Thailand Tourism Decline To Exacerbate

[duchovny]

As usual the desperados with Thai businesses are doing their best to quell any negativity about Thailand's tourist industry.

Who would open or buy a business related to the Thai tourist industry now? Please, anyone??

On the other hand, Cambodia is booming and developing rapidly, albeit from a low base, and their policies are very business friendly and tourists do like a new destination. It's everything Thailand used to be 10-15 years ago when we all really enjoyed it.

Thailand's been done to death and the Thai people have definitely lost their smiles. This latest stuff (that's all over CNN and BBC) is in no way helpful.

Put that together, and, as I say, who'd invest in Thai right now?

[Ulysses G.]

http://www.fas.org/faspir/pir0997.htm#coup

The last time I was in Cambodia - around 1997 - all the foreigners were fleeing the country and leaving their businesses behind - most did not return - because of all the political violence. That has never happened in Thailand.

There is a reason why Cambodia has to lure investors, but only the mentally challenged would actually apply!

Edited September 3, 2008 by Ulysses G.

[steveromagnino]

[As Stephen Colbert once said, there are more nerve endings in your gut than your brain :-)

Really?

If we want to insinuate things about the state of anyone's brain, it might be the person who is initially quoting me and then using other people's posts to supposedly "prove" what I said, or maybe the fellow who is claiming that tourism now is definitely higher than during the time of SARS, but offering no proof at all for what he is saying.

By the way. SARS hit during high season and it is now the lowest point of low season in a very bad year, so it is not a fact, but it stands to reason that tourism was better then.

Sorry mate, so far you tried to claim I made up that anyone was talking about employment; so I shot you down with earlier posts not from you (obviously) but from the people who were talking about how they believed tourism created more employment than agriculture; you have also tried to claim as fact that tourism now is lower than during the SARS period already...that may be your opinion, but to date the facts do not seem to support your claim.

You seem to want to use gut feeling. The full quote above, which I thought you might know but clearly not is a good explanation of using statistics vs. using your gut feeling (i.e. what you seem to do). It was delivered at the President's Roast recently (as in President Bush) by Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert address POTUS:

'Guys like us, we're not some brainiacs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the factinista. We go straight from the gut. Right, sir?

That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. Now, I know some of you are going to say, "I did look it up, and that's not true." That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works.'

Sorry to offend, certainly I would not want to cast doubt on your mental prowess, I merely would like to impart on your the importance of using words like 'in my opinion' 'it would appear' etc etc as claiming things as fact invites people to believe things that aren't true unless someone has the data on hand to show otherwise.

Incidentally, the hole being referred to is the hole you are digging for yourself :-)

Tourism is definitely not looking too hot right now; but spare us the drama queen hyperbole and I think everyone will get on just fine.

[GlobalHustle]

I'd like to know exactly what it is that 'Thailand's Tourism Decline' is going to 'Exacerbate'.

I'm also at a loss as to why the happenings of the last few days are regarded as 'stupidity' when for many they are seen as very positive signs of the struggles of a growing democracy.

---

The decline in tourism that Thailand is seeing (and before you rush elsewhere to invest, so is everywhere else) is due to the international economic downturn - It will not last.

I concur...rather wholeheartedly, good post

[Ulysses G.]

[sorry mate, so far you tried to claim I made up that anyone was talking about employment; so I shot you down with earlier posts not from you (obviously) but from the people who were talking about how they believed tourism created more employment than agriculture; you have also tried to claim as fact that tourism now is lower than during the SARS period already...that may be your opinion, but to date the facts do not seem to support your claim.

You used my quote and were refering to me and I told you that "no one" said that tourism created more employment than agriculture, meaning ME, since that is what we were talking about. I don't care what a million other posters might have said as we were not talking about them

Sorry if you aren't that hot at the English language.

About tourism rates during SARS compared to right now, there are no facts yet as they have not been compiled, so please spare us your ill-informed opinions if you will.

