Focus On Quality Tourists, Not Quantity, Urges PM Abhisit

[DoctorG]

Yet another thread brings out the Pattaya knockers. While I know this may be off topic, I can not let certain comments go without commenting myself.

The opposite to 'quality tourists' is 'low quality tourists', and I therefore take great exception to the Pattaya knockers here, e.g softgeorge and samran, though there are no doubt others who agree with them, like craigj7, for saying that Pattaya should be bulldozed down or that an atomic bomb should be dropped on it.

Shame on you all.

In making such stupid comments, and in agreeing with them, you are insinuating that I and my many friends who live here are low quality human beings, and likewise all those who come out to visit us must be as well, I and my friends who live here were tourists once, before we decided to retire and live here in Pattaya.

p.s I see that craigj7 is knocking the Americans as well now. Jeez, what is wrong with you? I am British and know many really decent Americans here in Pattaya. Grow up will you, please.

Thank you for your post :jap:

[Johpa]

Why is it that just about everything posted in the news section reads like an echo of an earlier report? How any times have we read this exact same announcement over the decades? As Bangkok is the hub of news echos, I would ask for a wee bit more discrimination as to what is posted as "news".

Mods, ban me if ye shall, but if posting non-Thai related items is cause for deletion, then so is posting this repetitive non-news Thai government drivel.

[atyclb]

Thai society by large, does not discriminate between high and low quality money. All money is perceived as desirable. Elements of Thai society create Pattaya with some influence from non Thai businesses. Pattaya already pays taxes directly to the police.

[samran]

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.

A few years ago now the Australian Tourism Commission published a report which said on average, Backpackers were the best type of tourist. It highlighted in particular:

- they tended to spend money in local businesses

- (care of working holiday visa arrangements) they spent their earnings mostly in Australia, paying taxes along the way

- on a per head basis, stayed longer and spent more than the average 'short term' wealthy visitor.

where they generally paid off though was that the research found that they often returned later in life, multiple times. Return customers so to speak.

Contrary to perceptions, 'backpackers' were generally from affluent backgrounds and were one of the key type of tourists that the Australian government tended to try to attract.

I'm guessing that most of these backpackers 'do Thailand' on their way through from Europe, so it stands to reason that Thailand benefits.

Edited March 3, 2011 by samran

[zthyadat]

"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.

I believe the figure is billion, not million. It is chronic in the English language papers. One would think that anyone with a semi-engaged brain would take note that the figures don't match up - a background awareness of the fact that since these two figures are related, they must agree with each other....... But no.

And assuming that figure is billion, then it means the total spending in baht terms (Bt37,000) is only slightly more than it was more than five years ago. Of course, since most of it comes in as foreign currency, dollar spending has increased.

[TheWizardofRnR]

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.

Thailand should not look a gift horse in the mouth. Very few "Quality" tourists are likely to bother with Thailand at all. The South of France is so much more inviting.

The South of France is not quality tourists , but the rich and famous...because it costs 10x more to holiday there !

[KKK]

(In photo: Mayomburi, a 5-star boutique hotel, is waiting for more wealthy tourists. It is located on Khao San Road, the haven of backpackers.)

When you build a 5-star boutique hotel in an area known as a haven for backpackers you would be expected to wait for wealthy tourists. If this is an example of how Thai businesses choose property locations god help them.

[Card]

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.

Abhisit measures 'quality' by how much they spend. Rich people are as sex-driven as the rest of the population. Therefore, the sex industry will attract as many 'quality' tourists as the poorer 'plebs'. Thailand's tourist industry would suffer greatly, if not collapse, if Thailand became PC or up-tight about sex. It's he lack of regulation in most things that is a great part of the attraction of Thailand. Otherwise go to Malaysia etc.

[rodneyjohn99]

Has he ever heard of value for money or quality service? to get quality tourists, you must provide a high standard to attract these kind of people. I find it hard to pick out an island in Thailand that is still natural and not over commercialised.

people's first impression of Thailand is getting ripped off by an organised legal limousine service at the airport. Then a drive through the polluted streets of Bangkok with its electrical wiring on full display. Cracked pavements hazard your way when sightseeing. Hookers, hustlers and tuk tuk drivers greet you with a smile though they are only wishing for your cash to fall from your pockets.

Thailand needs to clean up its image to attract the quality tourists but how is that ever going to happen.

unfortunately, its reputation has taken a battering over the years (though wasn't good to begin with) which has all been self inflicted. the rest of the world doesn't choose ignore the facts and pretend that certain things don't exist in Thailand. The first thing that springs to the minds of people from the rest of the world when they hear the word "Thailand" isn't quality.

