Focus On Quality Tourists, Not Quantity, Urges PM Abhisit

[morphious]

Quality tourists????? Am i missing something?

Its too late now when Thailand has spent the last three years or more giving cheap flights and acomodation to Pakistani,Indian and Arab men only to discover they spend nothing and travel around in hoards exploiting the sex indrustry (7 into one)Ive no doubt i will be called racist but this is fact.

What a joke Thailand is getting what it set its self up for

[thailandadam]

"Last year Thailand received 15.8 million international tourists, generating income of Bt585 million, he said."

That averages out at a tad over 37 Baht per international visitor. Is the quoted line a typo, or are the PM's advisors/scriptwriters slacking a bit?

Anyway, sad to say that Thailand (in common with just about every other country trying to entice tourists) can't be too picky at the moment.

Yeah, one Pad Thai and back on their return flight...seriously, I think it's more like a billion...makes more sense and good call on the math, there.

[Capealava]

If I assume the PM is more western than Thai, since he was born and educated in the west, it follows that his outlook and thought process are more western. Now, since he is not your average Thai, he is expressing a more focussed aspiration for his country. I can bet there is NOT ONE leader in the West who would be happy with a certain type of tourists that seem to flock to Thailand in droves. Similarly, the PM is aware of a longer term image problem if the entrenched view is that Thailand is a low cost sex tourist destination. So what is wrong with trying to clean up the industry? The success or failure of his stated aspiration is unknown, but as I said can't blame him for stating an aspiration.

Also, the PM is able to recognise white trash when he sees/smells/hears it...unlike the average Thai who may think all farangs are rich and well-educated. So which leader wouldn't want to minimise white trash from arriving and worse still, setlling here and breeding?

I believe this discussion is about all tourists. Abhisit did not mention or label the genre of sex tourist as the problem. If you have enough money i am sure sex is available in Cannes France on any given day. Your obsession with white trash makes you sound like a minister at the pulpit, shouting the "damnation and fires of hell await you"!!!!!!!!! Mellow out it is better for your heart.

[Capealava]

Most "quality" tourists are above average as far as intelligence. I'm sure they research their destinations and have a good idea what they will find. They will know that certain areas of Pattaya are designed to attract sex tourists. The bottom line is if you don't like the sex tourists areas, don't go.

How do you determine who is a quality tourist? Is it the amount of money they spend? In my opinion, sex tourists spend more money than the so called quality tourists. Are you so naive to think that bar girls and even many bars report the amount of money that they make from sex tourists?

A difficult thing to understand is why there are so many better than thou board members who hate Pattaya. Bulldoze Pattaya? Drop an atom bomb on it? The only logical reason I can think of for this hate (?) is that the members wives read their posts so they have to condemn Pattaya to make their wives happy. The wives obviously forbid the husbands to visit fun city.

no mate not everyone is sick f... like you the very type thailand wants to get rid off

I would rather see you the judgmental priest yelling 'sick fuc_k" on your way out.

[Deeral]

I think a few people should re-think their definition of "quality" tourist. Both TAT and posters on this forum.

firstly "backpackers" is being used as some sort of blanket expression for young or poor tourists - in fact they are not all the same.

The original visitors to almost any country are nearly always backpackers.....in that they are young middle class well educated people either studying for or with university degrees.THese people are also likely to become quite wealthy in the future and may well return to these countries they have "discovered" - price then will not be a problem, they often have families etc and require good superior accommodation with good customers services.

Furthermore they are politically aware and aware of social economic and environmental issues surrounding the places they visit. Thailand will fall short of their expectations in almost all of these aspects.

THe other visitors to Thailand have now increasingly become the "bottom of the barrel - both young and old.

They are the 21st century equivalent of the Brits who used to buy package holidays to Spain in the 1970s and 80s. In fact some of them are the same people. They are culturally unaware, and come on holiday primarily to get drunk and have sex. This is what Thailand has become famous for.