[think_too_mut]

[As Stephen Colbert once said, there are more nerve endings in your gut than your brain :-)

Really?

If we want to insinuate things about the state of anyone's brain, it might be the person who is initially quoting me and then using other people's posts to supposedly "prove" what I said, or maybe the fellow who is claiming that tourism now is definitely higher than during the time of SARS, but offering no proof at all for what he is saying.

By the way. SARS hit during high season and it is now the lowest point of low season in a very bad year, so it is not a fact, but it stands to reason that tourism was better then.

Sorry mate, so far you tried to claim I made up that anyone was talking about employment; so I shot you down with earlier posts not from you (obviously) but from the people who were talking about how they believed tourism created more employment than agriculture; you have also tried to claim as fact that tourism now is lower than during the SARS period already...that may be your opinion, but to date the facts do not seem to support your claim.

You seem to want to use gut feeling. The full quote above, which I thought you might know but clearly not is a good explanation of using statistics vs. using your gut feeling (i.e. what you seem to do). It was delivered at the President's Roast recently (as in President Bush) by Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert address POTUS:

'Guys like us, we're not some brainiacs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the factinista. We go straight from the gut. Right, sir?

That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. Now, I know some of you are going to say, "I did look it up, and that's not true." That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works.'

Sorry to offend, certainly I would not want to cast doubt on your mental prowess, I merely would like to impart on your the importance of using words like 'in my opinion' 'it would appear' etc etc as claiming things as fact invites people to believe things that aren't true unless someone has the data on hand to show otherwise.

Incidentally, the hole being referred to is the hole you are digging for yourself :-)

Tourism is definitely not looking too hot right now; but spare us the drama queen hyperbole and I think everyone will get on just fine.

You may be a bit off the mark here.

SARS was a region-wide disaster. That brought the only 2 world wide names from SEA - Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific down to their knees.

The tsunami - was another uncontrollable disaster that ravaged SEA.

What we are having now is a man made disaster that shows Thais can not live with their elected government. Never for long.

Do they deserve it? Do they need it?

Or what PAD gang wants, like House of the Lords, 70% of the parliament nominated and 30% elected.

Funny country, tragicomic Thailand is. Just find some shoe lover like Imelda Marcos and the picture is complete.

Much worse than any natural disaster and harder to forget (although not unforegetable).

[steveromagnino]

[sorry mate, so far you tried to claim I made up that anyone was talking about employment; so I shot you down with earlier posts not from you (obviously) but from the people who were talking about how they believed tourism created more employment than agriculture; you have also tried to claim as fact that tourism now is lower than during the SARS period already...that may be your opinion, but to date the facts do not seem to support your claim.

You used my quote and were refering to me and I told you that "no one" said that tourism created more employment than agriculture, meaning ME, since that is what we were talking about. I don't care what a million other posters might have said as we were not talking about them

Sorry if you aren't that hot at the English language.

About tourism rates during SARS compared to right now, there are no facts yet as they have not been compiled, so please spare us your ill-informed opinions if you will.

no I don't have great english writing skills.

But if you mean me, then say 'I didn't say', not 'no one said' as the meanings are wildly different as I am sure any grade 1 english student can appreciate.

As for your claim, would you like for me to explain again the difference in meaning between your first claim of 'already' now since amended to 'rates...right now'.

keep digging, it seems you have a real talent for it!

[LaoPo]

All the data shows that tourism is increasing massively, i

Source: http://www2.tat.or.th/stat/web/static_download.php?Rpt=nmt

All the data shows that tourism is increasing massively ? 2007 versus 2006 was a PLUS of +4,65 %

What period are you talking about ?

TAT doesn't supply the numbers anymore; the last statistics are from 2007*

Since this year they don't publish ANYTHING anymore (try to get the stats from 2008, you won't find anything) and I fear that 2008 will be a disaster for inbound tourism !

