Radical Changes Being Proposed Tourist Visas

[alex100]

Seems like some big changes being proposed it is 0815 on Sunday morning in sunny Midlands UK. My TW has a friend who works in the consulate in Birmingham don;t want to give to many details as she could get removed - she has just picked up the missus and the kids to go to the Thai Temple in Warwick. She says last week she viewed some real radical proposals to change is visa laws surrounding tourist visas and the 30 day senario. Proposals include pre entry visa stamps (non on entry) for tourist's between the ages of 17 and 35 years old with proof of funds hotel and flight bookings needed to be proved for holiday. And although she was not quite clear on this I understand they 30 day in out will be totally done away with the proposal roughly translates to a resonable amount of time between toursit trips. Nothing about other visa types. The proposal is all built around a statement about morality and discouraging what is reffered to as low grade tourism and public bad behaviour by said tourists. Any news on this in LOS.

I should have added there is a caviate about families with kids having exememptions.

Edited May 8, 2005 by alex100

[huski]

i doubt that it will happen as thailand is crying for any tourism right now, even thai airways is promoting low fares. proposals will always be thrown around...

[alex100]

i doubt that it will happen as thailand is crying for any tourism right now, even thai airways is promoting low fares. proposals will always be thrown around...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They have been asked to comment on effcets in terms of projceted increase in workload.

[Thaiquila]

Would 30 MINUTES be a reasonable amount of time between touristic trips?

[alex100]

Would 30 MINUTES be a reasonable amount of time between touristic trips?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You may jest - but think about the ramifications if the proposals do come to fruition - it would be virtually impossible to do the 30 day runs - fortuanltely I am older than 35 so it won't effect. The resaonable time would be I suggest enough time to back to your own country and re apply . Which would be what you would need to do - the entry requirment being the visa pre issued in your country of residence. If you think back in to the late eighties you needed a pre issued visa for a stay of 14 days or more or go through a huge rigmarole on arrival - this used to cause difficulties coming to Thailand from Saudi as you could not apply for your Thai visa until you had your exit re entry from Saudi - and the timing was always very tight. Some of the older hands (over 35) may remember these days. So it is not outside the realms of possibility that this will happen it was far stricter in the past.

[Thaiquila]

Excuse the jest.

I do realize any radical immigration policy change would have an unfair impact on many people.

It would both suprise me and not surprise me if Thailand makes changes that damage their tourist industry. We can only wait and see if anything is really up.

As long as we are on the topic, how about changing the stamp on arrival to a more reasonable amount of time, say THREE MONTHS?

I believe that is what you get in Malaysia, and in Mexico, you get SIX MONTHS (of course, only for the more favored countries).

Many westerners come to Asia for long trips, many are young and exploring, or old and winding down, but all the 30 day stamp does is encourage people to leave Thailand and spend money in OTHER countries. If there was a 90 day stamp, instead of flying to Penang, lots of people would explore more of Thailand, and spread some much needed tourist money to the less visited places in Thailand.

Keep up these visa policies, and UNSEEN THAILAND will be more apt than the marketers ever imagined.

Edited May 8, 2005 by Thaiquila

[george]

Ales, For us to make this a sa headline news, we need to have more evidence. Do you have more info?

[Boon Mee]

Just trying to keep out the low-life degenerate sex tourists.

No harm in that...

[Ajarn]

Keep up these visa policies, and UNSEEN THAILAND will be more apt than the marketers ever imagined

Personally, I'm okay with that.

[alex100]

I agree with what you are saying there are other ways to approach this - but the info I was given this morning suggests the moralists in the Thai goverment do not consider some to worthy tourists. Therefore their value as tourists do become a matter of percpetion. Think of what could be done if you could clear the backpackers out of samui and develop it all in the style of say hua hin. The moralists do seem to shouting with a louder voice. Maybe they reckon if they cleared out the backpackers and the lager louts they would attract more affluent tourists less of - but would spend more money - I don't know I am only guessing but the info is genuine.

[rainman]

You state that your thai wife has a friend who works in the consulate, etc. This information already traveled such a long way (from someone to the friend of your wife, from the friend to your wife, from you to here) that it likely picked up and also lost some things along the way and in translation. And perhaps those changes are only proposed for that specific consulate.

And she said she can't give 'too many details' as she could get removed. She's basically said it all already, according to your statement above. Not questioning your post, your wife or anyone here, but it does seem a little bit more of a story than reality right now.

It may be a proposal from a politician or minister ...but that's long ways from taking effect, if taking effect at all.

[alex100]

You state that your thai wife has a friend who works in the consulate, etc. This information already traveled such a long way (from someone to the friend of your wife, from the friend to your wife, from you to here) that it likely picked up and also lost some things along the way and in translation. And perhaps those changes are only proposed for that specific consulate.

And she said she can't give 'too many details' as she could get removed. She's basically said it all already, according to your statement above. Not questioning your post, your wife or anyone here, but it does seem a little bit more of a story than reality right now.

It may be a proposal from a politician or minister ...but that's long ways from taking effect, if taking effect at all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actaully came to me dircetly from the person who saw the Thai governmental request for task evaluation read my post properly it is very much first hand. Sorry if it upsets you young un's but it does look like something is brewing.

[Totster]

Actaully came to me dircetly from the person who saw the Thai governmental request for task evaluation read my post properly it is very much first hand. Sorry if it upsets you young un's but it does look like something is brewing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Doesn't upset me.. I don't come on tourist visa... however if I did, I still wouldn't be worried about anything... we always hear this is gonna happen and that is gonna happen, most of it never does.

