Impositions On Foreign Tourists

[sakura7]

Could somebody with some knowledge of Thai tourism please explain why the TAT spend vast amounts of taxpayers money attempting to attract visitors to this country, whilst other government departments are doing their best to discourage tourism.

I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) and the somewhat new addition of ATM charges of 150bt for foreigners. These impositions are now beginning to appear in guide books and travel advisories, thus pointing potential tourists elsewhere.

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

[jbaldwin]

Which government department do you think is responsible for the AGM fees? Do you not beleive that these fees are set by banks?

Also it is certainly not unique for cross border financial transactions to cost more than domestic ones.

Halifax makes no charge for transfer from my UK bank account to any other UK bank account but charges 9.95 GBP for a transfer to an overseas bank account. Do you also beleive that this is racist?

[phetaroi]

Could somebody with some knowledge of Thai tourism please explain why the TAT spend vast amounts of taxpayers money attempting to attract visitors to this country, whilst other government departments are doing their best to discourage tourism.

I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) and the somewhat new addition of ATM charges of 150bt for foreigners. These impositions are now beginning to appear in guide books and travel advisories, thus pointing potential tourists elsewhere.

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

I just think there are lots of ways to look at this. While I don't disagree with you, here are a few things I have noticed in my first two weeks here as a new retiree resident:

Haircut: US = $11; Bangkok = $4

Movie + snack + soda: US = $20; Bangkok = $5

Vaccination: US = $150; Bangkok = $40

Hotel: At a small town in US = $120; At any Thai city other than Bangkok = $30-$60

[samui04]

I just think there are lots of ways to look at this. While I don't disagree with you, here are a few things I have noticed in my first two weeks here as a new retiree resident:

Haircut: US = $11; Bangkok = $4

Movie + snack + soda: US = $20; Bangkok = $5

Vaccination: US = $150; Bangkok = $40

Hotel: At a small town in US = $120; At any Thai city other than Bangkok = $30-$60

From Euroland:

Haircut: 15E, Samui 3E, US = $11;

Movie + snack + soda: never tryed, DVD free at hotel

Vaccination: 9E (influenza), US = $150; Bangkok = $40

Pizza: 9E, Samui 8E

[JR Texas]

Could somebody with some knowledge of Thai tourism please explain why the TAT spend vast amounts of taxpayers money attempting to attract visitors to this country, whilst other government departments are doing their best to discourage tourism.

I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) and the somewhat new addition of ATM charges of 150bt for foreigners. These impositions are now beginning to appear in guide books and travel advisories, thus pointing potential tourists elsewhere.

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

There are loads of expats here who think the same way and wonder why, in a time when the country needs to bring tourists back to the Kingdom, such events are allowed to take place or stand.

In addition to the two things you mentioned.......TAT uses the phrase "quality tourists" repeated. That is highly offensive to many Westerners. Still, they continue to use it. "We only want quality tourists."

The visa rules are harming tourism. Just one of many examples: Some immigration departments (I think Singapore at the moment) are requiring foreigners to show an exit airline ticket prior to getting a tourist visa.

And if you fly in and decide to get an extension by crossing the border, some immigration checkpoints will not allow you to come back without an exit airline ticket......and then they will only give you 15 days (and can only do it four times).

These visa changes are unnecessary and have nothing to do with security--which should be the main function of the immigration dept and not social engineering. And they hurt tourism.

Yes, at present the tourist visa is free (after you pay for the exit airline ticket)......but that is no doubt a temporary situation caused by the drop in tourism.

Maybe some day they will introduce a pay to stay system and allow tourists to enter the country on a 30 day "stamp" at all checkpoints and by all means (walk in, drive in, fly in, by boat, etc) with no tourist visa required (initially), and then allow them to switch to tourist visa status without having to leave the country.

This could be easily accomplished. For long stay applicants, they could require a security check paid for by the applicant. Pay to stay w/ security check.....easy solution and that would encourage tourism, alleviate concerns of some expats that they might be forced to leave after the next visa bar raising event, and foster security.

Now, that would draw tourists back and help making Thailand expat friendly.

[kurnell]

For what I pay in Thailand compared to what I paid in Australia on my last visit in Jamuary in US$.