ALSO: the number of 14,4 million tourists for 2007 is heavily 'painted/colored' with (together) millions of so called tourists from Malaysia, Cambodia, Myanmar and Laos which, in fact are not tourists but border-crossers for one reason or another. Malaysia and Laos together count already more than 2 Million ''tourists'' !

Laos tourism INCREASED with 84%..yeah..right...from 282.000 to 521.000 LAOS tourists ON A POPULATION OF 6.7 MILLION PEOPLE

In the number of 14,4 Million are also countless visa-runners and people who travel 2 or more times to LOS per year. I know a few already and I'm sure many members do the same.

On TOP of that there are many business people (traveling around in Asia) who just write on their entrance card 'tourist' because they don't want to go through difficult questions at the passport control (if they're checked at all).

All in all a number of REAL tourists of 10 Million would be more realistic.

2007 versus 2006 statistics per Country of Residence : THAILAND_2007_tourist_numbers_res_1_12_1.XLS

Thai inbound tourism is NOT massively increasing; it's declining and my own guess is that tourism will drop between 15-20% in 2008 and I'm afraid I am on the lower side of the coin.

LaoPo

[madjbs]

Thai inbound tourism is NOT massively increasing; it's declining and my own guess is that tourism will drop between 15-20% in 2008 and I'm afraid I am on the lower side of the coin.

Ok, currently "massively increasing" is a slight exaggeration. But it is still not decreasing, growth rates just slowed for the first half of 2007 due to the coup etc.. By the end of the year growth had returned to around 10%. They will probably slow again now, for a few months.

A drop between 15-20% for 2008 looks unlikely, as during the first quarter of 2008, numbers are up 20% over 2007.

Edited September 3, 2008 by madjbs

[phomsanuk]

Excellent idea! now you should do the right thing and lead by example. Make your next post from Phnom Penh.

Funny you should say that , of late , the number of foreigners seen walking around Phnom Penh have increased dramatically and no , i have no 'Statistics ' for the nitpickers . There are even Thais moving here to work , even though 'Statistics ' say they are all going home .

I like Phnom Penh very much [more bang for the bucks.. ] except for the lousy health care and almost bought a place there but the laws are even less structured than Thailand. Probably worth 3 or 4 times what it was 3 yrs. ago..... ...

[cookee68]

I quite like attenuate, although I havent eaten a ten for a long time.

Anyway back to the point, whats up with people not wanting to come on holiday to places where there is almost mob rule, tear gassings, civil disobedience and corrupted power, fickle bastids

lets be honest this is the high lite of the day for most thais who have nothing better else to do with there life, and for sitting down and protesting they could do that with their eyes shut, thats all they seem to do all day and every day in the inlaws village

[yabaaaa]

As usual the desperados with Thai businesses are doing their best to quell any negativity about Thailand's tourist industry.

Who would open or buy a business related to the Thai tourist industry now? Please, anyone??

On the other hand, Cambodia is booming and developing rapidly, albeit from a low base, and their policies are very business friendly and tourists do like a new destination. It's everything Thailand used to be 10-15 years ago when we all really enjoyed it.

Thailand's been done to death and the Thai people have definitely lost their smiles. This latest stuff (that's all over CNN and BBC) is in no way helpful.

Put that together, and, as I say, who'd invest in Thai right now?

Sorry not true started my business 2.5 years ago offering accomodation still going strong just taken and received cash deposits for condo rents up to AUGUST next year.

[LaoPo]

Thai inbound tourism is NOT massively increasing; it's declining and my own guess is that tourism will drop between 15-20% in 2008 and I'm afraid I am on the lower side of the coin.

Ok, currently "massively increasing" is a slight exaggeration. But it is still not decreasing, growth rates just slowed for the first half of 2007 due to the coup etc.. By the end of the year growth had returned to around 10%. They will probably slow again now, for a few months.

A drop between 15-20% for 2008 looks unlikely, as during the first quarter of 2008, numbers are up 20% over 2007.

I supplied facts: I hope you can give us facts also, not vague statements ?

