagree with.

Most of us spend a small fortune when we come to Thailand and i personally don't like being taken advantage of to visit somewhere.

 

Same here... While some forms of dual pricing may be difficult to completely eliminate and avoid, it’s usually easy enough to shrug it off and carry on without dwelling on it.

 

That said, when the issue arises in public forums like this, it presents a worthwhile opportunity to voice a firm stance and draw attention to the inherent flaws in pricing policies based purely on nationality.

 

No one appreciates being exploited. For many visitors, such practices leave a bitter aftertaste - and for some, it’s enough to deter them from returning.

 

This is where I believe Thailand’s current state-sponsored dual pricing policy is fundamentally misguided. The country’s tourism economy leans heavily on repeat visitors. If anything, Thailand should be doing all it can to value and encourage their return - not alienate them. To do otherwise is poor business sense.

 

 

  8 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

Dual pricing only effects cheap backpacker type tourists and sensitive souls. Thailand in no way should appease cheap backpackers who offer nothing to the economy, but take up valuable space. Not only should they put the prices up for foreigners but ban anyone with a back pack from coming into a national park. Furthermore ban hostels. The prices for these places are still cheap compared to western standards. 

 

Donnie, I think you would be unhappy if a restaurant, hotel, shop, etc. charged you a foreigner's price. You seem to be condoning greed and injustice. 

 

If you have a family with 2 or more children you would certainly feel the financial effects of your opinion.

 

Banning hostels and cheap accommodation will affect Thais more than foreign tourists, so your wish would not be granted.

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Tourism Minister Sorawong Thienthongn will work on this for two weeks, then it will be forgotten. The dual pricing, especially at National parks is beyond obnoxious. 30 baht vs. 300 baht? Please. All that should be required is the showing of a pink card or a Thai DL to prove you live here. I stopped supporting the parks long ago. 

Plus, at parks on the signboards they use Thai numbers for the local prices (rather than Western numbers, which are commonly used elsewhere), so foreigners who can't read Thai can't see how big the price discrepancy is.

8 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

ual pricing only effects cheap backpacker type tourists and sensitive souls. Thailand in no way should appease cheap backpackers who offer nothing to the economy, but take up valuable space. Not only should they put the prices up for foreigners but ban anyone with a back pack from coming into a national park. Furthermore ban hostels. 

 

Whats the betting that these 'cheap back-packers' have a higher weekly spend than this fool above.... 

3 hours ago, Free the 115 said:

I have no problem with dual pricing. 
if their wages were on a par with mine, I might do, …..but they aren’t……so I don’t 

I would like to wager that the majority of the complainants are student types, who get discounted heavily in their home countries and expect similar here. 
I know that there are certain locations that extract the urine with the pricing, but to me it’s simple. I don’t enter.

Moving on to food, if someone buys food every day from me, of course I am going to offer them better prices than someone I see a few times a year, so again I have no problem with that.

you might be surprised what the 'average Thai' earns. which is 40K a month in Bangkok and Nonthaburi. Increasing the national park rate from 20 to 40 baht would not hurt them one bit.

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Whats the betting that these 'cheap back-packers' have a higher weekly spend than this fool above.... 

He has been whining since moving here, from looking and renting his very first apartment here,  its been a lot of whining. Silly whining. 

Good luck trying to get the Hospitals to accept that - they've been having a field day raising prices over the past few years. An appt that used to cost 1,200 baht is well over double now. Dumbest law they ever passed was allowing dual pricing to begin with. 

Seriously.  How is this even an issue? Who cares?  How much does Thailand make from "dual pricing"? 

 

Who sits in their home country and decides whether or not to visit Thailand based on the admission price to a national park?  

 

 

Wait, haven't I heard all this going back a few years, but as we know, nothing changed... Dual pricing is still here, the scams are still here, the cops fining tourists, but not thais is still here.... And I believe in another 10 years again nothing will change.

vowing and doing - two entirely different things.

8 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Dual pricing only effects cheap backpacker type tourists and sensitive souls. Thailand in no way should appease cheap backpackers who offer nothing to the economy, but take up valuable space. Not only should they put the prices up for foreigners but ban anyone with a back pack from coming into a national park. Furthermore ban hostels. 

 

The prices for these places are still cheap compared to western standards. 

 

Thailand simply needs to adjust the wording and image of the dual pricing. For example, if you see a price on the wall, but then offers Thais a reduction it may look better than showing two prices on board and you get the dreaded sensitive police brigrade crying dual pricing. 

 

In London you have attractions and places that offer discounts for locals, and those not from the area pay more. I see no moral outrage there. Imagine being a local Thai and seeing lovely national parks destroyed by mass cheap tourists, throwing rubbish everywhere, crowds, and the enviromental damage it does to your locality. Letting them in cheaply offers some compensation. 