Haircut: Aust = $8.50; Bangkok = $8.50

Movie + snack + soda: Aust = $10; Bangkok = $6.50

Vaccination: no idea

Hotel (same standard eg. 4 star): In Sydney, Melbourne etc = $95; Bangkok = $100

[JR Texas]

For what I pay in Thailand compared to what I paid in Australia on my last visit in Jamuary in US$.

Haircut: Aust = $8.50; Bangkok = $8.50

Movie + snack + soda: Aust = $10; Bangkok = $6.50

Vaccination: no idea

Hotel (same standard eg. 4 star): In Sydney, Melbourne etc = $95; Bangkok = $100

I had a Thai friend tell me that Australia was actually getting cheaper than Thailand........I did not believe her, but it is interesting that your figures suggest that for some things.

One would think that in a time of economic crisis hotels and airlines would drop prices........I suppose that has happened somewhere in Thailand but certainly not in the places I have recently stayed at.

One example: I just went to Bangkok and stayed at my usual place by the river.......did not even ask them how much I would be charge......got the final bill and said to myself, "same as last time." No discount.

One thing that I think is putting tourists off is the relatively high price of hotels and food in Thailand. They seemed up increase prices 3 fold over the past three years (saw this first hand in Pattaya-Jomtien).

I know for a fact that I can go to Bali and have a good time and spend far less than I must now spend in Thailand for the same things (Bali is, of course, more beautiful).

I suppose, in the end, they will be forced to change.......as one other poster on another thread pointed out (think Bonobo), other countries in the region are doing everything possible to take advantage of Thailand's mistakes........and they are becoming attractive alternatives.

[tuky]

Unfortunately Thailand as a name is a great brand.

It is very deceptive as the first time tourist will find out after stepping foot on the skybridge (or most likely the bus) at swampy.

From a distance Thailand looks great, but get inside and it is filthy, smelly and sometimes quite inhospitable.

Just last week my girlfriend and I spent the night in BKK, what a disaster. We went for a walk which turned into a mountain style trek. The footpath was all torn up wherever there wasn't a sidewalk stall and it generally looked like a war zone. This was Silom.

Ok, so I am in a negative mood.

It is probably worse here in Indo in reality

But Indo seems to have more charm than Thailand now days.

Good luck Thai.

Edited June 11, 2009 by tuky

[phetaroi]

In addition to the two things you mentioned.......TAT uses the phrase "quality tourists" repeated. That is highly offensive to many Westerners. Still, they continue to use it. "We only want quality tourists."

I don't agree with you at all about this, because what they're really talking about are not wanting sex tourists. Because most traditional Thais are, out of politeness, not likely to mention this, I am very close to a Thai family up in Chiang Mai who have always been very offended by the sex tourism in Thailand. It took really getting to them before the topic was ever discussed, but they looked with disdain at the sex tourists themselves, and with equal disdain at the Thais who accommodate the Thai sex industry. Yesterday was a very good example of my own displeasure with this aspect of Bangkok life. As usual, when I walked past the Amari Watergate Hotel I was pestered by touts offering me women, men, boys, and girls. "Mai ow!" Then I stopped in at Pantip Plaza, where I was pushed to buy porno DVDs. "Mai ow!" I will say, one of the hawkers did actually apologize to me.

The visa rules are harming tourism. Just one of many examples: Some immigration departments (I think Singapore at the moment) are requiring foreigners to show an exit airline ticket prior to getting a tourist visa.

And if you fly in and decide to get an extension by crossing the border, some immigration checkpoints will not allow you to come back without an exit airline ticket......and then they will only give you 15 days (and can only do it four times).

These visa changes are unnecessary and have nothing to do with security--which should be the main function of the immigration dept and not social engineering. And they hurt tourism.

Yes, at present the tourist visa is free (after you pay for the exit airline ticket)......but that is no doubt a temporary situation caused by the drop in tourism.

On the other hand, of course, few Thais are allowed even a tourist visa to the United States or most Western countries.

[phetaroi]

I suppose, in the end, they will be forced to change.......as one other poster on another thread pointed out (think Bonobo), other countries in the region are doing everything possible to take advantage of Thailand's mistakes........and they are becoming attractive alternatives.

I'm not sure the change will be as necessary as you might think. In the past, the tourism dollar did, to a large extent, prop up many businesses in Bangkok and other places in Thailand. Walk into any of the restaurants in the major shopping malls in Bangkok. Who are most of the clients? Not farang. Middle class Thais. Who are most of the shoppers at Central World and Paragon? Middle class Thais. It appears to me that Bangkok, at least, is fast becoming a modern, self-sustaining economy, far less reliant on farang tourism dollars.