THere is one more thing - allied to the tourists are the expats and retirees - who are largely simply here on a prolonged holiday. With minimal savings they thought they could eek out their lives on the cheap in THailand. Their background is primarily poorly educated, working/artisan classes, again they are culturally unaware, socially inept and relatively uneducated their expectations are anything but "quality" - alcohol and cheap sex are the main occupations.

They have a strong influence on the type of services offered to in places like Phuket and Pattaya and certainly have helped to create the shabby image that Thailand now has.

If tThailand is to be a "quality" destination it would require a massive change in all aspects of Thai life - economy, infrastructure, care for environment, care for customers etc.this would of course put the cost of living up and drive out a significant amount of the dregs of the expat community too. Spain had the same problem it became a receptacle for the dregs of Northern Europe - Thailand has become a receptacle for the dregs of the Western world. Calling for a sift to quality will take a lot more than a few words from a dimwitted PM - who is probably hoping that his Etonian friends won't laugh at him or shun him for his apparent lack of "good taste"

[TimTang]

I think the prime minister has it wrong - but I imagine he is a 5 star traveler. Once I saw a documentary on TV showing how backpackers and the "thrifty" tourist actuallly help the local economy out more than the 4-5 star traveler. This was because the frugal trourist would get a room at a B&B or a small locally runned hotel than staying at a place that would be owned by some big corporation or international company., Next, the food would also be purchased from some "ma and pa" runned restaurant than at some chain hotel or restaurant. Also, the program I watched brought out how the young traveler is usually into learning about the culture more than the older traveler. So I always thought Thailand had it correct - to attract both kinds of tourists... (and when there were political problems in Thailand, who were the first establishments to suffer? - the international hotel chains.

Hmmm, how do backpackers help the economy? They stay in small cheap hotels who do not pay taxes

They eat in small cheap places, who do not pay taxes

They shop in small cheap shops who do not pay taxes,

So how do they help the economy? considering that hotel chains, retail chains, malls and larger food chains all pay taxes and employ people.

Just because there isn't a strict equivalent to the IRS in the US, doesn't mean these small operations are not paying taxes. A small hotel or restaurant either is, or is part-of a piece of real-estate, which means someone is paying property taxes. Those overheads are reflected in the price of the rooms or meals. Taxes have already been levied on the food they buy, the fuel they buy to transport that food, or the pick-up truck they bought to transport what-ever.

As long as money is changing hands the government will always find a way to tax it, whether it be overtly or covertly.

[Lovedog100]

A good start might be taking a bulldozer through places like Pattaya. Round up all the bargirls on the streets. Quality tourists don't flock to Thailand for ladyboys and the sex industry.

I can't tell if you are joking, or just out of touch. The average Pattaya ex monger spends way more per day than the average "tourist". Many after leaving continue to send money into the country by sponsoring a lady.

I have to laugh at who they think are quality tourists.

Russians, they are likely to stay in a high end hotel, but other than that, they don't spend money. You can see them in droves in the malls, but their hands are empty. They haven't bought anything, and are not caring sacks with what they have purchased. They can be found on the beach sunning sunning themselves, again, not spending money. At bars, disco, and other tourist attractions, they typically walk in a few meters, look for a minute or two, and walk out again. Many places hate them coming in, they are arrogant, demanding, never tip, and are just as likely not to buy anything.

Chinese, what a bunch they are. They come in droves on tours. They stay in the tour hotel, eat where the buss drops them off. Visiting a temple, or just walking down a market place, they only look and take pictures. I'm amazed at the places they have their picture taken in front of. They will go home with 1000 pictures of themselves standing in front of places. I often wonder when they get home and someone asks what the place was like, after seeing the picture, do they say "I don't know, we never went in" They never walk in, just get their picture taken out front, then walk to the next place to have their picture taken in front of it.

Africans, Now there is a joke. How many have seen Africans that you would consider a quality tourist? Most come and overstay their visa. They often get involved in crime of some sort. The men will rob, steal, or sell drugs, and the women will sell themselves, competing with the Thai girls. They stay in 4k to 5k a month rooms, and are never seen in a restaurant, or any tourist attraction.