Good luck with that Mr. Abhisit, but pulling the wool over the eyes of the rest of the world is harder than you think.

"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.

[borovik]

["Has he ever heard of value for money or quality service? to get quality tourists, you must provide a high standard to attract these kind of people."

Very true!

Quality Tourism was an idea of Khun Taksin,Khun Abhisit - do not copy!be original.

[eastlight]

Yet ANOTHER example of the PM being a complete twit!

Thailand is now the Benedorm of the world.In fact even Benedorm isn't that any more.

Thai has had decades to set up the infrastructure for its tourist business and time and again they have chosen the cheep and sometimes cheerful option.

To suggest that they can alter this by choosing different "classes" of customers is a joke. It's not up to them anymore........You have to have the facilities , eco awareness etc etc to attract them.

Thailand has made its bed now they can lie in it

You hit the nail on the head!

[SiriusBlack1]

More "breaking news." This just in: Politicians are still blathering the same nonsense they always do, meanwhile life goes on as usual. Visa-free travel for citizens of countries with populations of 100 million or more continues regardless of economic viability. Yawn.

[rafish]

Hmmm...Interesting, When I attended the travel fair in BKK in June, I signed up with over 140 resorts, at that time they were practically giving away rooms with an extra day. I am still getting solicitations and upon inquiry I am being told tourism is still way down, according to the article it is up by over 7% this year, but considering the global financial crisis of the past three years, is that 7% on the 23% drop from 2009? I am sure oil futures shooting over $100 a barrel are not helping much.

That's alright Horse. Phuket was saying that tourism for the year exceeded 7 million visitors. Unfortunately the number would require 250,000 visitors per month every month. I think when one does the math there is certainly a very wide disparity between "truth and fiction."

[Tiffer]

Is there s secret backpacker society who communicate with each other? and i really doubt any country is dying to have the backpackers, while countries tolerate it they certainly do not wish for it.

@kuffki

Secret society? Yes. It's called social networking!

Many countries welcome backpackers.

You're invited to my next lecture of tourism devolpment...

I am sorry but i would have to pass on a lecture of tourism development from a backpacker, much prefer to listen to lectures from educated, successful people who have travelled in class, not on the back of the horse with 1 backpack. But thank you for the offer anyhow.

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

@kuffki

Ah kuffki... if you came to one of my lectures you would have the option of joining in with undergraduate or postgradraduate students.

I am sure you would enjoy interacting with this published lecturer who is highly educated (as I imagine you are) and who has travelled to 30+ countries for business development (as I am sure you have) and who can ride a horse

The only stumbling block is that 30 years ago I did fit the sterotype of "backbacker". I wonder would be comfortable in such company?

Oh yes. In order to address your question, can you clarify your understanding of "backpacker" so that we can proceed accordingly

[KKK]

Abhisit measures 'quality' by how much they spend.

Not just Abhisit. IMHO all Thais measure quality in monetary terms. The more it costs the better it must be...is something that I've heard from a Thai so very often. There are far better cars than a benz at a much lower price available. But try and convince a Thai of that.

[chooch7]

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.

Thailand should not look a gift horse in the mouth. Very few "Quality" tourists are likely to bother with Thailand at all. The South of France is so much more inviting.

quality tourist are not looking for cheap and dirrty

[KKK]

I think Abhisit came up with this in an attempt to dispel rumours that he is British. Surely only a Thai could come up with such an idiotic suggestion.

Oh dear...your post just proved it is not just Thais who can come up with idiotic suggestions.

my feeble attempt at humour was obviously wasted on you.

[borovik]

16 million tourists bring income of 600 milion Baht.

Are you getting this ?Gentlemen?

1 tourist bring about 40 Baht income?

bloody cheap charlies these tourists!

[TimTang]

...backpackers and the "thrifty" tourist actuallly help the local economy out more than the 4-5 star traveler.

You make a good point!

While it may be true that some backpackers are stoners and low-lifes, they only make up a small percentage. A large percentage are high-school graduates and university students that have decided to take time off to explore the world before they get trapped in the establishment with families, mortgages, student loans to pay off, and etc.

I don't think if fair to degrade them just because they're low budget travelers. Once they've established themselves they may very well return as 4 and 5 star tourists, provided they were pleased with their previous visit.

Edited March 3, 2011 by TimTang

[Rama]

I know what to do - they should have a special "privilege'" card to use in Thailand to appeal to quality (read high end) tourists.......wait a minute, Thaksin tried that and it didn't work either..............just cost the government (and still does) a lot of money....................