[beechguy]

Could somebody with some knowledge of Thai tourism please explain why the TAT spend vast amounts of taxpayers money attempting to attract visitors to this country, whilst other government departments are doing their best to discourage tourism.

I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) and the somewhat new addition of ATM charges of 150bt for foreigners. These impositions are now beginning to appear in guide books and travel advisories, thus pointing potential tourists elsewhere.

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

There are loads of expats here who think the same way and wonder why, in a time when the country needs to bring tourists back to the Kingdom, such events are allowed to take place or stand.

In addition to the two things you mentioned.......TAT uses the phrase "quality tourists" repeated. That is highly offensive to many Westerners. Still, they continue to use it. "We only want quality tourists."

The visa rules are harming tourism. Just one of many examples: Some immigration departments (I think Singapore at the moment) are requiring foreigners to show an exit airline ticket prior to getting a tourist visa.

And if you fly in and decide to get an extension by crossing the border, some immigration checkpoints will not allow you to come back without an exit airline ticket......and then they will only give you 15 days (and can only do it four times).

These visa changes are unnecessary and have nothing to do with security--which should be the main function of the immigration dept and not social engineering. And they hurt tourism.

Yes, at present the tourist visa is free (after you pay for the exit airline ticket)......but that is no doubt a temporary situation caused by the drop in tourism.

Maybe some day they will introduce a pay to stay system and allow tourists to enter the country on a 30 day "stamp" at all checkpoints and by all means (walk in, drive in, fly in, by boat, etc) with no tourist visa required (initially), and then allow them to switch to tourist visa status without having to leave the country.

This could be easily accomplished. For long stay applicants, they could require a security check paid for by the applicant. Pay to stay w/ security check.....easy solution and that would encourage tourism, alleviate concerns of some expats that they might be forced to leave after the next visa bar raising event, and foster security.

Now, that would draw tourists back and help making Thailand expat friendly.

Well a little closer to being correct on some points. Possibly Singapore and others, do ask for tickets exiting Thailand, but Laos does not and actual "Tourist Visas", are not free any longer, but, only 1,000 Baht per entry, good for 60 days, 30 day extensions available without leaving the country. No limit on those and double entries are easily obtained. I would think almost any tourist could afford that, if not, maybe they could consider shortening the holiday and go back to work.

The 30 day entry most receive at the airport, aren't on visas, those are "Visa Exempt" entries, free and unlimited for approximately 40 countries. At the border, you may be extending your holiday, but not your visa. True, recent change restrict the number of entries to 4, but with an entry by air, you receive 4 again, these are also "Visa Exempt" entries and no charge for the entry.

Seems some people don't mind buying a visa for Indonesia, but balk at paying something to go to Thailand. Also, most will pay a visa fee to enter Laos and Vietnam. At worse, I would say Thailand fits in the middle somewhere, and has some competition.

Edited June 11, 2009 by beechguy

[beechguy]

Could somebody with some knowledge of Thai tourism please explain why the TAT spend vast amounts of taxpayers money attempting to attract visitors to this country, whilst other government departments are doing their best to discourage tourism.

I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) and the somewhat new addition of ATM charges of 150bt for foreigners. These impositions are now beginning to appear in guide books and travel advisories, thus pointing potential tourists elsewhere.

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

I haven't seen double pricing in the same manner as you do here, but they will definitely try to charge you more for a number of things in many countries that I've been to.

Not for the one time visitor, but I opened a bank account on an earlier visit, and transferred money to my Thai Bank before visiting. That way, if I had problems, it was more of a local issue. May work well for those who visit on a regular basis.

[loong]

Seems some people don't mind buying a visa for Indonesia, but balk at paying something to go to Thailand. Also, most will pay a visa fee to enter Laos and Vietnam. At worse, I would say Thailand fits in the middle somewhere, and has some competition.

In this situation, I would have absolutely no objection to paying 1000 Baht to get a tourist Visa for Thailand.

I do, however object to having to pay the 1500 Baht visa into Laos, the high cost of taxis, rooms and food in Vientiane in order to be able to apply for this visa. I really don't want to be spending money in Laos that i could be spending in Thailand. As well as the complete waste of 3 days.

[MJo]

Here we go again with the visas.