Indians, now there is a group of quality tourists. They typically come in a group of 5 or 6, or on a tour. The tours book them into Indian owned hotels, and take them to Indian owned restaurants, both have to pay a kick back to the tour company. They walk around looking, and sharing a beer between five of them. Other than that beer they are passing back and forth, their hands are empty, because they aren't buying anything. Many places will not allow them in, because the Indians consider it free entertainment, and will sit with out being a customer, drinking what ever they bough at 7-11, not eating, nor buying any tourist trinkets.

The Korean's and Japanese are better. They will mostly come buy tour, however do like to shop and see the sights. They don't complain or haggle about the price. They will pay admission to go in someplace, and will spend some money while in. The Japanese sex monger seems to be well off, and have no problem spending money to get what they want..

Yes, I am speaking in generalities, and not everyone fits into the stereo type. I've given my obversations, from what I see, and there is always someone that doesn't fit inside the box. However the biggest part do. I have a friend that has a little bar, in a group of about a dozen bars under one roof. In the middle they have a Muay Thai boxing ring, with staged fights nightly. I have sat there countless hours and watched how the different groups of tourist react to it. The Russiand, Arabs, and Indians will stand on the sidewalk and watch the fights, while blocking others from walking past on the sidewalk. They never go in and sit down to buy a drink. Arabs will sometimes come in and sit down, but get up and leave when they are told they have to buy a drink or give the seat to a paying customer. Groups of Koreans and Japanese will come in, obviously with a tour guide, they always sit at the same bar, so I assume there is some payment made to the guide. However, they all will order a soft drink, seldom buy a second, and all get up and leave after the drinks are consumed. 99% of the paying customers at any given time are European, and American/Canadian. Who are the real quality tourists?

[samran]

PS. Could you may be point out countries who welcome backpackers and openly say so, a link would be great! Thanks in advance once again

The United States, Australia and virtually all European countries welcome low-income travelers. They do not go out of their way to offend any income group because that is an extraordinarily stupid economic policy.

Many of these "low-life scum of the earth" (not my view but apparently the view of others) stay a long time. Because of that, they end up spending a considerable amount of money.

Rich people often stay a short time and spend good money. Do the numbers: One "low life scum of the earth packpacker" spends, perhaps, 400B/d on a budget hotel and another 400B/d on food. Lets make it easy: 1000B/day. They often stay a month (some much longer). 30 d x 1000 = 30,000 B. And that does not include RT airfaire often paid for by their not-so-poor parents back home, so lets throw in another 35000B and we get 65000B being spend by the scum over a period of 30 days.

One rich person spends, maybe, 5000B/day on a fancy hotel and 500B/mean (1500B/day minimum) and stay maybe one week and leaves. 5000 x 7 = 35000 (hotel) + 10500 (food) + RT air (35000) = 80500B. So the poor ("non-quality" person who is not wanted) scum spends 65000B and the rich ("quality person" who is wanted) person spends 80500B. Is the money spent by the poor scum backpacker insignificant?

Yes, I probably underestimated what the rich person spends. But by how much? I do not know. I think the point is valid. Poor people who stay a long time do spend a significant amount of money. The govt. should welcome them to Thailand because there is a huge tourism industry that is in place that caters to them.

Why not promote Thailand as a tourist destination for all income categories? That is what most developed countries do.

Ok, now that you have written 1000 words, please provide a link where countries you had mentioned WANT and INVITE and WELCOME and PREFER backpackers.Just because backpackers go to Australia it really does not mean they are wanted, liked or welcomed, they are simply tolerated.

Also please provide 1 link where Thailand said they DID NOT WANT or DID NOT WELCOME or REFUSED backpackers.

I think you are a bit wrong on Australia. They heavily court the backpacker market, via tools such as working holiday visas, and extensions to those visas of you work for three months in the agricultural sector.