I'm very curious where you found the percentage of 20% PLUS in the first quarter of 2008 versus 2007......TAT ?

LaoPo

[madjbs]

Why don't you read the thread? I'm sick of repeating myself already on this thread.

EVERYTHING I have said in this discussion has been backed up by facts and data, which is much more than can be said for some of the others here.

Edited September 3, 2008 by madjbs

[LaoPo]

Why don't you read the thread? I'm sick of repeating myself already on this thread.

EVERYTHING I have said in this discussion has been backed up by facts and data, which is much more than can be said for some of the others here.

1. Why is it so difficult for some to stay polite ? There is no need for you to become impolite.

2. I missed your link in one of your previous messages: http://www.pata.org/patasite/index.php?id=111

but I think you confuse and mix data information. That link speaks about TRAVEL STATISTICS and INTERNATIONAL ARRIVALS and not TOURISM and that is not the same madjbs !:

"Travel Statistics As of July 2008

During the first quarter of 2008, international arrivals into 37 destinations in Asia Pacific region collectively registered a year-on-year growth of +8.9% to reach nearly 100 million.

3. According to TAT, 2007 versus 2006 had a rise of 4,65% inbound tourists to Thailand.

To assume, according to the Pata data, that tourism suddenly grew to 18.7% in the first 3 months of 2008 is quite optimistic and actually absurd.

It could very well be that INTERNATIONAL ARRIVALS in THAILAND were indeed UP by 18.7% but arrivals are not the same as tourists. Highly likely that there were a large number of transit passengers as well as business travelers.

4. Since TAT doesn't supply statistics anymore since this year I prefer waiting for the official TAT numbers rather than to accept the stats from Pata as being tourist data and facts.

Pata:

"The following publicly available statistics are updated monthly. They show the year-to-date changes in international visitor arrivals (IVAs) to five Asia Pacific sub regions."

Your so called facts and data are therefore not the ones we were hoping for. Maybe better reading and studying is an option, next to staying polite ?

LaoPo

[duchovny]

http://www.fas.org/faspir/pir0997.htm#coup

The last time I was in Cambodia - around 1997 - all the foreigners were fleeing the country and leaving their businesses behind - most did not return - because of all the political violence. That has never happened in Thailand.

There is a reason why Cambodia has to lure investors, but only the mentally challenged would actually apply!

aaaah, things have changed a bit since 1997.

It's now a great time to invest in Cambodia. on the up and gearing to pick up where Thailand is dropping off.

Let's face it. People still want to come to SE Asia but the Thai smiles are fading and the arrogance is increasing.

Cambodia is the new Thailand.

[catmac]

Those claiming that tourism is booming, and that the latest bloodshed will have no effect, might like to read this...

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustr...K23003020080902

if you think that it's all lies, please scream in a polite way. Except for the really hard-core political rants in the coup thread (understandable, as this is a subject that people on both sides feel strongly about), I have rarely read such rude and insulting comments as those from madjbs and steveromagnino. If you 2 are running businesses in Thailand, I hope your customer approach is a little more civil.

[Ulysses G.]

Thai inbound tourism is NOT massively increasing; it's declining and my own guess is that tourism will drop between 15-20% in 2008 and I'm afraid I am on the lower side of the coin.

Ok, currently "massively increasing" is a slight exaggeration.

Or a massive Porkie Pie!

[OlRedEyes]

I doubt tourism numbers will fall significantly, if at all.

I doubt if they do, it will ever be in the sector of tourists that Thailand could really do without.

los would really be better off w/o so many backpacker types i do agree. these give los a bad name.

Don't love backpackers too much, but LOS (or is it Land of Denial) gives themselves a bad name, no good blaming it on someone else.

Edited September 4, 2008 by OlRedEyes

[zorro1]

http://www.fas.org/faspir/pir0997.htm#coup

The last time I was in Cambodia - around 1997 - all the foreigners were fleeing the country and leaving their businesses behind - most did not return - because of all the political violence. That has never happened in Thailand.