You yourself even said it's just an evaluation.... when they have evaluated, found out it won't work, it will be put in file 13.

totster

[The_Eye_Of_Sauron]

If this is real then its a good old TV scoop!

Dynamite too.

Indonesia introduced a variant on this theme in 2004. Some bigwigs there made a lot of money from it.

Edited May 8, 2005 by The_Eye_Of_Sauron

[mbkudu]

Just trying to keep out the low-life degenerate sex tourists.

No harm in that...

Careful what you say Boon; then your old pal Georgie will be packing his bags for another pasture.

Edited May 8, 2005 by mbkudu

[Ajarn]

If this is real then its a good old TV scoop!

Dynamite too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Still simply gossip and rumour, isn't it?

[Totster]

If this is real then its a good old TV scoop!

Dynamite too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Still simply gossip and rumour, isn't it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly.... nothing like a good gossip though...

totster

[The_Other_Mac]

Just trying to keep out the low-life degenerate sex tourists.

No harm in that...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think low-spending under-35s form the degenerate sex tourist population. Quite the reverse.

Back in the west, making specific laws for particular demographics tends to get people very upset. I can't imagine a western govt blatantly ruling that Thai women 17-35 must show a larger amount of cash on arrival than others, even though that would be a very effective in reducing overstayers.

I'm not sure if Thais really understand that backpackers are not actually from a different and lower social class than "normal" tourists, they're just at a different stage in life.

[Nam Kao]

I am for it, More poon ying for me

[bangkokian]

This issue has periodically been featured in the local t.V. news for the past two months or so. As far as I understand, the proposal is not based on any moralistic grounds. It is about attracting more affluent tourists to the country. It certainly does not seem practical, nor moral to me.

There is a tendency to stereotype backpackers as "low-quality" tourists. I believe that many do have a better understanding, but still find comfort in adhering to traditional thoughts/beliefs/ways/values.

The U.S. embassy has been quite biased against younger single Thai women, even when travelling with family members. After the 911 incident, this bias may become less obvious since multiple-year tourist visas are less frequently granted by the embassy. True, they have been more p.c. about it. Indeed, the world is replete with stated, but unenforced and unstated, but widely practised, laws.

Just trying to keep out the low-life degenerate sex tourists.

No harm in that...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think low-spending under-35s form the degenerate sex tourist population. Quite the reverse.

Back in the west, making specific laws for particular demographics tends to get people very upset. I can't imagine a western govt blatantly ruling that Thai women 17-35 must show a larger amount of cash on arrival than others, even though that would be a very effective in reducing overstayers.

I'm not sure if Thais really understand that backpackers are not actually from a different and lower social class than "normal" tourists, they're just at a different stage in life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Edited May 8, 2005 by bangkokian

[dr_Pat_Pong]

If this is real then its a good old TV scoop!

Dynamite too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Still simply gossip and rumour, isn't it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely Ajarn. As far as I can tell, the changes are not known about at other Thai posts and missions at this time.

[Wolfie]

This man in the pub told me....

[The Coder]

Regardless of strategy, the question is going to be will the changes actually attract the people they want? And will it actually weed out the people they don't? You get the feeling sometimes they pass laws thinking they can do no wrong. But it can backfire rather badly on either or both ends and the truth is they just might not care in the end. I might predict a mixed blessing where they turn away a slice of lower spenders only to find they can't prop up the losses with enough higher spenders to fill the gap. Certainly the elite card didn't gain as much interest as hoped. So maybe they are kicking around new ideas which is not surprising. Just look at alcohol. Many thought there's no way closing times would last, especially in farang meccas because people would stop coming and the tourism industry was under a barrage of pressures as it was. Well closing times were enforced and not only that became stricter and earlier over time. There is even crazier stuff all the time like alcohol can only be purchased at two time windows each day. There's also the drug testing and full moon party curbs going on so don't put it past them to shake up visas too. It just doesn't seem they will hesitate to make radical changes to things regardless if they are in desperate need of tourists.

I wonder why they don't just raise the price of entry. As someone on tourist visa's for some years now, I can say when they raised the price of tourist visa extensions to 1900 baht, the number of people getting them went down tremendously. In my experince at Bangkok Immigration, it *instantly* went from a queue of roughly 30 down to about 3.

Lest not forget. While the proposals are interesting, it lacks credibility at this point.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

This man in the pub told me....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How true the rest want the rules changed just to accommodate their particular desires and wants. Visa rules by negotiation

[devildog683]

just tryin to scare everyone else away.......

[rainman]

You state that your thai wife has a friend who works in the consulate, etc. This information already traveled such a long way (from someone to the friend of your wife, from the friend to your wife, from you to here) that it likely picked up and also lost some things along the way and in translation. And perhaps those changes are only proposed for that specific consulate.

And she said she can't give 'too many details' as she could get removed. She's basically said it all already, according to your statement above. Not questioning your post, your wife or anyone here, but it does seem a little bit more of a story than reality right now.

It may be a proposal from a politician or minister ...but that's long ways from taking effect, if taking effect at all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actaully came to me dircetly from the person who saw the Thai governmental request for task evaluation read my post properly it is very much first hand. Sorry if it upsets you young un's but it does look like something is brewing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Doesn't upset me, i'm on non-IMM B Still doesn't sound like something Thailand would do now, though.

[astral]

I can just imagine some Thai big wig dreaming up a policy like this

without consulting his other half the Thai Tourism Authority.

It would kick TAT right in the balls, especially after 26th December.

Time will tell.