Plenty of research about which shows Australia recognises the importance.

see http://www.ret.gov.au/tourism/Documents/tra/Snapshots%20and%20Factsheets/Niche%204%20Backpackers%202003.pdf

http://www.ret.gov.au/tourism/Documents/tra/Snapshots%20and%20Factsheets/Developing%20Better%20Statistics%20and%20Reports.pdf

and more generally

http://www.ret.gov.au/Search/retresults.aspx?k=backpackers

[Deeral]

I think the prime minister has it wrong - but I imagine he is a 5 star traveler. Once I saw a documentary on TV showing how backpackers and the "thrifty" tourist actuallly help the local economy out more than the 4-5 star traveler. This was because the frugal trourist would get a room at a B&B or a small locally runned hotel than staying at a place that would be owned by some big corporation or international company., Next, the food would also be purchased from some "ma and pa" runned restaurant than at some chain hotel or restaurant. Also, the program I watched brought out how the young traveler is usually into learning about the culture more than the older traveler. So I always thought Thailand had it correct - to attract both kinds of tourists... (and when there were political problems in Thailand, who were the first establishments to suffer? - the international hotel chains.

Hmmm, how do backpackers help the economy? They stay in small cheap hotels who do not pay taxes

They eat in small cheap places, who do not pay taxes

They shop in small cheap shops who do not pay taxes,

So how do they help the economy? considering that hotel chains, retail chains, malls and larger food chains all pay taxes and employ people.

Just because there isn't a strict equivalent to the IRS in the US, doesn't mean these small operations are not paying taxes. A small hotel or restaurant either is, or is part-of a piece of real-estate, which means someone is paying property taxes. Those overheads are reflected in the price of the rooms or meals. Taxes have already been levied on the food they buy, the fuel they buy to transport that food, or the pick-up truck they bought to transport what-ever.

As long as money is changing hands the government will always find a way to tax it, whether it be overtly or covertly.

kuffki doesn't appear to have the ability to realise s/he's answered half the question her/himself.furthermore the poster fas also failed to understand that unlike a drunken expat a backpacker is a good investment for future business.

I'm sorry but I think that that post is another example of people who post without thinking - or just out of ignorance.

Edited March 3, 2011 by Deeral

[erikr_]

"A smattering of Russians and no one else" was how the tourist numbers on Koh Samet were described to me yesterday. "Even the staff are getting worried", said the restaurateur of eleven years in a prime location on the island.

"Low season hasn't even begun and I've never seen it this bad, even the Scandinavians have vanished."

This is the reality and these business owners are not expecting any growth in trade for the foreseeable future, particularly now with very high oil prices on the horizon with the revolutions across the Middle East, continuing global economic turmoil and the resilient strength of the Thai Baht.

So I think they need to be concentrating on quantity. Not quite sure how you control quality unless consulate interviews are conducted to get a 30 day holiday visa.

Or as a friend of me said when he told me he had been to Thailand: "There was only one thing really bad about it - To many russians, they spoil the atmosphere with their behaviours" - just to put it in perspective. My friend is Russian!

[Deeral]

Why is it that when middle-aged men come to Thailand they suddenly believe they are not only "god's gift to women" but also God's gift to the Thai economy - of all the self inflated clap-trap.

THey are in fact a major source of the problem - so long as they are part of the image that Thailand portrays to the rest of the world they will hold back serious, planned and "quality" development.

[Kilgore Trout]

"A smattering of Russians and no one else" was how the tourist numbers on Koh Samet were described to me yesterday. "Even the staff are getting worried", said the restaurateur of eleven years in a prime location on the island.

"Low season hasn't even begun and I've never seen it this bad, even the Scandinavians have vanished."

This is the reality and these business owners are not expecting any growth in trade for the foreseeable future, particularly now with very high oil prices on the horizon with the revolutions across the Middle East, continuing global economic turmoil and the resilient strength of the Thai Baht.

So I think they need to be concentrating on quantity. Not quite sure how you control quality unless consulate interviews are conducted to get a 30 day holiday visa.

Oh, come on...you should know by now that the Thai definition of quality is "more money" (it costs more, I guess in this case, pays more)

Just go into any tv shop and ask...why is this one better? answer-"because it costs more"

[Deeral]

PS. Could you may be point out countries who welcome backpackers and openly say so, a link would be great! Thanks in advance once again

The United States, Australia and virtually all European countries welcome low-income travelers. They do not go out of their way to offend any income group because that is an extraordinarily stupid economic policy.