Can anyone tell me if such a country exists that let's all nationalities to enter freely without visa and without any payment and then to stay indefinedly without the need to leave the country or pay anything ever. With the added security of absolute guarantee that these rules are never changed ?

Also would be interested to know if such country exists where 100% of GDP comes from long term tourists not married, not working and under 50 years old "retirees" ?

If these indeed exist maybe we could all pack up and move there.

[ThaiEye]

Could somebody with some knowledge of Thai tourism please explain why the TAT spend vast amounts of taxpayers money attempting to attract visitors to this country, whilst other government departments are doing their best to discourage tourism.

I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) and the somewhat new addition of ATM charges of 150bt for foreigners. These impositions are now beginning to appear in guide books and travel advisories, thus pointing potential tourists elsewhere.

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

You have to understand how Thai authorities work. Different bodies have their own strategies and plans and have nothing to do with anyone else.

The two-teir price or banking system has nothing to do with the TAT. The TAT can only advise, they have no authority to interfere with the goings-on of other parts of government actions.

Sometimes their advice is accepted and a lot of the time it is not.

Learn more about how the Thai system works and you will realize.

[PattayaParent]

<snip>I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) <snip>

Simply not true.

All over Asia and Middle East locals get preferrential pricing for places, even in USA from what I read on these pages.

[JR Texas]

Seems some people don't mind buying a visa for Indonesia, but balk at paying something to go to Thailand. Also, most will pay a visa fee to enter Laos and Vietnam. At worse, I would say Thailand fits in the middle somewhere, and has some competition.

In this situation, I would have absolutely no objection to paying 1000 Baht to get a tourist Visa for Thailand.

I do, however object to having to pay the 1500 Baht visa into Laos, the high cost of taxis, rooms and food in Vientiane in order to be able to apply for this visa. I really don't want to be spending money in Laos that i could be spending in Thailand. As well as the complete waste of 3 days.

Many people (rich and poor) hate having to take a useless, time-consuming trip across the border just to get a visa. In most cases it is a two day trip (e.g., Lao, Malaysia) but can turn into a three day trip (e.g., Hong Kong).

Why immigration can't allow people to get the visa without leaving the country is a mystery........again, a simple pay to stay system that eliminates the need for border runs would help bring in more tourists.

Both the Philippines and Cambodia have a pay to stay system that promotes tourism and increases the flow of foreign dollars circulating in both countries.

Maybe Thailand will learn from its mistakes and adopt a tourism/expat friendly immigration system that will be good for the economy.

[beechguy]

Seems some people don't mind buying a visa for Indonesia, but balk at paying something to go to Thailand. Also, most will pay a visa fee to enter Laos and Vietnam. At worse, I would say Thailand fits in the middle somewhere, and has some competition.

In this situation, I would have absolutely no objection to paying 1000 Baht to get a tourist Visa for Thailand.

I do, however object to having to pay the 1500 Baht visa into Laos, the high cost of taxis, rooms and food in Vientiane in order to be able to apply for this visa. I really don't want to be spending money in Laos that i could be spending in Thailand. As well as the complete waste of 3 days.

Some seemed to imply that the visa/immigration situation in Thailand is discouraging tourists from coming here. My point is, one must pay to enter several of the surrounding countries, so what's the difference.

Can you enter any of the surrounding countries free for 30 days? Unlimited times?

Another point, the 1000 Baht for a Thai tourist visa, is for 60 days each entry, not 30 days as others. Also, no limits.

For many, they can apply in their home country for double or even triple entry tourist visas. Except for activating the second and third entry, no need to spend much time in another country if they don't want.

Personally, I enjoyed my time in Laos, and intend to spend more time there if I go back again. If a person does need to go there to get a visa, they can get a double entry and not have to back to Laos for six months. Also, Cambodia may be an option now.

Anyway, I think there are alot of other factors that may discourage the average tourist, but immigration regulations aren't at the top of the list.

Edited June 11, 2009 by beechguy

[ThaiEye]

How much do Thais have to pay for a visa to Western countries? And to what extent (and financial one) do they have to go to, to actually get one? Thailand is free..

Many western countries like the US, UK and Australia have a two-teir price system for international university students. They can end up paying twice to three times the amount as locals, running into thousands and thousands of dollars. Much worse than having to pay a 100 baht to get into a museum..

Edited June 11, 2009 by ThaiEye

[loong]

How much do Thais have to pay for a visa to Western countries? And to what extent (and financial one) do they have to go to, to actually get one? Thailand is free..