There is a reason why Cambodia has to lure investors, but only the mentally challenged would actually apply!

aaaah, things have changed a bit since 1997.

It's now a great time to invest in Cambodia. on the up and gearing to pick up where Thailand is dropping off.

Let's face it. People still want to come to SE Asia but the Thai smiles are fading and the arrogance is increasing.

Cambodia is the new Thailand.

Not in the next 50 years if ever. Have you been there? Your really comparing Phnom Penh To BKK?

[madjbs]

Why don't you read the thread? I'm sick of repeating myself already on this thread.

EVERYTHING I have said in this discussion has been backed up by facts and data, which is much more than can be said for some of the others here.

1. Why is it so difficult for some to stay polite ? There is no need for you to become impolite.

2. I missed your link in one of your previous messages: http://www.pata.org/patasite/index.php?id=111

but I think you confuse and mix data information. That link speaks about TRAVEL STATISTICS and INTERNATIONAL ARRIVALS and not TOURISM and that is not the same madjbs !:

"Travel Statistics As of July 2008

During the first quarter of 2008, international arrivals into 37 destinations in Asia Pacific region collectively registered a year-on-year growth of +8.9% to reach nearly 100 million.

3. According to TAT, 2007 versus 2006 had a rise of 4,65% inbound tourists to Thailand.

To assume, according to the Pata data, that tourism suddenly grew to 18.7% in the first 3 months of 2008 is quite optimistic and actually absurd.

It could very well be that INTERNATIONAL ARRIVALS in THAILAND were indeed UP by 18.7% but arrivals are not the same as tourists. Highly likely that there were a large number of transit passengers as well as business travelers.

4. Since TAT doesn't supply statistics anymore since this year I prefer waiting for the official TAT numbers rather than to accept the stats from Pata as being tourist data and facts.

Pata:

"The following publicly available statistics are updated monthly. They show the year-to-date changes in international visitor arrivals (IVAs) to five Asia Pacific sub regions."

Your so called facts and data are therefore not the ones we were hoping for. Maybe better reading and studying is an option, next to staying polite ?

LaoPo

It's far more than you can provide to back up your claim of a fall of 20%. It's not specific on who exactly they are counting but if you think tourism has fallen 20% then it means that the so called "transit passengers as well as business travelers" you talk of, have risen over 50% to account for the 18.7% total increase.....Highly unlikely.

Oh and it is not absurd that tourism increased suddenly to 18% from 4%, as I pointed out already (repeating myself yet again), by the end of 2007 growth was back up to above 10%. It was the poor first half of the year due to the coup etc.. that gave a poor overall figure for the year.

It appears you are another doom and gloom dreamer. Ignoring the only data we have, doesn't make you right.

Edited September 4, 2008 by madjbs

[madjbs]

Those claiming that tourism is booming, and that the latest bloodshed will have no effect, might like to read this...

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustr...K23003020080902

Who is claiming that the lastest blood shed wont have ANY effect? Not me...

You obviously don't read here very much if you think I'm rude. And yes, it does get a bit annoying debating with children.

[Ulysses G.]

Those claiming that tourism is booming, and that the latest bloodshed will have no effect, might like to read this...

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustr...K23003020080902

Who is claiming that the lastest blood shed wont have ANY effect? Not me...

You obviously don't read here very much if you think I'm rude. And yes, it does get a bit annoying debating with children.

Thanks for proving the point about being RUDE.

children= anyone who doesn't accept incorrect statistics that do not apply to the subject in dispute

Edited September 4, 2008 by Ulysses G.

[klikster]

.. plus a wide open visa plan .

Is there anything official on Cambodia's visa plans .. like on an embassy website?

[klikster]

There are many of us who hope to build businesses around viable market opportunities rather than waiting for tourists to come; we need stable government and not crony capitalism.

You seemed to have done one of those disjointed leaps of logic. What is wrong with having a diverse economy? And how does having a robust tourism industry contribute to ".. crony capitalism." any more than manufacturing, IT services, etc.?