Many of these "low-life scum of the earth" (not my view but apparently the view of others) stay a long time. Because of that, they end up spending a considerable amount of money.

Rich people often stay a short time and spend good money. Do the numbers: One "low life scum of the earth packpacker" spends, perhaps, 400B/d on a budget hotel and another 400B/d on food. Lets make it easy: 1000B/day. They often stay a month (some much longer). 30 d x 1000 = 30,000 B. And that does not include RT airfaire often paid for by their not-so-poor parents back home, so lets throw in another 35000B and we get 65000B being spend by the scum over a period of 30 days.

One rich person spends, maybe, 5000B/day on a fancy hotel and 500B/mean (1500B/day minimum) and stay maybe one week and leaves. 5000 x 7 = 35000 (hotel) + 10500 (food) + RT air (35000) = 80500B. So the poor ("non-quality" person who is not wanted) scum spends 65000B and the rich ("quality person" who is wanted) person spends 80500B. Is the money spent by the poor scum backpacker insignificant?

Yes, I probably underestimated what the rich person spends. But by how much? I do not know. I think the point is valid. Poor people who stay a long time do spend a significant amount of money. The govt. should welcome them to Thailand because there is a huge tourism industry that is in place that caters to them.

Why not promote Thailand as a tourist destination for all income categories? That is what most developed countries do.

Ok, now that you have written 1000 words, please provide a link where countries you had mentioned WANT and INVITE and WELCOME and PREFER backpackers.Just because backpackers go to Australia it really does not mean they are wanted, liked or welcomed, they are simply tolerated.

Also please provide 1 link where Thailand said they DID NOT WANT or DID NOT WELCOME or REFUSED backpackers.

I think you are a bit wrong on Australia. They heavily court the backpacker market, via tools such as working holiday visas, and extensions to those visas of you work for three months in the agricultural sector.

Plenty of research about which shows Australia recognises the importance.

see http://www.ret.gov.a...kers%202003.pdf

http://www.ret.gov.a...d%20Reports.pdf

and more generally

http://www.ret.gov.a...x?k=backpackers

Kufki - stop! you're just getting more and more out of your depth. firstly "a link" isn't the only way to find informationSecondly these people can read and make critical inferences - you must try to do the same.THere is plenty of stuff out there with the information you need. rather than blustering about on this thread, why don't you do some research of your own?then hopefully you won't ask such daft questions and put forward such baseless arguments.

[moe666]

Targeting Indian tourist, I believe their annual income isn't much higher than Thailands.A friend and her daughter were accousted on a street in Pattaya ( no they donot work in a bar) by a Indian man who asked her how much for short time. She asked how much you pay he said 200baht, she told him even if I where for sale you could not afford me.

[Seanextra]

Would be good to see Thailand perform some research like this ! Would make for some very interesting figures and maybe sway some thinking ?

[Deeral]

I think you'll find that there are more than a "smattering" of people from eastern Europe holidaying in Thailand now.

THe Western contingent is running out of steam, so the Thai tourist industry has turned to a less discerning (if that's possible) demographic.

Most posters here seem to have a very blinkered "Western orientated" perception of what is really going on.

Arrivals are UP this year - as for the money they spend - I haven't seen any figures, but the type of spending is different. In Pattaya they are package holiday-makers, who pre-pay for a lot of stuff - but that doesn't mean it isn't going into the Thai coffers. THey also tend to be bussed about to "Outlets" and the like so many of the posters here don't really see half of what they do.

as for the "quiet" airport; try hanging around U'tapao when a charter flight comes in.

THese aren't the only "upwardly mobile" demographic - India, China, Taiwan etc are also on the up....this on top of the top two visitors Malaysia and Korea.

One thing you might notice in the top 5 nationalities visiting Thai;and is that there are none of the old Western countries with the possible exception of the UK.

many businesses, activities, hotels, bars etc still aim their product at these old groups and consequently they are all "quiet" or doing badly.