Many western countries like the US, UK and Australia have a two-teir price system for international university students. They can end up paying twice to three times the amount as locals, running into thousands and thousands of dollars. Much worse than having to pay a 100 baht to get into a museum..

Very funny, I understood the topic of this thread to be about tourists in Thailand, so what does the cost and availability of visas to and the cost of a university education in western countries have to do with it?

Anyone with half a brain can work out why there are difficulties for a Thai to get a visa to a western country.

[JR Texas]

How much do Thais have to pay for a visa to Western countries? And to what extent (and financial one) do they have to go to, to actually get one? Thailand is free..

Many western countries like the US, UK and Australia have a two-teir price system for international university students. They can end up paying twice to three times the amount as locals, running into thousands and thousands of dollars. Much worse than having to pay a 100 baht to get into a museum..

Surely Thailand does not have to adopt any Western policies that it deems unjust or unfair. The last time I looked, Thailand was an independent country with the ability to make up its own mind about things.

Thailand should be focused on making its tourism sector better. That means attracting low income, middle income, and upper income tourists.

Instead, it seems to be focused on ruining it. There many factors at play.....an important factor is the social culling agenda of the immigration department that is coming across as being xenophobic.

They should be focused on security. Instead, they seem to be focused on some type of social engineering project.

Add to that the new ATM fees, double pricing, increase in crimes against foreigners, hefty increases in hotel room fees over the past three years, political instability.......the tourism numbers go down.

Add to that the global economic downturn and now the Swine Flu........numbers go down.

Add to that the fact that Thailand's neighbors are progressing rapidly in terms of their tourism packages/policies........numbers go down.

As stated earlier, eventually the people making the rules will wake up and change their approach to tourism. Until that day happens, the Thai people will suffer, at least those dependent on tourism for their incomes.

[Lancelot]

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

Catchy slogan

TAT pretty much doesn't care. Like most governemt agencies world wide, the people employed (at TAT) are there to earn a salary and eventually collect a pension. Why hustle when you can cook the books and rest on your laurals

[barky]

Could somebody with some knowledge of Thai tourism please explain why the TAT spend vast amounts of taxpayers money attempting to attract visitors to this country, whilst other government departments are doing their best to discourage tourism.

I cite the racially biased imposition of double pricing i.e. 10bt for Thais - 100 or 200bt for foreigners (unique to Thailand I believe) and the somewhat new addition of ATM charges of 150bt for foreigners. These impositions are now beginning to appear in guide books and travel advisories, thus pointing potential tourists elsewhere.

Are we now to assume that TAT stands for Thailand Against Tourism?

I just think there are lots of ways to look at this. While I don't disagree with you, here are a few things I have noticed in my first two weeks here as a new retiree resident:

Haircut: US = $11; Bangkok = $4

Movie + snack + soda: US = $20; Bangkok = $5

Vaccination: US = $150; Bangkok = $40

Hotel: At a small town in US = $120; At any Thai city other than Bangkok = $30-$60

These examples are totally irrelevant if you live on Thai wages as most aliens do here.

[mrtoad]

How much do Thais have to pay for a visa to Western countries? And to what extent (and financial one) do they have to go to, to actually get one? Thailand is free..

Many western countries like the US, UK and Australia have a two-teir price system for international university students. They can end up paying twice to three times the amount as locals, running into thousands and thousands of dollars. Much worse than having to pay a 100 baht to get into a museum..

There are obvious reasons why this is the case, and it's not to do with racism and has nothing to do with some of the double pricing stratagies that are in place here.

[JR Texas]

How much do Thais have to pay for a visa to Western countries? And to what extent (and financial one) do they have to go to, to actually get one? Thailand is free..

Many western countries like the US, UK and Australia have a two-teir price system for international university students. They can end up paying twice to three times the amount as locals, running into thousands and thousands of dollars. Much worse than having to pay a 100 baht to get into a museum..

There are obvious reasons why this is the case, and it's not to do with racism and has nothing to do with some of the double pricing stratagies that are in place here.

True.........one thing ThaiEye might find interesting is that in the United States an American citizen/student who attends a university located in a state outside of his/her home state pays a hefty price for that.

It is almost always cheaper to attend a university in your home state. Even though you pay more to attend an out-of-state university, I have never heard an American say that was "double pricing" or related in any way to racism.

