From the top of the page today:

"Latest News:Foreign Tourist Arrivals In Thailand Exceed Target In 2010"

Isn't it irrepsonible to use the word "target" and "foreign tourists" in the same sentence? I hope no one gets shot.

Nah.

It says they exceed the target, which means that too many have been shot already!

It would be interesting to know how many of those tourists are the revolving border crossing variety and how many are 1st time tourists or tourists who have not been here on a long term basis.  

The government comes out with numbers which really don't make sense.  Long term residents who can't get any other visa get back-to-back tourist visas.  They are hardly tourists and they don't contribute to the tourism sector of the economy in a significant manner.  

Are you suggesting that visa running expats don't patronise bars and their more comely employees?

No, I am suggesting that back-to-back tourists don't usually stay in a hotel, take tours, eat in tourist area restaurants etc.  There is no doubt that the vast majority of these people contribute to the economy, but they don't significantly contribute to the tourism sector.  

Do they drink?  Yes, but more likely at a local watering hole than in the lounge of a hotel.  Do they travel?  Yes, but  probably by car or a regular bus rather than a tourist van.  Do they visit the ladies?  Yes, but probably in a massage parlor catering to the locals more than tourists.  

Back-to-back 'tourists' have a host of enterprises that they support, like the visa services to Cambodia and Laos.  

Could be, I'm of the opinion that they may be more discriminating on where they spend their money but they still spend it.

A lot of regular long time genuine tourists follow the same pattern as expats, they seek out better and cheaper, many come as package tourists, staying in good hotels and doing the tours but most return as an up market form of backpacker, seeking out good deals on accommodation, food and drink and... errr... other types of hospitality.