Tourism in Thailand is constantly changing, but unfortunately the short-sightedness of the Thai entrepreneurs ensures that these changes always aim for the quick buck and the lowest common denominator.

[bangon04]

"Last year Thailand received 15.8 million international tourists, generating income of Bt585 million, he said."

That averages out at a tad over 37 Baht per international visitor. Is the quoted line a typo, or are the PM's advisors/scriptwriters slacking a bit?

Yes you can see why he thinks there is a problem - 37 baht per visitor does fit a definition of cheap charlie.

Perhaps some of the PM's advisors want to make him sound silly, but Mark has GCSE Maths, so should be able to spot this one.

Maybe the 37 Baht refers to the declared income for tax purposes in Thailand? That would be likely....

[Chupup]

Wasn't this tried before under Thaksin with the whole platinum card or whatever it was that gave people free gold course access and free visas?

Sure was, a load of bol'cks then and the same now, is the PM saying ( L O Scams ) wants bigger wallets to plunder, ??? if the averageJoe has stopped coming what chance QUALITY punters , who advises this guy ??

[Deeral]

Targeting Indian tourist, I believe their annual income isn't much higher than Thailands.A friend and her daughter were accousted on a street in Pattaya ( no they donot work in a bar) by a Indian man who asked her how much for short time. She asked how much you pay he said 200baht, she told him even if I where for sale you could not afford me.

Presumably though she looked at his passport?

[samran]

Why is it that when middle-aged men come to Thailand they suddenly believe they are not only "god's gift to women" but also God's gift to the Thai economy - of all the self inflated clap-trap.

THey are in fact a major source of the problem - so long as they are part of the image that Thailand portrays to the rest of the world they will hold back serious, planned and "quality" development.

here here.

Most of the people who are most sensitive to the 'lets nuke pattaya' comment are ultimately those who falsely think that without them Thailand would fall in a heap.

[Ricardo]

If they want tourists of any description it might be a good idea not to shut the country's major international airport down in the middle of the high season

When do they plan to do that, then ?

Hmmm, how do backpackers help the economy? They stay in small cheap hotels who do not pay taxes

They eat in small cheap places, who do not pay taxes

They shop in small cheap shops who do not pay taxes,

So how do they help the economy? considering that hotel chains, retail chains, malls and larger food chains all pay taxes and employ people.

The guesthouses & locally-owned restaurants & bus-companies/ferries & low-cost airlines all employ plenty of people too, but perhaps put less money into the pockets of rich Thais, who forget the days when many of themselves were students travelling the world on-a-budget in-between studying overseas. And gods but they could be cheap ... I've met my share !

That money does go round and round the Thai economy, but to the wrong sort of people, the ones that you won't meet on the golf-course or in the business-class lounge at Swampy. Which is why I like to travel this way (on a budget), and mix with people like this (real Thai people), long after I could afford to upgrade.

Edited March 3, 2011 by Ricardo

[MRDave]

Maybe more Tourists would come to Thaland if they didn't get ripped off by the Thai government and Thai people at every opportunity, as for quality I think their meaning is quality =big spenders, well I tend to find people with more money tend to spend less.

This is because they tend to be tight which is how they got their money in the first place. A low quality monger like myself managed to spend over £9000 on my first trip. As for bulldozing Pattaya what types of drugs are you on? People go to Pattaya for a reason kill that off and watch it become a ghost town and many Thai families starve to death.

Edited March 3, 2011 by MRDave

[MaiChai]

They only want high end tourists because the profit margins are greater. However Thai thinking forgets that there are less high end tourists than your average tourist, so in reality is the profit higher with less tourists than lots of tourists on a lower margin?

I think the reality is that there are lots of interesting places for people to go, and alot of people have already been to Thailand? Thats the way I look at it; I would like to go somewhere I have not been to. Also Thailand is rather too well developed for an exotic holiday, and doesn't have the pristine beaches that other places in Asia have (Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam come to mind).