In Thailand, the double pricing is clearly applied on the basis of racial stereotyping. The rationale behind it may be that foreigners can afford it so it is fine that they pay more.......something like that.

But for a foreigner, it feels wrong...unjust...unfair...discriminatory. I pay the extra fee.....but I don't like it. Clearly our belief systems are a bit different with regard to this.

[sickinthailand]

i hadn't gone back home(bkk) for a long time, and the last time i went back which was earlier this year.

after went back i feel like..well.. it has not change a bit!

i do under stand what many farang talking here. i even ask my self how any foreigner want to stay in this place!

i don't hate bangkok since it is my home, but i am a kind of disappointed that bangkok doesn't improve anything at all since i left.

soi dog, dog shit, endless road fixing, city overall cleanness, double price system. etc

thailand has been a very famous tourist sport in s.e.a for many many years already. thailand should move for a better place, a better tourist destination by now, but it is not!

things in thailand is not as cheap as before as the country is developed.

thailand can not keep the quality low with everythink in the country getting more expensive like this.

that doubble price system too. i know many country also do that, but again thailand should had got out of that system by now.

it is not a friendly system. or i would rather see they let thai in for free than thai 50, foriener 500.

i don't see thailand go anywhere far and it will loose it populality for sure if she doesn't try to improve her self.

[Samuian]

Unfortunately Thailand as a name is a great brand.

It is very deceptive as the first time tourist will find out after stepping foot on the skybridge (or most likely the bus) at swampy.

From a distance Thailand looks great, but get inside and it is filthy, smelly and sometimes quite inhospitable.

Just last week my girlfriend and I spent the night in BKK, what a disaster. We went for a walk which turned into a mountain style trek. The footpath was all torn up wherever there wasn't a sidewalk stall and it generally looked like a war zone. This was Silom.

Ok, so I am in a negative mood.

It is probably worse here in Indo in reality

But Indo seems to have more charm than Thailand now days.

Good luck Thai.

Well nobody forces you to come here in the first place -

stay away and it will be one whiner and many complains less!

Or pay up so they can fix it and shut up!

Just had a friend over fromindia - he said he was stunned

how clean everything was and compared to toher places in Asia -

oh yes - unless you haven't come around much - which i suspect!

And some more to "overpricing":

Visit to japanese Restaurant:

Berlin: 100 Euro (2 Pers.)

Samui: 40 Euro (2 Pers.) max.

Seafood Restaurant:

Berlin: 130 Euro (2 Pers.)

Samui: 50 Euro (2 Pers.) max.

Fill up the Tank:

1 l Diesel

Berlin: 1,19 Euro - 56 ThB

Samui: 23.19

Taxi switch on Meter:

Berlin: 3.00 Euro - 141.12 ThB (when you enter!) up to the first 7 Km - 1 km = 1.58 Euro for distance of 7 Km 658 ThB!

Samui: 200-500 ThB

Now Special on Cineplex = 80 ThB

German banks charging for every Bankstatement 2.50 Euro!

So give me a break!

Thailand = Rip off... if one believes so - take my advice: stay away!

This will be a better place!

[JR Texas]

Unfortunately Thailand as a name is a great brand.

It is very deceptive as the first time tourist will find out after stepping foot on the skybridge (or most likely the bus) at swampy.

From a distance Thailand looks great, but get inside and it is filthy, smelly and sometimes quite inhospitable.

Just last week my girlfriend and I spent the night in BKK, what a disaster. We went for a walk which turned into a mountain style trek. The footpath was all torn up wherever there wasn't a sidewalk stall and it generally looked like a war zone. This was Silom.

Ok, so I am in a negative mood.

It is probably worse here in Indo in reality

But Indo seems to have more charm than Thailand now days.

Good luck Thai.

Well nobody forces you to come here in the first place -

stay away and it will be one whiner and many complains less!

Or pay up so they can fix it and shut up!

Just had a friend over fromindia - he said he was stunned

how clean everything was and compared to toher places in Asia -

oh yes - unless you haven't come around much - which i suspect!

And some more to "overpricing":

Visit to japanese Restaurant:

Berlin: 100 Euro (2 Pers.)

Samui: 40 Euro (2 Pers.) max.

Seafood Restaurant:

Berlin: 130 Euro (2 Pers.)

Samui: 50 Euro (2 Pers.) max.