 

Aren't the also planning this for the BTS - where by locals in Bangkok may get a set fare of 20 Baht per person, but others will pay full fares. Wording makes it okay. 

 

8 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

I think people should pay 1,000 per year of age to enter anywhere in Thailand. E.G.: a 3 year old child should pay 3,000, a 14 year old boy 14,000, a 45 year old man 45,000 and so on. I think DonniePeverley will appreciate this.

 

3 hours ago, JustinTyme said:

They just need to change the wording, to more easily explain the rationale behind this.  These are PUBLIC areas funded by taxes! 
The Thai have "already paid."

Tax Payer - 30 Baht
Non Tax Payer - 150 Baht

(and to the very small minority of tax paying foreigners, yes, they should provide you with a card to avoid the higher charge)

Problem.... Many thais don't pay taxes

I remember when the "Tourist Police" were much more Tourist orientated. They didn't carry guns or chase up serious crime. They spoke English or tried to and helped tourists. Genuinely helped them. But that was in 1990 when I first arrived. Now they just the same as the regular police.

13 minutes ago, Aussie999 said:

Problem.... Many thais don't pay taxes

A farang with Thai ID like a Thai DL can get in for Thai price.

Just now, Magictoad said:

A farang with Thai ID like a Thai DL can get in for Thai price.

Wrong, does not always work.

21 minutes ago, jas007 said:

Seriously.  How is this even an issue? Who cares?  How much does Thailand make from "dual pricing"? 

 

Who sits in their home country and decides whether or not to visit Thailand based on the admission price to a national park?  

 

In the end, it all comes down to the overall experience.

 

I doubt many people would avoid Thailand solely because of dual pricing. But what can happen is a gradual erosion of goodwill - a sense that the country's attitude towards tourists is shifting in a less welcoming direction.

 

Dual Pricing, though seemingly minor in isolation, contribute to that impression. They subtly shape the tone, encouraging other businesses to follow suit under the assumption that such behaviour is acceptable.

 

So yes, on their own, instances of dual pricing may seem insignificant. But when they become part of a broader pattern - a series of little slights or signals - they risk becoming the final straw. It’s death by a thousand cuts.

 

We’re seeing a similar situation unfold in Japan. Tourism policy is changing, and over the last decade, I’ve noticed a marked shift in how tourists are perceived. There’s a growing weariness among some locals. While over-tourism is a valid concern, it’s jarring to see a country promote itself as a tourist haven, only to implement official policies - including dual pricing - that suggest otherwise. I used to visit Japan every year, but I’m now in no hurry to return. That shift in attitude has had an effect.

 

 

Just now, Aussie999 said:

1 minute ago, Magictoad said:

A farang with Thai ID like a Thai DL can get in for Thai price.

Wrong, does not always work.

 

Correct - it won't work in National Parks (i.e. Koh Samet) and it won't work in hospitals that have dual pricing policies.

9 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Dual pricing only effects cheap backpacker type tourists and sensitive souls. Thailand in no way should appease cheap backpackers who offer nothing to the economy, but take up valuable space. Not only should they put the prices up for foreigners but ban anyone with a back pack from coming into a national park. Furthermore ban hostels. 

 

The prices for these places are still cheap compared to western standards.

 

What on earth have you got against backpackers? They definitely add to certain segments of the economy, and if they have a good experience, they’re likely to return later in life when they have more money to spend, so it’s an investment. Plus, they are better behaved and more respectful than your average drunken sex tourist in Pattaya or Phuket.

 

Sure, I’m in my sixties have my grumpy moments, but I remember how great it was to be young and free-spirited and have the whole world in front of me -- everyone should have that experience. Lighten up!

1 hour ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

I never complain about anything here in Thailand, except for the many moaning, miserable foreigners. 

 

I like it the way it was. 

 

It too late now, the whingers and whiners are changing Thailand. 

 

For those of you thinking of retiring here, living as an expat, you've missed the bus, too late. 

 

The the many miserable foreigner's have screwed Thailand 

 

There’s nothing wrong with making observations or holding opinions.

 

Thailand, like every country, isn’t perfect. For most of us, the overall experience is a clear net positive – but that doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t discuss the negative aspects. Open discussion is healthy, especially when it's done in good faith.

 

I’ve spent my entire adult life here, and I’m more than comfortable discussing all facets of life in Thailand – both the wonderful and the frustrating.

 

What does get tiresome, however, is the attitude from some long-term expats who seem to believe that tenure alone gives them exclusive rights to pass judgement. As if anyone who hasn’t "put in the years" is somehow less entitled to voice an opinion. It’s a delusion of seniority that adds nothing constructive to the conversation.