The other problem with Thailand is you have cross the broken pavements, polution, food vendors and all the rest of it to get between hiso places. Hardly appealing to high end tourists?

Edited March 3, 2011 by MaiChai

[Kilgore Trout]

Thailand needs visitors with all budgets, not just the ones staying at corporate upmarket hotels. A variety of visitors provides opportunity for a wide variety of Thai businesses and vendors.

The main issue facing most of these hotels is

there are too dam_n many of them.

Oversupply makes the numbers of tourists that do show up seem even thinner on the ground each year that these locations add 10% more rooms. Then the investors get tense because the promoters were selling them on unrealistic numbers of guests and income for their 'investment'.

Now they GM's and FnB's are under the guns to make a small turn out seem to be a good year, and the heavier guns are calling their TAT buddies and whining because 'well heeled customers' are not filling their increasingly empty resorts and their investments are languishing.

Over supply and political <deleted> are the main problems for Thailand, but far from the only ones. Still over supply of over priced hotel rooms means investors are getting more and more scared, and pressuring the government to fix their screw-up in logical investment strategy.

The ones doing well are part of international chanins that spin their Thailand properties off on their existing world wide reputation and marketing plan. The local high end places are looking too local, or expecting TAT to save their bacon.

I agree about the int. chains, My wife and I recently went to a high end resort in cha am, the int. company that starts with an sh and ends with an n, and although very expensive (from my standard, compared to the uk or us very reasonable room rates)I did not have to put up with any "Thai" crap, staff were polite and everything was on the up and up.

Every other trip where we go to local places is always a crapshoot, some experiences so bad it really spoilt the whole trip.

Would love to support the local economy more, but I also want quality for my money

[chris1967]

I am curious how the Thais plan to assess the quality of foreigners; should be an interesting evolution

[Kilgore Trout]

How many men who initially came here for the sand, sea and sXX are now sending money to support Thai girls they met in bars? I'd like to know the ammount transfered to Thailand from overseas every year. The men who send this money would not have been considered as "quality tourists" but I'm sure now make up for a good chunk of the GDP.

Right, like the govt. really cares if bargirls are making money; the pm is working for his investors and with remarks and policies like that its no wonder the divisions we are dealing with now exist and are boiling

[Wombat6]

If the govt. want more money spent by Tourists, they can start the ball rolling by charging the same prices for all at National Parks and all other govt. operated facilities....farangs are not stupid when it comes to a two price operation......and i don't want to hear about...".but Thai people are poor and that is the reason"....try telling all the Thai Tourist that roll up at these venues in their Mercedes and BMW's, that they are poor

[moskito]

May be Thailand can attract some wealthy Russians because its not so far for them to here.

If somebody really have money, there are a lot of better and SAFER countries to choose from :jap:

[rubl]

I'm pretty sure we heard the same drivle this time last year. And, what exactly is the definition of a 'quality tourist' and 'quantity tourists'?

I say bring on the election and get this idiot out. Even Taksin wouldn't have come out with rubbish like this.

For your information, it started with k. Purachai Piemsomboon, a former interior minister under PM Thaksin in 2001. He said a.o. tourists came to Thailand for temples and culture. They would get up early to look around and therefor also didn't need long opening hours. It continued for years.

April,18, 2004:

"BANGKOK— THE law-and-order government of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has been trying to clean up Thailand's image as a good-time sex and entertainment center since his election in 2001. The latest effort focuses on earlier closing hours for bars, discos, massage parlors and karaoke halls across the country."

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CEEDB1E38F93BA25757C0A9629C8B63

[jimbeam1]

Maybe more Tourists would come to Thaland if they didn't get ripped off by the Thai government and Thai people at every opportunity, as for quality I think their meaning is quality =big spenders, well I tend to find people with more money tend to spend less.

This is because they tend to be tight which is how they got their money in the first place. A low quality monger like myself managed to spend over £9000 on my first trip. As for bulldozing Pattaya what types of drugs are you on? People go to Pattaya for a reason kill that off and watch it become a ghost town and many Thai families starve to death.

How long did your first trip last?

jb1