Fill up the Tank:

1 l Diesel

Berlin: 1,19 Euro - 56 ThB

Samui: 23.19

Taxi switch on Meter:

Berlin: 3.00 Euro - 141.12 ThB (when you enter!) up to the first 7 Km - 1 km = 1.58 Euro for distance of 7 Km 658 ThB!

Samui: 200-500 ThB

Now Special on Cineplex = 80 ThB

German banks charging for every Bankstatement 2.50 Euro!

So give me a break!

Thailand = Rip off... if one believes so - take my advice: stay away!

This will be a better place!

Of course it is more expensive in developed countries! And people are paid more to make up for it. So it does not seem as expensive as it does for someone coming from the developing world.

Thailand is a developing country that is trying to raise prices beyond what its present status merits.

You said Thailand (or Bangkok) is clean compared to other places in Asia?

If you mean cleaner than most places in Korea, Japan, and Singapore......I think you are wrong.

I have lived in China.......yes, there are lots of places in China that are not clean, but Hong Kong is much cleaner than Bangkok (both Bangkok and Hong Kong do have bad air.....seems worse in Bangkok to me).

Your overly-aggressive "if you don't agree with me get out" style is not productive.

[loong]

Unfortunately Thailand as a name is a great brand.

It is very deceptive as the first time tourist will find out after stepping foot on the skybridge (or most likely the bus) at swampy.

From a distance Thailand looks great, but get inside and it is filthy, smelly and sometimes quite inhospitable.

Just last week my girlfriend and I spent the night in BKK, what a disaster. We went for a walk which turned into a mountain style trek. The footpath was all torn up wherever there wasn't a sidewalk stall and it generally looked like a war zone. This was Silom.

Ok, so I am in a negative mood.

It is probably worse here in Indo in reality

But Indo seems to have more charm than Thailand now days.

Good luck Thai.

Well nobody forces you to come here in the first place -

stay away and it will be one whiner and many complains less!

Or pay up so they can fix it and shut up!

Just had a friend over fromindia - he said he was stunned

how clean everything was and compared to toher places in Asia -

oh yes - unless you haven't come around much - which i suspect!

And some more to "overpricing":

Visit to japanese Restaurant:

Berlin: 100 Euro (2 Pers.)

Samui: 40 Euro (2 Pers.) max.

Seafood Restaurant:

Berlin: 130 Euro (2 Pers.)

Samui: 50 Euro (2 Pers.) max.

Fill up the Tank:

1 l Diesel

Berlin: 1,19 Euro - 56 ThB

Samui: 23.19

Taxi switch on Meter:

Berlin: 3.00 Euro - 141.12 ThB (when you enter!) up to the first 7 Km - 1 km = 1.58 Euro for distance of 7 Km 658 ThB!

Samui: 200-500 ThB

Now Special on Cineplex = 80 ThB

German banks charging for every Bankstatement 2.50 Euro!

So give me a break!

Thailand = Rip off... if one believes so - take my advice: stay away!

This will be a better place!

Very interesting post

"Well nobody forces you to come here in the first place -

stay away and it will be one whiner and many complains less!"

"Thailand = Rip off... if one believes so - take my advice: stay away!

This will be a better place!"

Maybe the TAT should adopt these as slogans.

[samran]

Of course it is more expensive in developed countries! And people are paid more to make up for it. So it does not seem as expensive as it does for someone coming from the developing world.

Thailand is a developing country that is trying to raise prices beyond what its present status merits.

You said Thailand (or Bangkok) is clean compared to other places in Asia?

If you mean cleaner than most places in Korea, Japan, and Singapore......I think you are wrong.

I have lived in China.......yes, there are lots of places in China that are not clean, but Hong Kong is much cleaner than Bangkok (both Bangkok and Hong Kong do have bad air.....seems worse in Bangkok to me).

Your overly-aggressive "if you don't agree with me get out" style is not productive.

Again you show your lack of understanding for basic finance or economics. Have you only ever worked for NGO's your whole life that you don't understand these things?

If a hotel is full, or near full, they charge whatever they want for their rooms, cause people will pay......pretty simple. Just because there are a group of tourists who can't afford a particular hotel isn't a concern for that hotel if they are covering costs and making a targeted profit....

And why should price have anything to do with a country's 'status'? Shouldn't it have more to do with the cost of delivering that service which could include very hefty financing costs for that hotel or resort to be built. Or should everyone live in poverty so you can live like a king?