[taff33]

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.

"Soft" George why don't you try viagra and join in with the bar girls or boys .

[KKK]

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.

"Soft" George why don't you try viagra and join in with the bar girls or boys .

perhaps he doesn't have the necessary equipment

[ableguy]

"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.

So true, it makes you wonder if they know what the fuc_k they're actually talking about.

Nobody claimed they know what they are talking about/

[rafish]

Timebandit 2,

How original can you be? I'm sorry if you fell off your bar stool? Cheesedick, now that's original. It must be nice around your place after the sun goes down and the bar girls get prettier?

Nothing like a Pattaya native to get all those high quality tourists that Mark is talking about bringing to Thailand, thinking, "My those guys on the ThaiVisa Forum sure sound like the kind of people I want to associate with. " Intelligent, so worldly, and oh manly in their use of the Kings English. Perhaps some lipstick would suit you my friend?:jap:

[lounger]

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.

are you real?

Hi Chub, just a greeting as I see you took 4 years to make your first post.

I like a man of few words, it sure beats the guys who love seeing their words in print

[RAM8]

I have fallen in love with Thailand and its culture. It will be my main destination for the next few years. Yes, I partake in the sex industry, but I also have sex with ladies in other countries too. Even when I am in my own country, I have regular sex with women (shock, horror). But I also like to travel, see new places, experience the wonderful food and customs. I am not a cheap charlie - I spend a lot of money and like to have a good time. If I am not seen as a 'quality' tourist and I feel that I am not as welcome in LOS as I am now, then I guess I will spend my vacation elsewhere.

It doesn't matter where you are in the world, there always seems to be a few idiots in government.

[ableguy]

I saw it coming. By tighter visa rules, drive out all the Cheap Charlies and the boozefighters and Scarecrow-Types. Next comes big advertisement in China that Thaland is the southernmost luxury holiday destination of a Chinese-like homeland ( not truly a homeland but the ones in charge think in these terms ). Next step, tighten the visa rules a bit more. Result : Asia for the Asian new wealthises. The chines middle class is by far more promising a customer than fasr, ugly, misbehaving "sex"-Bomber tourists. The ones who have sttled down in the sticks will be fairly tolerated, as they do not spoil the picture of the "tourist destination". The transforamation has just begun. The chinese Yuan will compete with the Dollar. Fact is the Thais prefer chines tourist to "white longnoses". The long term holiday motto will be " come to China's most south !"

I long suspected they want to change the "image". This cannot be done in a sudden., but these news show that a transformation is under way. Not to mention that the formerly "poor" country girl from Eesarn now is the proud owner of rice filed re-developed to a rubber farm. Since germany recently introduced a duty to winter-tires, each car needs 8 tires. Which leads to newborn rubber baronesses , driving unpaid-for pickups and watching unpaid-for TV's and sending their kids to non-proven so called schools where they learn to sing and play football..

Welcome to Thailand ! Am I off-topic ?? I apologize ! OP was about tourism. I apologize fro being so off topic. But the tourist thing still clings to my mind. If it ever bothered government . . what's the outcome ?? 7% of the GDP ?? Did you ever wonder why Thais don t give a fuc_k for your presence ?

There were times when official stats were 3% on tourism. Not so long ago. It's about time some expats realize what in reality their often claimed "importance" is made of. Absolutely neglectible !

I am happy to contribute to a family of few, have bettered their lives a littel bit. I always thought that being a tourist I am paying to touds. Now i feel i am paying to families and their spouses directly.

The topic is TOURISM. Well, if I bogged you with this, Sorry !

Are we feeling better now.?

[kuffki]

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.

[kuffki]

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.

[Tiffer]

Just how different is Thailand from other developing nations?

I have spent time working in many African, Asian and Latin American countries and find that “getting out a bit more” is good for the myopia.

So how should we view the PM’s comments (and typos) that have again sparked a flood if not a tirade of comments about the country in which many of us choose to live, that same country in which we could also choose not to live?

I think we’ll find that the PM has suggested focussing resources on higher end / higher spend tourism.

He has not suggested focussing resources on deterring other types of tourism.

Granted he is not the first to raise this point an her will not be the last.

Increasing medical tourism in Bangkok and demand for luxury resort properties such as the Anantara up in the Golden Triangle are important... elephant polo anyone or is that to high end?

Not forgetting that Royal Orchid also package medical tourism which supports an increasingly privatised Thai International (New debate) and so it rolls on.

Clearly, as many have mentioned, the stereotypical image of Thailand is not the most desirable and campaigns to alter this perception should be welcomed.