I just don't see much point in making stuff up (e.g. tourism makes up a major source of employment, greater than agriculture e.g. tourism is lower than during SARS) as I guess that is not the way I run my business.

What someone "makes up", errs about, etc really isn't a business point. And I think you are confusing "major" with "majority". If employment is 30% for widgets and 40% for gadgets, widget employment is still a "major source of employment". What can be just as important is the relative contribution to GDP.

As for reliance on western cash to fund tourism, I think it is fairly obvious to most now that the past targets of Americans and British are fading, and with higher oil prices as well as their economic issues, just as well.

It *seems like" you are willing to write off a significant portion of tourism business because it comes from the west. That seems like pretty poor business to me. I wonder how many Thai business people would share your dismissal of future western business?

[madjbs]

Those claiming that tourism is booming, and that the latest bloodshed will have no effect, might like to read this...

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustr...K23003020080902

Who is claiming that the lastest blood shed wont have ANY effect? Not me...

You obviously don't read here very much if you think I'm rude. And yes, it does get a bit annoying debating with children.

Thanks for proving the point about being RUDE.

children= anyone who doesn't accept incorrect statistics that do not apply to the subject in dispute

Thanks for proving the point about debating with children.

Yeahh... international arrival numbers are completely irrelevant....... hahaha what a joke.

[LaoPo]

Why don't you read the thread? I'm sick of repeating myself already on this thread.

EVERYTHING I have said in this discussion has been backed up by facts and data, which is much more than can be said for some of the others here.

1. Why is it so difficult for some to stay polite ? There is no need for you to become impolite.

2. I missed your link in one of your previous messages: http://www.pata.org/patasite/index.php?id=111

but I think you confuse and mix data information. That link speaks about TRAVEL STATISTICS and INTERNATIONAL ARRIVALS and not TOURISM and that is not the same madjbs !:

"Travel Statistics As of July 2008

During the first quarter of 2008, international arrivals into 37 destinations in Asia Pacific region collectively registered a year-on-year growth of +8.9% to reach nearly 100 million.

3. According to TAT, 2007 versus 2006 had a rise of 4,65% inbound tourists to Thailand.

To assume, according to the Pata data, that tourism suddenly grew to 18.7% in the first 3 months of 2008 is quite optimistic and actually absurd.

It could very well be that INTERNATIONAL ARRIVALS in THAILAND were indeed UP by 18.7% but arrivals are not the same as tourists. Highly likely that there were a large number of transit passengers as well as business travelers.

4. Since TAT doesn't supply statistics anymore since this year I prefer waiting for the official TAT numbers rather than to accept the stats from Pata as being tourist data and facts.

Pata:

"The following publicly available statistics are updated monthly. They show the year-to-date changes in international visitor arrivals (IVAs) to five Asia Pacific sub regions."

Your so called facts and data are therefore not the ones we were hoping for. Maybe better reading and studying is an option, next to staying polite ?

LaoPo

It's far more than you can provide to back up your claim of a fall of 20%. It's not specific on who exactly they are counting but if you think tourism has fallen 20% then it means that the so called "transit passengers as well as business travelers" you talk of, have risen over 50% to account for the 18.7% total increase.....Highly unlikely.

Oh and it is not absurd that tourism increased suddenly to 18% from 4%, as I pointed out already (repeating myself yet again), by the end of 2007 growth was back up to above 10%. It was the poor first half of the year due to the coup etc.. that gave a poor overall figure for the year.

It appears you are another doom and gloom dreamer. Ignoring the only data we have, doesn't make you right.

1. You're right; I have no proof of the mentioned 20% expected decline because TAT doesn't supply statistics anymore and WHY would that be ? Something to hide ? Until 2007 the statistics were handed out every month...now not even a single month, not even for January 2008. WHY ?

2. I didn't say it HAS fallen but that it probably would fall in 2008, and the year isn't over yet.

3. It IS absurd that tourism increased 18% because Pata speaks of International Arrivals, not tourists.

3. I am a realist not a dreamer who says inbound tourism is UP 18% in the first 3 months of 2008 BECAUSE International Arrivals are 18%.

4. In your link: http://www.pata.org/patasite/index.php?id=111 it supplies the %'s for the different Sub-Regions in the world.....WHERE IS EUROPE ?

5. If the number of 3.099.662 (versus 2,610,662 for 2007) as TOURISTS would be correct and keeping in mind that the 1st Q of 2008 is high season.....x 4 = 12.398.648 tourists. TAT speaks of 14,4 Million tourists for 2007...so YOU are still 2 Million people short.

BUT: your number CAN'T be correct because they are International Arrivals aqccording to your own source Pata (is that by plane, boat, land combined ?)

SO: Mr. madjbs, where are the facts and truth ?

BTW: do you have any other source (other than Pata) who can confirm this number of +18% and WHERE did they get this info from ?

LaoPo

[madjbs]

Yes you are right that the 18% increase likely refers to an increase in more than just tourism. However, we can probably safely say that tourism is in that 18%. The growth rate at the end of 2007 was around 10%, so its fairly safe to assume it was still around there somewhere for the first quarter of 2008. The only specifics it gives are that it is international arrivals at Suvarnabhumi airport excluding Thais.

As I said, we can probably expect a decrease now due to the bad news coverage, but if all of the other data is anything to go by, the numbers will bounce back in a month or two.

I predict that by the end of 2008 we will see a total growth rate similar to that of 2007, the current crisis wont have as big an effect as the coup in 2006 but the effects of the economic slowdown will be slightly higher. I predict 4-6 % growth in tourist numbers for 2008.

To be honest though, it would probably be better for Thailand if the number of tourists didn't grow too rapidly. But instead Thailand concentrated on the growing revenue, which if you look at the stats, was the case in 2007, even though tourist numbers didn't grow much.

[LaoPo]

Yes you are right that the 18% increase likely refers to an increase in more than just tourism. However, we can probably safely say that tourism is in that 18%. The growth rate at the end of 2007 was around 10%, so its fairly safe to assume it was still around there somewhere for the first quarter of 2008. The only specifics it gives are that it is international arrivals at Suvarnabhumi airport excluding Thais.

As I said, we can probably expect a decrease now due to the bad news coverage, but if all of the other data is anything to go by, the numbers will bounce back in a month or two.

I predict that by the end of 2008 we will see a total growth rate similar to that of 2007, the current crisis wont have as big an effect as the coup in 2006 but the effects of the economic slowdown will be slightly higher. I predict 4-6 % growth in tourist numbers for 2008.

To be honest though, it would probably be better for Thailand if the number of tourists didn't grow too rapidly. But instead Thailand concentrated on the growing revenue, which if you look at the stats, was the case in 2007, even though tourist numbers didn't grow much.

Your answers don't add up. I asked you WHERE IS EUROPE in those Pata statistics. If the +18% is just from the other Sub-Regions the PLUS should be even much higher if Europe is included. Sorry but I don't trust the Pata statistics.

It's also strange that INTERNATIONAL ARRIVALS are UP 18,7% just in Suvarnabhumi Airport. Is that IN- or EXCLUDING transfer passengers ?

Ever thought of the enormous number of arrivals in airports like Phuket, Hat Yai, Samui (from Malaysia + S'pore) and others ? I don't even speak yet about land-entrance from 4 different countries. That means that the 18,7 % must even be a lot higher....a LOT !

BUT: we will see.

YOU predict 4-6% growth for 2008 and

I predict a decline of 15-20% for 2008

Let's wait and see, OK?

LaoPo

[madjbs]

I think you are getting confused with the statistics. The sub region stats do not show how many people from each region came to Thailand, they show how many people visited each sub region. The only info on the whole page which has any relevance to Thailand is the line which Thailand at the start, the other stuff has nothing to do with Thai arrival numbers.